User talk:Svgalbertian

SVG logos

Hiya! i see you've been contributing with converting logos from .png to .svg. Perhpas you'd be able to help me with converting Image:American Broadcasting Company Logo 2007.svg‎ to the SVG version? I can't seem to get it to work on my machine. I also have a second image, Image:ACCESS Television 2008.svg. Thanks for taking the time to read this. :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 02:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Hopefully you will see this here, as my account is very new and your page is semi-protected. Taking a look at the images you have, the contents are actually raster images, and not vector. You can see this by opening up the images in a notepad (SVG files are plaintext) and seeing the block of binary data. There are ways to convert raster images to vector but the results are shoddy at best. That is why I only take graphics from vector sources e.g. PDF's and brandsoftheworld.com. --Svgalbertian (talk) 03:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
• I understand now. I just can't figure out how converting the ACCESS TV logo worked (albeit unexpectedly). RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 04:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Best I can tell the ACCESS TV logo didn't work, you just embedded the PNG graphic inside the SVG file. --Svgalbertian (talk) 02:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Venetian logo.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:The Venetian logo.png. Y --Svgalbertian (talk) 02:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AB-provincial highway.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:AB-provincial highway.svgY--Svgalbertian (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:RDS logo.svg)

Thanks for uploading Image:RDS logo.svgY --Svgalbertian (talk) 04:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Microsoft Logo Historical.svg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Microsoft Logo Historical.svg. Y --Svgalbertian (talk) 21:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

SVG logo

Hey Svgalbertian, I have an SVG file that I uploaded and the text of a logo appeared in a different font then it was supposed to appear in. See here The font was supposed to be Times New Roman but somehow it turned into Arial. Thank you. Emarsee ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 18:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Emarsee ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 20:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

S&P/TSX 60 and Category:Delisted S&P/TSX 60 companies

Hello, I've reverted your edits in the articles on Air Canada and ACE. Unlike articles that are only historical, these articles are about ongoing concerns. The word delisted bothers me enormously, because, in my opinion, it leads the reader to believe that the stock has been delisted from an exchange, and again, in my opinion, reflects badly and incorrectly on the corporation in question.

Wikipedia articles are routinely cruised and quoted by search engine bots and the word delisted rings alarm bells.

Perusing S&P press releases, I've found they make reference to addition/deletion from indices. Further, their press releases relating to this matter include the following caveat: "Company additions to and deletion from an S&P equity index do not in any way reflect an opinion on the investment merits of the company." Some the S&P press releases that I displayed contained links to spreadsheets, that listed all the companies in the S&P/TSX 60 index on the date in question. I could not find a list maintained by S&P that listed deleted corporations in there entirety. Rather, deleted corporations were listed on a press release by press release basis.

Some of the references in the 2 categories listed in the title of this section force the reader/editor to wade through a multitude of press releases, 200 plus, in the main, pdfs, displayable only one at a time, some of which when displayed link to spreadsheets. This is unacceptable referencing. It took me many hours ,following a link, to a list of press releases, and further, to follow links contained within these press releases, to reach a possibly relevant citation.

I believe your contributions in this matter are well intended and not designed to mislead. I do question, however, your decision to create a category, ie. a list, that one has to compile, rather than one, that is readily accessed from an S&P press release, and directly referenced.

Regards --Rosetown (talk) 21:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm anything but a financial whiz. Perusing S&Ps press releases(PDFs), my impression is that inclusion in their various indices are done by committees following strict guidelines. One recent release, stated that ACE was deleted from the S&P/TSX 60 index. In another recent release, I saw that Air Canada was added to an index, although I don't recall which one. You may be aware that it is ACEs stated intention to wind down as a holding company by distributing all its shares to its various stakeholders, thus having no reason to continue to exist. ACE has already done so to a great extent.

I believe that only ACE was on the S&P/TSX 60 index, not Air Canada. However, I was not prepared to wade through over 200 press releases and I could be wrong.

I'm assuming, maybe wrongly, that you are drawing your information from S&P.

Certainly, the S&P/TSX 60 article needs better referencing.

As to the (Category:Delisted S&P/TSX 60 companies), delisted is a misleading term. S&P uses deletion from. Perhaps, (Category:Removed from S&P/TSX 60 index) should you wish to continue with that category. As you can tell, I'm not a fan of this category. It's difficult to cite. You need a citation for every corporation on the list. There is only one editor that I can see. Its notability is questionable.

I hope I'm not being too difficult.

Regards--Rosetown (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)