User talk:Chris55

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Chris55!

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans  العربية  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  Esperanto  español  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  magyar  íslenska  italiano  日本語  ქართული  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/−


Hello, Chris55!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted content[edit]

Afrikaans  العربية  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  বাংলা  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  suomi  français  galego  עברית  हिन्दी  magyar  Bahasa Indonesia  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  Nederlands  polski  português  русский  sicilianu  svenska  Türkçe українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文  繁體中文  +/−


Hello Chris55, the following content you uploaded violates one or more of our policies and therefore has been or will soon be deleted:

File:Iraqdossier-p15.jpeg

The Wikimedia Commons (this website) only hosts media files with a realistic educational purpose and that can be used for any purpose, including:
  • use in any work, regardless of content
  • creation of derivative works
  • commercial use
  • free distribution

See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons, and Commons:Image casebook for some specific examples. Some other Wikimedia projects have different licensing policies. For example, the English Wikipedia allows fair use of sounds and photographs. This is not the case on Wikimedia Commons; "fair use" materials are not acceptable here.

Please make sure that you only upload educational content you have created yourself, those which are out of copyright, or those for which you have the required permission for the work to be used in all the ways described above. Please note that derivative works of copyrighted material are also considered copyrighted. Again, please read through Commons:Licensing, which is quite crucial, to understanding how Wikimedia Commons works. Thanks for your contribution, and please do leave me a message if you have further questions.

And also:

Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 06:59, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

user:Hedwig in Washington, this very definitely was published under a free licence which was why I uploaded it. It's fairly unusual for British Government documents and it's important to keep it in view as subsequently there have been attempts to hide it. I gave the evidence and I'd need to go back and check it. I don't check this user page regularly. Chris55 (talk) 07:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It happened because no verifyable source was given, only a generic one. See: Com:Essential information. Can you recover a reliable source? I'd be very happy to restore the files. Please let me know. Thanks! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 14:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've reread the notes I made at the time and they weren't as positive as I remember. The British government introduced an Open Government Licence with much fanfare but it is not the default, as in the US, but must be explicit. There is no copyright notice on the September dossier but that's not enough in Britain (despite being still available from websites including the BBC.) So whereas it's usable in the US because it's an official government statement, it would require a statement from the British government to establish open copyright in Britain. Given that the official (Chilcot) inquiry is still stalled it may not be worth asking. Chris55 (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File:Last of the Tasmanians Map.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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

 — billinghurst sDrewth 21:17, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your postings[edit]

čeština  Deutsch  English  español  suomi  français  italiano  日本語  português  русский  українська  +/−
Click the "Signature and timestamp"-button to sign your talkpage contributions
Click the "Signature and timestamp"-button to sign your talkpage contributions
As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 12:07, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries by traffic-related death rate[edit]

Hi Chris55, it seems that your very nice picture

Road traffic accidents world map


has some errors. Iran and Venezuela are shown as countries with the highest road traffic accidents. But, Venezuela is not present in the data - it should be denoted like grey = "no data". Iran has value 32, but Libya has much higher 73, Thailand 36 etc.

Please, could you correct the picture? Thank you in advance. :) Tachto (talk) 18:44, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tachto, I don't agree with your comments. Do note that the map reflects all age death figures per 100,000 inhabitants, not the raw totals which are in the WHO spreadsheet cited. The RTAs are at line GHE Code 153 (line 148) and populations are at line 10.
  1. Venezuala shows 12,100 road deaths, pop 29,955,000 = 40.39 per 100,000.
  2. Iran has 32,000 pop 76,424,000 = 41.87
  3. Libya has 2,000 pop 6,155,000 = 32.49
  4. Thailand has 24,900 pop 66,785,000 = 37.28
I agree the comparisons are surprising and western figures seem to represent the effects of road safety campaigns.

Chris55 (talk) 10:52, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whymenfightameth00russuoft.djvu 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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:07, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Ethics of War.pdf 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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:09, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rabies world map-Deaths per million persons-WHO2012.svg 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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

158.140.213.218 15:46, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

see File talk:New cases daily for Covid-19 in world and top 5 countries Jan-Mar.png — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 122.56.206.163 (talk) 18:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

color scheme for country charts[edit]

Hi Chris, since you did not react on my comment on File_talk:Covid-19_new_cases_in_top_5_countries_and_the_world.png yet, I'll try to reach you here.

How about using the same color scheme for the same countries?

Personally, I do use the one below:

Color hex Country
3c3b6e US (dashed)
ff0000 Canada (dashed)
ef3340 Spain
007a33 Italy
0055a4 France
ffcd00 Germany
cc66ff United Kingdom

I picked appropriate colors from the country's flag. But there's too much blue, red or green around. So France got the blue ("Allez les bleus"), while UK got a purple. North america got dashed. Work in progress is to find more suitable color settings. --Traut (talk) 10:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update: It's easy to pick 009c3b for Brazil. But I have no good idea which color to take for the new hotspots in Chile and Peru. --Traut (talk) 09:20, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coronavirus statistics?[edit]

Hi Chris:

I am looking at your "Covid-19 daily deaths in top 5 countries and the world.png" Where do you obtain your data? Checking out Mexico specifically, your chart indicates currently about 2000 daily deaths. However, "https://coronavirus.gob.mx/datos/" shows about 300, and "https://covid19-country-overviews.ecdc.europa.eu/" seems to follow closely. as they are probably the from the same data source.

thanks, Baden

187.216.232.32 17:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Baden, the data comes from ECDC as it says on the page.
Unfortunately as happens from time to time, it's obvious that Mexico did a big catchup on Oct 9 by posting 3,013 deaths cf 369 the day before and 401 the day after. I haven't had time to cross check with John Hopkins to see if they have smoothed the data properly. Sometimes the countries help with that and other times they don't. If you have the detailed corrections I'd be glad to change it. You can email me. Chris55 (talk) 17:14, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've now checked with John Hopkins and they have much the same as ECDC, except that their adjustment comes on 5 October with an increase from 79,088 to 81,877 - 2,789 cf 3013 for ECDC. However their total figure for 9 October is 83,497 which is very little different to the Mexican figure on the site you quote of 83,507. I can't find their historical figures: do they have such a page? Chris55 (talk) 19:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris:

Thanks for your prompt response. There are major inconsistencies occurring here, and my limited sleuthing capabilities cannot exactly discern where. For starters, the two links I gave above show the official Mexican statistics, and the ECDC charts. The ECDC data page link you gave me has the following death stats for October compared with the Mexican government link:

   Date		ECDC	Government (men + women)
   2020-10-10	411	
   2020-10-09	3013	0
   2020-10-08	369	47
   2020-10-07	446	185
   2020-10-06	180	221
   2020-10-05	208	231
   2020-10-04	388	256
   2020-10-03	414	278
   2020-10-02	432	267
   2020-10-01	483	264

There is a big discrepancy in these two sources, but that is minor compared to the data displayed on your chart. Yes, there was an one day ECDC anomaly (from where?) in the above data, but your previous chart dated 2020-10-03 shows equivalent quantities, roughly 2000 deaths/day.

thanks, Baden

187.216.232.32 19:35, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tried downloading the historical data from the Mexican site but I got timeouts. It looks very much as I said: they've done a big catchup which yields a net increase in deaths of around 2,800-3,000 but both international sources have not revised their earlier numbers. They may do so in the coming days. You'd probably have to go back months to catch all the changes.
I have seen typos in the ECDC figures (there was a biggie in Algeria a month or so back corrected after a few days) but I don't think this is one of them. There have also been bigger changes in the totals. If you log in it would be easier to communicate. Chris55 (talk) 22:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Chris:

Okay, I think I just discovered the problem. Your chart is for *weekly* deaths, but is labeled "daily deaths". Is this the case? It would align the Mexican statistics. What about the others?

Main page legend: "Semi-log plot of weekly deaths due to COVID-19 in the world and top five current countries (mean with cases)"

Chart page title: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Covid-19_daily_deaths_in_top_5_countries_and_the_world.png

Image page title: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Covid-19_daily_deaths_in_top_5_countries_and_the_world.png

Chart page "Description": [...] "This is now the weekly total rather than a 7 day rolling average." [...]

thanks, Baden 200.68.142.2 04:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, I shouldn't have used the word 'daily' in the picture title. The problem is that the chart is used in several other languages and I discovered earlier that if I changed the name they never caught up. Chris55 (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pay attention to copyright
File:Big lie.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

MSG17 (talk) 22:39, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Big lie.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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

MorganKevinJ(talk) 22:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you change the file, please ensure the source field is also updated. Thanks. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

user:ShakespeareFan00 I would if I knew where the source field was! And this was 10 years ago. Chris55 (talk) 17:51, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lung cancer mortality map[edit]

Hi, Chris55. The article "Lung Cancer" is currently undergoing review. Are you able to create an updated map similar to this?

I found maps for 2020 here, but I am unsure of the licensing. Perhaps there are similar maps elsewhere with appropriate licensing for Wikimedia Commons. Axl (talk) 07:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]