User talk:Ayacop/Archive2

Blanco

Helo again, are you going to put the Blanco scans in the article or shall I do it, I noticed they were orphaned right now. If the article is too big, perhaps we should make a second one in the Category Botanical Illustrations WayneRay 12:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

I promised I'd do it, Wayne, when I'm done. Also, they are not orphaned, they are in the plants categories, and they are in my own category, so they can't be orphaned, regardless of what toolserver might tell you. -- Ayacop 14:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I just scanned 300 species from my old slide collection, I will be busy on that for a while, thanks again. WayneRay 16:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

Image:Dermatoms.svg

Hey Ayacop,

I noted that this image has a tag ({{PD}}) that doesn't adequately explain its disposition. Please update the license tag with an accurate license tag. Thanks. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 13:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

health

H Ayacop,

a while ago you made a remark about your health. How are things? (email me at teun.spaans AT gmail.com) if you dont want to broadcast it all around, i can read german if you prefer that)

regards,

TeunSpaans 15:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Health is ok. The problem now is rather that I'm in a full time programming project which is eating free time. Thanks for asking. -- Ayacop 09:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

categories

Why this edit?! --84.177.76.23 00:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• Editing without a reason and ignoring me -> revert! --84.177.96.241 21:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Suspected misdentified tree images

Re Image:Araucaria heterophylla formerly Araucaria excelsa1.jpg and Image:Araucaria heterophylla formerly Araucaria excelsa2.jpg - I have put notes on their discussion pages to the effect that I doubt very much that these are A. heterophylla. They look like Araucaria columnaris to me - A. heterophylla is a very very common tree in Auckland New Zealand where I live, and none of the specimens I have seen exhibit this kind of twisting appearance - leaning to one side is like this is, however, a characteristic of A. columnaris. Just wondering if there is any way to flag such images. Kahuroa 10:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Depends on where they're used (the article using it has now an additional gallery with them). I can't comment on the identification, and you are probably best suited to cast doubt on it. -- Ayacop 15:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Northwest Crown Fire Experiment.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Northwest Crown Fire Experiment.png. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Jkelly 23:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem should be resolved now. Source URL mistyped. -- Ayacop 09:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Duplicate

Hello, Image:Heliconius numata.jpg and Image:Makak neonatal imitation.jpg are identical. Please tag one of it with {{Bad name}}. Thank you. --GeorgHH 12:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Carotene

Hi Ayacop,

I noticed you removed Category:Terpenes from Image:Beta-carotene-2D-skeletal.png and Image:Alpha-carotene-2D-skeletal.png. When I uploaded these images, I added them to the terpenes category because I was sure they are terpenes, having read that they are tetraterpenes at w:Terpene. I checked my facts in Biochemistry (Stryer et al.). I may still be wrong, and it would be good to hear your perspective. If you could explain why you felt they do not belong in Category:Terpenes, I would be very grateful, as it would prevent me (or you!) from making further errors.

Best wishes

Ben 13:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Easy: just look where they are now: in Category:Carotenoids which itself is in Category:Terpenes. So they are still in Terpenes, do you understand? -- Ayacop 18:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yep, sorry. I see.

Thanks very much.

Ben 19:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tranexamic acid.svg

Hello there, I'm sorry to bother you, but there seems to be an error in Image:Tranexamic acid.svg—please see Pubchem 5526, you'll see what I mean. Thank you, Fvasconcellos 20:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Argh, thanks. Ironic, that this happens with such a small formula. BTW, you're doing good work yourself, keep it up. -- Ayacop 10:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, no problem. I've just found out I'd messed up a structure, I'll be doing some fixing myself :( Fvasconcellos 13:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Triclosan.svg

Hi Ayacop. Could you please crop this structure (too much empty room at the top and the bottom)? Many thanks. --Leyo 16:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. My, was that long ago. -- Ayacop 19:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. The version Image:Triclosan.png might be superseded now. --Leyo 20:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

ToL Newsletter issue 1

The inaugural newsletter of the Tree of Life project has been published. You are welcome to read the newsletter, comment on its contents, frequency and form, or unsubscribe by putting your name on my talk page.

Teun Spaans 21:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Montrichardia linifera0.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Montrichardia linifera0.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from BryanBot. 14:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

==Quality Image Promotion++

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Echinops Ain France.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--16:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Culex sp larvae.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Culex sp larvae.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 08:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Northwest Crown Fire Experiment.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Northwest Crown Fire Experiment.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 01:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Phytophtora_reproduction.png

Hi Ayacop. I'm trying to get my head around what's going on with this one... it looks like 2 of the images ("A" and "D") are "used by permission" on the source page, but I can't find anywhere where it says they were released by the authors under CC. In any case, the 2 component images from USDA have been cropped out for now (Image:Zoospores_-_Reproductive_Structure_of_the_Phytophthora.png and Image:Chlamydospores_-_Reproductive_Structure_of_the_Phytophthora.png). Do you have any other information about it? It's a really good image, but copyvio is copyvio :(. If I don't hear back from you, I'll just delete it, but I can always undelete later if more information turns up. There seems to be a few other USGov images around for Phytophthora (as well there should be with the pepper/curcurbit blight going crazy), so maybe the best approach would just be to reconstruct it? --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 02:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Where is the problem if all pictures published in PLoS are released under CC-2.5 except when stated otherwise, as they say? --Ayacop 17:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Decategorizing

Please don't decategorize images without reason. This has been discussed until I'm ready to puke, and the agreement is that the family categories are NOT overcategorizing. So, stop removing them. KP Botany 22:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Ayacop, if you continue to remove categories without discussion you will be blocked. :( --Gmaxwell 00:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Blocking someone for doing maintenance work. Sounds like a joke to me. --BerndH 05:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Doing whatever you want without discussing it with other editors is fine though? Notice, the discussion page for this image is a red link, Image talk:Lupine in Grand Teton NP-NPS.jpg, and while I used comments in my reversion summary, Ayacop chose not to respond or discuss, but simply revert [1].KP Botany 03:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It has been discussed before. --BerndH 07:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is continuing at Commons talk:WikiProject Tree of Life. [2] —the preceding unsigned comment is by Wsiegmund (talk • contribs) 17:26, 7 April 2007

A Wikiproject page is not where commons policy is set. I invite any user to point me instances of multiple category removal after being warned, I will not hesitate blocking people who are actively damaging commons. I know these people mean well, but we block people who cause harm and will not stop. --Gmaxwell 17:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It is no harm done. I maintain that no information is lost. You won't be able to disprove that. I will repeat doing what I do to keep the botany tree usable. Regards. --Ayacop 17:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

My comment above was informational. I'm not implying that policy is made on Wikiproject pages, nor on user talk pages. If guidance on a Wikiproject page conflicts with policy, that should be corrected, in my opinion. Wsiegmund 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:3-Caren (BS).png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:3-Caren (BS).png. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Kareha 12:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Civility

Please don't use incivil, senseless edit summaries, as they have no meaning.[3] Your insulting me is not a reason to revert. Again, if you can't and won't discuss your edits, don't revert mine. KP Botany 05:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

There is hardly reason to discuss a perfectly fine edit. It is up to you to come to a sort of understanding what has happened. I will give you another hint, this by example:

Suppose an Image:New_York.jpg that has the category tags 'New York' and 'North America'. By your logic, I have to leave the North America tag on the picture (and all other like it), although 'New York' is a subset of 'North America'.

Mister, it is your turn to explain this phenomenon. It is not my duty to ever-and-ever again try to explain it to you like a little child that just happens to have made a wrong decision but can't stand the truth. --Ayacop 07:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Not my turn to explain anything, you're the one who undid my edit without explanation. Stop demanding me explain what you have done. KP Botany 18:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Read and understand this: Commons:Categories#Over-categorization. This link has been given to you again and again in the respective discussions. Your repeated failure to understand may be interpreted as willful uncivil behaviour. --Ayacop 08:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, this link was given, and I was told explicitly and repeatedly that over-categorizaion is not relevant in this case. Your repeated failure to wait until the issue is discussed is uncivil. KP Botany 02:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Ayacop, you're really pushing the envelope on incivility. Disagreement is not incivility, nor is "failure to understand" - but namecalling ("little child") is out of bounds, and you're the only one doing that. Shouldn't you be setting a better example yourself? Stan Shebs 17:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree... I think you might want to test out your "ignore" button for a while.

BTW: why are you threatening to block people? As far as I can tell, you aren't an administrator (I am, and I've been tempted to give both of you a holiday). Both of you need to cool down, because this is really getting rediculous. --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 17:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

If you read again exactly what I wrote you'll see I never stated to be an admin. Of course, I could therefore never block people myself. But if people believe that why should I reject the notion? --Ayacop 13:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, because sometimes the admin list is inaccurate. But as you may know from the Essjay episode, misleading people ("I will block YOU ...") is greatly frowned upon, and could itself get you bumped off here. Stan Shebs 17:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

In this case I demand equal treatment for Gmaxwell, quote here on the same page: if you continue to remove categories without discussion you will be blocked. :( --Gmaxwell 00:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC). If it's as it looks, that people plan to let all the plant family categories rot, then my work is no longer needed, anyway, so I don't care. --Ayacop 06:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Gmaxwell jumped the gun a bit there, and if I understand his view on categories, he would (more or less) actually agree with what you're doing if he looked at the diffs a bit more closely. I more or less agree with you too. But I will block you (and/or KP Botany) if you can't do your part to keep things civil, because the problem of whether or not to use redundant categories has lately become less of an issue than the truly nasty tone this conversation has taken. No matter who is right or wrong, you still need to be civil. No matter who threw the first punch, it's both of your responsibilities not to throw any more of them. We can't reach a solution to this by hair pulling or name calling. --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 13:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Your image: Betalain_pathway.svg

Hi Ayacop. I think I fixed the viewing errors in this image. Therefore, I have removed the librsvg-bug category tag. --Ysangkok 19:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

CTP strucuture.svg

Hi,
the image Image:CTP_structure.svg is incorrect.
It is missing a CH2 - group between phosphates and sugar, because ribose is a pentose (five carbon atoms).
Greetings, Teebeutel 08:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Trypanosomes and blood.png

Image deletion warning

Image:Trypanosomes and blood.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Steschke 18:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Botanical illustrations

Great job with the new pages of botanical illustrations WayneRay 14:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)WayneRay

Thanks. I just digitized the book for Project Gutenberg, so I thought hey, put the picture on Commons too. --Ayacop 14:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Lactuca compounds

Hi Ayacop,

I have created a working version of Image:Lactuca compounds.svg. This of course means that it is not any more a good example of a librsvg bug, so I figured I'd mention the fact to you personally. (Note, I do not browse commons very regularly, so if you want a swift response, it's probably a good idea to drop a note at en:User_talk:Slashme)--Slashme 10:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ipomoea_capillacea_Blanco2.332.png

Image deletion warning

Image:Ipomoea_capillacea_Blanco2.332.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

68.196.106.94 05:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ipomoea_capillacea_Blanco2.332.png

Image deletion warning

Image:Ipomoea_capillacea_Blanco2.332.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

68.196.106.94 05:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)