Dear Glenn, Welcome to RepRap.
Thank you very much for improving the organization of the RepRap wiki. In particular, I like the way you've renamed various FAQs to less misleading names and linked to them at FAQ. --DavidCary 18:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your appreciation. --Glenn 20:31, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
You once moved a bunch of text I put on a "category" page to a page in the main namespace. 
I can see that has some big advantages over the way I've been using category pages -- also a few disadvantages.
Is there a better way? Perhaps Wiki Administration#open questions is a better place to discuss this.
--DavidCary 14:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
You edited some of our pages, and we don't know why, for some reason we can't edit them anymore.
We see the following messages in our pages:
There are security restrictions on this page
edit is restricted to the author group (set from the "protect" tab)
move is restricted to the author group (set from the "protect" tab)
Could you please help us gain access to our pages again? And how could you have edited them, if we can't?
The unprotect tab is not visible for us. And it also looks that we are not in the group of authors. How?
When we try to manually access the URL  to unprotect the page we see this message:
You are not the author of this page
We have 2 users: imgartchen and stlprinter. None of them have access to the pages that we created.
- Hi STLPRINTER
- I think I have removed the restriction that imgartchen applied to many pages.
- Please test if it works now.
- I have looked through all Imgartchen edited pages and removed the restrictions.
- br, --Glenn (talk) 07:53, 14 January 2015 (PST)
The pages that we created were protected by us and, as we understand, they should not be changed by anyone, except us.
How could you gain control over our protected content and change permissions, as if you were the owner?
Looks like you placed yourself as the owner of our content. How?
And yes, after you changed something yesterday, we can edit the pages now, but we can't protect/unprotect them.
- Hi STLPRINTER
- The reason I could override the protection was, that I have administrator access. Some time ago I asked for it, among others because I had trouble editing some protected pages.
- I can not see how I can bring back your content protection. I am sorry.
- --Glenn (talk) 04:10, 18 January 2015 (PST)
Category : Printing material
Hi Glenn, I created this category to separate thermoplastic printing material from the 'category : thermoplastic', which also covers thermoplastic material which are not printable or truly experimental. I then changed to "Printing thermoplastic material", which was more in line with what I was willing to do. As you cannot move a category page, I changed all the links. So, I think the 'printing material' category can simply be deleted, but not being a sysop, I cannot do it myself. It can make sense, but that needs to modify many pages, which I do not intend to do.
Also, is it possible to add "Category : Printing thermoplastic material " in the page "Printing Material Suppliers " which is protected.
- Hi PRZ - it has now been done. --Glenn (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2016 (PDT)
Resized image quality
Hello, while contributing on schematic images, I noticed that on RepRap wiki, the quality of the resized images is terrible. Images are very fuzzy and there is a lot of artifacts. For schematic, the png format is more adapted than jpeg, but after resizing, the quality is as poor in both formats, so at the end I decided to use JPEG because of the availability of IPTC fields, which does not exists in PNG images.
You can find an example in jpeg in this page RepRap_Firmware_heating#Analog_converter. It seems that use of colors aggravate the problem.
Another example in png here Duet_Web_Control where text looks quite fuzzy, while it is perfectly neat in the not resized image.
Maybe png images are converted through a jpeg library as png images are not supposed to create artifacts ?
The wikimedia manual page is here : https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Image_administration
This is not wikimedia itself as on Wikipedia you don't see these effects. Also, manual pages tells that ImageMagick gives better results than the GD library. However, I never seen so bad quality using GD library.
Can someone have a look in the configuration of the RepRap wiki to improve the image quality ?