User talk:AllanPH

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, AllanPH!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 05:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Five senses.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Five senses.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Motopark (talk) 06:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Picture collection must collect from local picture from Commons, please upload first every picture to Commons and then collect it from those. Please take a look at File:Collage Rome.jpg as an example how to do it. See Commons:Collages for details. Motopark (talk) 06:09, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Dear Motopark,

If you cared to take a look at the summary for the picture "Five senses.jpg" it clearly says that this is my Own work work and I am the author of this picture. I have also clearly presented the licensing information that is provided as required on the picture page. With regard to the requirement of making collages as you just prescribed, refer me to the Wikicommons prescription that this is absolutely necessary! Otherwise please stop making false statements and falsely flagging clearly annotated pictures or I will report you. --AllanPH (talk) 22:02, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but it's indeed standing practise that you have to provide the exact source for every single image in a collage/montage. You have to keep in mind that around 10 percent of all uploads are claimed to be own work by the uploader, when in fact they are not. This may sound strange for a honest uploader/creator, but regrettably that's the reality we are facing 24 hours per day and 365 days per year. But apart from the provenicence aspect, it is also helpful to have a montage connected to the single images, if someone who sees the montage, but is interested only in one of the source-images.

Actually we have a specific template to list severeal source-images: {{Derived from|Example.jpg|Beispiel.png|Sample.svg}}. See File:Béjaïa (Algérie).jpg and File:2009 year montage.PNG as examples how other users have listed multiple source without using this template. --Túrelio (talk) 07:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for outlining the reasons. I will upload each photo separately and will then make a collage of it.

--AllanPH (talk) 18:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

It seems random to order the air inspecting senses so diagonally but those for direct material contact vertically. My added symbols improve this by hinting to which physical (left column) or chemical property (right column) each sense processes. Therefore, please accept my improvement. Thank you. --LKreissig (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi LKreissig, I was wondering what is the reasoning behind your change. So as you may imagine, there are many ways how to categorize the senses. Categorizing senses as "air inspecting" and "material contact" is just one of many possibilities. The reasoning I organized as I did was placing chemosensory senses "olfaction" and "gustation" on the same row. You may also argue that "touch" and "hearing" should be on the same row as they are both mechanosensory by the underlying molecular mechanism. However, whether a five piece illustration, that is fairly self explanatory, requires a deeply meaningful semantic organization is debatable. I rejected your added icons as this did not make the illustration substantially clearer while making the image busier and aesthetically in no way better. So I will politely ask you not to change this figure and make your own if you wish. --172.249.171.104 15:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Of course "touch", "hearing" and also "seeing" are all mechanosensory (the latter quantum mechanical) and they all have an "underlying molecular mechanism", and that is why I ordered them all together. Your grouping of chemosensory senses "olfaction" and "gustation" fully remains also in my superior tabular arrangement. An encyclopedia is the very last place for avoiding thematic arrangement improvements away from randomness with arguments like "but the article would become somehow busier and less aesthetical". An encyclopedia is not a pop concert! Can you accept that our both contributions were improving here, your pictures and my table arrangement? --LKreissig (talk) 21:25, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

LKressig, let's just agree to disagree. I appreciate that you are trying to make things better and that's commendable. The reason I rejected the addition is that the icons made very little sense to me as well as several other people I asked second opinions from. The thematic arrangement you are proposing has very little basis in modern biology as there is no "air inspecting" senses. Nor is vision a mechanosensory sense as you claim. Please leave this illustration as is. Thank you. --AllanPH (talk) 07:12, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Hearing and smelling are not virtually fully air inspection while other senses also depend on air properties, and vision is not the only on quantum mechanics (→photon) based sense? That is what you wanna tell? --LKreissig (talk) 07:52, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I went back to my notes, when I made this illustration as this has become an ordeal. It turns out I adopted the original layout based on the topological organization of the sense organs on the body with eyes and ears situated more rostrally than nose and tongue, which in turn are above the somatosensory surface of the body part depicted (hand). If you do your permutations, it is possible to arrange these sense organs 120 different ways with many different conceptual schemes. I have picked one of those many schemes. You have a different scheme, which is based on your own subjective criteria of "air inspection", "material contact" and a "mechanosensory visual system". Feel free to make your own illustration and adopt whatever scheme you please. This illustration has been used in wikipedias in more than 12 different languages and even more individual articles. All of these people who included it have deemed it perfectly fine to include this in their wikipedia contributions. As the author of this illustration I find your addition to be confusing and significantly deteriorating the clarity and aesthetics of the original illustration. I don't know how to say this in any other way - stop vandalizing other people's work and move on. --AllanPH (talk) 17:29, 10 October 2017 (UTC)