*Please remove the distracting watermarks in it, if possible. The author has released the image under the Creative Commonst Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.
Its title is both in incorrect English and not quite accurate. For example, Ganymede is the ninth-largest known body in the Solar System, larger than the planet Mercury, which hardly makes it a 'small body'. The shortest accurate title that I can think of is "Non-planets of the Solar System to scale".
Its subtitle is not quite accurate either (Pluto is not a planet, so its moons do not fall under any of the categories mentioned) and is better in sentence case. It should be "Dwarf planets (Pluto & Ceres) • Moons of planets and dwarf planets • Asteroids • Comets".
Sentence case is also better elsewhere in the image
The zoomed-in images have a "NO TO SCALE", which should be "NOT TO SCALE"
There is "THE RAPRESENTATION etc.". I can't quite figure out what this is supposed to tell the viewer, so I don't quite know how this is best rephrased. At the very least it should be "THE REPRESENTATION" and "TO SCALE".
There is a list of spacecraft that took images of the objects in the image. It should say "Voyager 1–2", with an endash (–), not a hyphen (-). There is also "Cassini-Huygens", which is best shortened to simply "Cassini", because the Huygens part was a lander and didn't take images from space.
Every header has "XX moon(s) system". The "system" is simply unnecessary and should be removed.
The asteroids' header says "Some Asteroid Belt Bodies". This is both inaccurate (433 Eros is a near-Earth asteroid) and clumsily said. It's better if it simply says "Some asteroids" or "Several asteroids".
Request taken by
Mliu92 (
talk) 18:43, 10 October 2015 (UTC).: I'll work on these as I'm available. Two updated above. Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 18:43, 10 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Thanks! --
evrik(
talk) 00:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Evrik: This should complete the request. Let me know what you think about the simplification of emblem 27 (Moravian Church). Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 21:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
This graph hasn't been updated since 2006. The prices after 2006 are:
2007: 11.60
2008: 13.84
2009: 18.72
2010: 27.03
2011: 27.22
2012: 21.69
2013: 17.46
2014: 16.34
Please change the color of the line from red to blue after 2010 since the methodology for calculating the price changed in 2011.
Kaldari (
talk) 19:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Graphist opinion(s)
Request taken by
FOX 52 (
talk) 02:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC).reply
Done uploaded new version to this current file -
FOX 52 (
talk) 07:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)reply
@
FOX 52: Could you center the "year (calendar)" label at the bottom?
Kaldari (
talk) 20:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)reply
The runway diagram of O'Hare International Airport is outdated; they added another runway. A current diagram, as PDF, can be found
here. An update would be appreciated. --
Huon (
talk) 19:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Graphist opinion(s)
@
Huon: It looks like
BorgHunter has already updated the illustration from the FAA source to add 10R/28L on 15 October 2015. Please verify if this request should be marked complete. Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 16:42, 23 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Done: My thanks to BorgHunter!
Huon (
talk) 18:36, 23 October 2015 (UTC)reply
For the 5 millionth article, a special Wikipedia logo will be used. I think most of the nominated logos are pretty sad looking, so I thought I'd ask here for additional submissions! Please submit additional mock-ups at
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/5 millionth article logo. --
Calliopejen1 (
talk) 18:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC)reply
May someone please vectorize this scheme, before moving it to Commons?--
Kopiersperre (
talk) 19:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Request taken by
Mliu92 (
talk) 17:05, 21 October 2015 (UTC).reply
@
Kopiersperre: How does this look? I did not trace the original drawing (proportions set by eye). Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 17:05, 21 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I am asking for the vectorization of the logo as well as the removal of the white background and the words "choose better". The source can be found
here.
Israel'sSon 05:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Graphist opinion(s)
Request taken by
Mliu92 (
talk) 18:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC).reply
Please vectorize the logo and remove the white background. The high-resolution source can be found
here. Thanks!
Israel'sSon 04:50, 4 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Graphist opinion(s)
I'd suggest placing against a transparent background -
FOX 52 (
talk) 16:46, 6 November 2015 (UTC)reply
That's what I'm saying. OK, you may start now.
Israel'sSon 22:06, 6 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Request taken by
Mliu92 (
talk) 06:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC). @
Israel's Son: I took some liberties with the layout to improve the left/right symmetry of the logo during the vector process. Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 06:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nice work though, but I think you need to resize it since it is non-free.
Israel'sSon 06:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I resized it to 10% of the original upload, but it's a vector and will scale cleanly up now. Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 07:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I am requesting a creation of a stand-alone logo, so I can use the free logo to replace the title card. --
George Ho (
talk) 00:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Graphist opinion(s)
Request taken by
FOX 52 (
talk) 16:44, 6 November 2015 (UTC).reply
Can you change the font color to white, remove the black background, and create an opaque transparency?
George Ho (
talk) 01:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep in mind if I change the text to white against transparent I don't know how much you will be able to see of it -
FOX 52 (
talk) 02:48, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Depends on pixels of a black border of logo.
George Ho (
talk) 03:35, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I believe that doing an exact replica is not easy; I know you did your best. Can you make the SVG image larger in pixels, so borders would look nice and easy to bear? --
George Ho (
talk) 17:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Not a problem and done -
FOX 52 (
talk) 18:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
The image becomes harder to see, especially when viewed in 220px. I added the image here for readership. Maybe the font should be plateau-ish (more ink-ish, maybe) in white color, as seen in the non-free image. I don't know the basics of SVG developing, so you can make it more visible.
George Ho (
talk) 18:46, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Or maybe just make the borders more solid... but not too solid.
George Ho (
talk) 18:47, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I've changed it to black and white, I think that is your best option, maybe you can get another editors input cheers -
FOX 52 (
talk) 20:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Fine, I'll wait for others to make other versions.
George Ho (
talk) 20:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Wait,
Fox, can you reverse colors of the background and the font? I mean, make the background transparent and the font black? Or create another version at a separate file? I didn't say proper words.
George Ho (
talk) 22:01, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Yeah I just reversed the values and went transparent -
FOX 52 (
talk) 22:47, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Love it! Simple and neat. --
George Ho (
talk) 23:50, 9 November 2015 (UTC)reply
grainy and artifact-y, please make png or svg… --
Kintetsubuffalo (
talk) 04:40, 8 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Graphist opinion(s)
Request taken by
Mliu92 (
talk) 17:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC).reply
@
Kintetsubuffalo: Let me know what you think. I re-centered the logo based on the position of the round circle. Cheers,
Mliu92 (
talk) 17:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC)reply