User talk:Lycaon/Archive5

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

Hello - thank you for providing images to the wikimedia commons. Please keep in mind that images uploaded to the commons should be useful to all users of wikimedia projects - this is possible only if the images can be found by other people. To allow others to find the images you uploaded here, the images should be in some place that can be found by navigating the category structure. This means that you should either place the images on topic pages (galleries) or put the images directly into a category, or do both. Which of those possibilities is preferred is however a matter of debate, see here.

The important point is that the images should be placed in the general structure somewhere. There is a large number of completely unsorted images on the commons right now, see Commons:Really unused. If you would like to help to place some of those images where they can be found, please do! Thank you. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 21:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Archive 1 (3 Jan 2006 – 8 Jan 2007)
Archive 2 (11 Jan 2007 – 30 May 2007)
Archive 3 (30 May 2007 – 2 Aug 2007)
Archive 4 (2 Aug 2007 – 24 Aug 2007)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dianthus hyssopifolius 1.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dianthus hyssopifolius 2.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Loxodonta africana - at the waterhole.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}}}

Opinion

Hi, I'd like you to take a look here. Alvesgaspar closed a nomination for FP but I think he misunderstood the work. I made some commentaries and I'd like a third opinion. Thank you. Dantadd✉ 23:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

QI Nomination

I've uploaded a different shot of the miscolored Opisthograptis luteolata. I'm not sure if there's a regulation to withdraw a nomination. But the other version has a better crop and has more consistent focus as well. --MichaD | Michael Apel 10:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Wasp-looking hoverfly

After all this fellow appears to be a Ceariana vespiformis (I fell now much better to have taken it for a wasp ;-)) - Alvesgaspar 10:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Amadina erythrocephala f.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}}}

Weevil again

Dear Hans, you know that iam traumatized of identifying weevils, do you have any idea of the species of this one ? Best regards --Richard Bartz 16:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Please help ID fish

Hello, Hans, could you, please tell me what are these fishes . The picture was taken at Madagascar. Thank you.--Mbz1 21:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chorthippus parallelus 1.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Phyllopertha horticola on Aegopodium podagraria.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}}}

QICbot

No I do not know why it failed, probably an edit conflict (I don't know whether the code does any retries after such events?) --Tony Wills 21:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality images/Subject/Animals

Thanks for the re-org of the galleries, looks good, I will try and get things in the right groups! --Tony Wills 21:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry if they end up in the wrong place, I'll keep an eye on it. Lycaon 21:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Carex riparia.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Carex riparia.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Decticus verrucivorus.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Loxodonta africana - drinking.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}}}

Distorted building side

Hello Lycaon, After you pointed it out on QIC, I have to agree that on the right side of Image:Wentworth Castle02 2007-08-13.jpg horizontal features show up diagonally. No idea why the stitch produced this, thank you for pointing this out, I would have like to spot that one before Digon3 tackled the blue fringing on the trees to the left. -- Klaus with K 11:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

FP Closing

Hi Hans, I will be away for a couple of days. I will make a short trip to the Vosges Mountains. Can you go on with the closing process? Kind regards, Simon --Simonizer 22:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please help id sea hare

Hi, Hans, I hope you are not tiered yet from my questions. Here's the picture from Hawaii: Do you know what kind it is? Thank you.--Mbz1 03:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

Likely a Dolabella auricularia Aplysiidae. Lycaon 11:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you.--Mbz1 16:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

Coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae)

Dag Hans, Following your comments of my picture of Latimeria chalumnae, I uploaded a new version of it. I need your help on the classification this specimen . I am everything but a specialist of marine taxonomy. On Wikispecies, I found this picture of a similar (?) specimen [[1]] Is the taxonomy of this living fossil already agreed among specialists? Alvast bedankt. Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 08:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hippophae rhamnoides.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}}}

Thanks João Felipe C.S 16:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok, sorry... João Felipe C.S 15:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Taurotragus oryx.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}}}

Unknown wasps

Hi Hans,

I need your help again to identify two wasps: The first seems to be a digger wasp of the Sphecidae family. The second, a parasit wasp of the Ichmeumonidae familiy. The last one was very difficult to shoot because it is very fast flying and stays only a moment on the flowers. Regards, Alvesgaspar 16:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for Wikispecies

Hi Lycaon,

Some days ago I placed a request for changing a template on Wikispecies, the one appearing at the Main Page. I saw that it's usually you the one who makes changes, so as I know you are around here, I'd like your help for fixing that. Thanks. - Keta 17:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for help with Image:CurrentSwitchLogic.svg

Thank you for taking the time to critique this image. The blob and negation bar problems you point out do not occur in Inkscape, nor do they occur if I export the image as a png from Inkscape. Do you know of a SVG syntax checker that would check my file for errors? --Gerry Ashton 22:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for a re-evaluation

I've done some touching up to my dragonfly picture in the quality image candidates for August 31. Can I get another opinion? Calibas 23:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

ambiguous stitching errors...

Please take a look at Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#Talamone_panorama_bottom, I still can't see any stitching errors... Alessio Damato 09:48, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I see... thanks for being so clear :-) Alessio Damato 21:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Welwitschia mirabilis (female).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}}}

User PH-3

I noticed you did some gallery checking on my main page yesterday. Thank-you. --Digon3 talk 13:41, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Please help ID the fish

Hello, Hans. If you could please help me to id . The picture was taken at Hawaii. Thank you.--Mbz1 15:04, 1 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

An image name

Hi! Would you please explain the reason of your this revert? Did I do something wrong? Tsunami is a wrong name. Please take a look at [2] and [3] and reply me on my WP talk page. Best regards Oda Mari 19:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I see. So sorry for my ignorance to take the proper steps. Please tell me what to do next? Or is it better to ask you or some Commons administrator to do the rest? Thank you and best regards. Oda Mari 05:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Babel

For the PH-3 ! --MichaelMaggs 19:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Early Christmas?

Thanks for the compliment :-). I see you have been busy [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] (I am waiting to see what reaction you get from those others that you 'demoted' ;-) --Tony Wills 05:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Aepyceros melampus petersi (female).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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rosa canina .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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Liocarcinus marmoreus 2.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Helophilus trivittatus.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Xerus inauris 1.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! San - Khoekhoen rock art - Namibia.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}}}

back

Hi Hans, iam back from my short trip. Should i resume the closing process? Or would you like to go on for a while? By the way, what happend to Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Mittlist Gfaell 02.JPG? Version2 should be featured and version 3 isnt closed correctly --Simonizer 22:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Hey Hans. Maybe you didnt read this message. Should i resume the closing process or would you like to go on? --Simonizer 14:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Oops sorry. I'm a bit busy at the moment (project porposal deadline). Maybe we can arrange something in the near future so that we can alternate the closure. It is quite a bit of work. I wouldn't mind helping out then. I won't be around though from half September up to half October (first a week to Helsinki for work (ICES ASC) and then I'll be at sea sampling for three and a half weeks). Lycaon 16:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, it is really much work. Perhaps we can invent a simplification, as soon as you are back again. Much success for your project.. --Simonizer 07:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oedipoda caerulescens 1.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}}}

Enjoy the trip and work very hard ... --Foroa 06:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tragelaphus strepsiceros (male).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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Orobanche caryophyllacea.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}}}

Error in vote count

Hi Lycaon. I noticed that the voting on the image Duolbagorni in Kebnekaise valley.jpg as QIC has been closed by you with the conclusion that it is not nominated. The conclusion is - I think - OK since no further votes has been added the last two days. However, the summarized vote count is wrong. There is actually one supporting vote, not zero. Just a minor detail. I thought of just correcting it, but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the procedures to do it. Cheers. -- Slaunger 20:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Medieval crane - Brugge.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Astrantia major.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}}}

Insect identification

Hi,

I took a few macro shots of insects and before uploading, I'd like to identify them so I can give a proper name to the file. I think you are good at this, so could you help me to do so, or tell me where I could start searching ?

the pictures to identify are : [14], [15] and [16]

thanks in advance ! Benh 23:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The first one is a solitary bee, probable genera: Andrena or Anthophora. (this site might help. I assume the images are French?).
The second one is very hard to identify without actually examining it in hand (Chorthippus ??).
The last one is possibly a Mitopus morio, but again, I'm not a specialist on terrestrial critters ;-)
Sorry for the late reply. Too busy lately :-). Regards. Lycaon 13:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I just saw your responses. Thanks a lot for the help !!!! Benh 20:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Navy binoculars.jpg

The problem is that it's not self-made? Ohh, okay - why don't you said that? --Beyond silence 11:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I did. Quote: “not eligible (not by wikipedian)”. ;-) Lycaon 11:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dysdercus andreae.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Van Veen.svg, 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}}}

overexposed and it has no identification?

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:GeckoMoscowZoo.JPG

What you mean "image is overexposed and it has no identification"? What the right you have for remove my nomination? If you don't like it, just vote  Oppose. But nominate for remove is despicable action. You nave not right to remove my nomination, I haven't break any licesce because it's my image. So I will remove you template and replace it with a vote if you won't do it. D.wine 15:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Biological naming conventions

Hi Joaquim. A small remark. You should only italicize genus and species name, no higher taxa such as families. That's an international convention for scientific names of organisms. There are exceptions such as in Lithuania where they italicize all foreign names, but generally this rule is followed. (BTW, I found the name of another of your wasps: Sceliphron caementarium). Cheers. Lycaon 18:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Hans,

Thanks for the information. That little bastard is very hard to shoot, I'll have to find where it stays for the night (in a nest of mud attached to walls, says the book)... BTW, congratulations and welcome to the club - Alvesgaspar 18:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Obrigado ;) Lycaon 20:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

A new version is available

Dear Lycaon, Iam very disapointed about the polling-progress on this Image. So i uploaded a new improved version and would ask if you can drop an eye on it, that would be very kind. Regards Richie --Richard Bartz 20:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! M36(c14) tropic of capricorn.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}}}


Your input is appreciated

Hi Lycaon. I have initiated a few discussions, which seems to be deadlocked. I thought you might have an opinion.

  • You seem quite knowledgeable about taxonomy. Do you happen to have an opinion on these observations concerning the accepted species name for dwarf fireweed?
On Darf fireweed, all evidence seems to indicate that the current accepted name is Chamerion latifolium (L.) Holub. A reference can be found on the German wikipedia. This would warrant a change in the current category structure.
Thank you for your fast response on this. Who can we ask to do the necessary modifications (I don't feel I have the necessary knowledge)? -- Slaunger 19:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
No probs, I'll give it a try later tonight. Lycaon 19:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I actually think I can manage. I'll give it a try and then you can double-check...?? -- Slaunger 20:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done I moved the article, iw'ed to the German article you mentioned, changed cat to Chamerion, created that cat as a subcat to Onagraceae. I added authors to the chamerion cat in accordance with GRIN. I tried to iw to other wikipedias from the Chamerion cat. Apparently only the Polish wiki refers directly to the genera. Unfortunately the Polish wiki links to a lot of articles specific for Epilobium angustifolium in other wikipedias, so I fear the new cat will be spammed with a lot of incorrects iw when an iw bot comes by.... I hope I have done it right. -- Slaunger 21:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Great! But it looks as if most of the Epilobiums are currently placed in Chamerion... Needs further investigation ;-) Lycaon 21:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
On geodata I'll come back later.
Cheers. Lycaon 19:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Birds and what they eat

Re my birds un-interested in beans, well the song thrush seemed to like bread put out for sparrows, and last month I found some snails for the thrushes but others found them first :-) --Tony Wills 22:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, nice food stories :-)) Lycaon 22:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

How do insects grow?

I've been struggling with a doubt about the growing of insects. Every entomologist say that all winged insects are adult. However, I suppose that at least some of them will continue growing. For doing that they'll have to replace the exo-skeleton which covers part of the body (or all of it) from time to time. My question is: does it happen with flies (Dyptera) as well as with bees and wasps (Hymenoptera)? I've seen wasps of the same species with very different sizes and I wonder if ther grow. For example this guy is much smaller than others of the same Polistes gallicus species. Sorry for the ignorance and for the candid question (to say the least...) - Alvesgaspar 23:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Insects (and all arthropods for that matter) only grow by moulting. Adult stages of insects do not longer grow. Different sizes of the same species are often a result of the relative successfulness of the larval stages. If food is in abundance, you may find rather large specimens, if it was limited you may find smaller individuals. It is a bit like with bonsai.
Many Crustaceans at the other hand, keep on shedding their exoskeletons and grow forever. This can sometimes be seen in lobsters, where at times huge specimen are caught.
In general size is determined by the genotype of the species, but environmental factors can lead to quite a bit of variety.
Concerning your wasp, I don't think it is a Polistes gallicus. Its front is too yellow, even for a female P. gallicus. I do think it is a Polistes species though. Have a look at this site: you have seen the wasp in real life, so you may be able to judge better as to which one it is. Regards. Lycaon 12:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your explanations, Lycaon. I'm happy that lobters don't follow the general rule of insects regarding growth  ;-) Alvesgaspar 12:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I had never really thought about adult insects and whether they grow ... but anyway I come here with a query :-) ...
A source that I trust implicitly (:-) en:Polistes_gallicus says that "Polistes dominulus, sometimes referred to as the European paper wasp, is one of the more common and well-known species of social wasps in Europe; for many years, the species was known as Polistes gallicus, a name which was incorrectly attributed." and gallicus is redirected to dominulus. Most of the wasps gallicus wasps on commons are Alves' after being identified by Lycaon ... have you led him astray, or is there something I should know ;-) --Tony Wills 12:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not so sure about that source as it doesn't mention its source ;-). Both P. dominulus and P. gallicus are mentioned in referenced articles from 2006 ([17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22]) and from 2007 ([23], [24], [25], [26], and many others). Seems the jury is still out on this one and as original research in beyond the scope of wikis, it looks as if we will still have two species instead of one. Lycaon 14:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:MontBlanc2c.jpg

Did you delete my suppport vote from Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:MontBlanc2c.jpg? --Beyond silence 08:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, It has been forgotten. ;) --Beyond silence 11:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Adidas Absolado TRX TF-2.jpg

What is copyright on my own photo? --Beyond silence 08:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

It depicts a copyrighted logo (see Derivative works). Lycaon 09:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Is that enough for deletion? --Beyond silence 15:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a copyright specialist, but I'm afraid that is enough reason. Lycaon 15:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Can you see the Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Adidas Absolado TRX TF-2.jpg? --Beyond silence 11:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for now and remove the template. Lycaon 13:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. --Beyond silence 14:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Nest photography

Hi Lyacon,

Re your comment, I can not support nest photography, without a proven license or in countries where this not required, a very compelling reason., can you tell me more about this, please? I couldn't find any relevant info in Google or Wikipedia about "nest photography" and licenses and such. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Fungi

Hi Lycaon! I see that you have been a lot on wikispecies, and therefore assume that you're good in species and so on. I got two pictures on fungi, and wonder if you know what sort of fungi it is?

The fungi I talk about is: Image:Redbrown fungi.JPG Image:Redbrown fungi2.JPG

Image:Vue en montant à Vallonpierre.jpg nomination for FP

Hi hans,

You voted for this picture on FPC and the author uploaded a new version of it. Maybe you'd like to have a look.

thanks ! Benh 20:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Caladenia flava -- QI

Good point on the comment its a protected species these were a 10km walk from the nearest public road, I've removed the more detailed location. Gnangarra 13:51, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for Hoverfly ID !

all is said :). You got it before I even started researching (that relieved me, it tooks me 2 days to find the plant ID :) ). I changed the template and (of course) credited you for this. Benh 19:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: your comments at FPC

Hi Mr. Hillewaert,

I read this: I reserve my judgement until the current investigation into this matter has come to a conclusion. and was wondering where Commons holds its investigations into sockpuppetry. I am really interested in that kind of thing. (Weird, I know.) I hope you can help. Doodle-doo Ħ 21:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. How does that affect all the votes? (I noticed that too, it was pretty obvious - the accounts were created pretty much in sequence.) Doodle-doo Ħ 22:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, they are nullified :-(. If you have suspicions (it doesn't happen very often luckily), you do a request for checkuser. Lycaon 22:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll keep that in mind. Have the votes been struck from the record yet? Doodle-doo Ħ 22:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Did you see what Acarpentier said on their talk page? They're claiming that the other accounts were "coworkers" of theirs (though they most likely weren't). Doodle-doo Ħ 21:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Dresden-Fuerstenzug2.jpg

I rework the image with more care. --Kolossos 19:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lutheran Cathedral Helsinki.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}}}

Overexposed?

You tagged my QIC as overexposed. How is it determined, and how to fix it? Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Again, you commented on overexposed sky. Could you tell me more on what is it and how to fix it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bad Bramstedt (BP24).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}}}

Picture at FPC

Could you help in identifying the flower which I nominated on FPC? Muhammad Mahdi Karim 14:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the id. Now that you have identified it, could you remove he tag at FPC? Sorry, if I am a bother. Thanks, Muhammad Mahdi Karim 16:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

ID help again

Hi, Could you please help in identifying the specie of the dragonfly? Thanks, Muhammad Mahdi Karim 19:34, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposal concerning User PH-n templates

Hi Lycaon, I've written a proposal concerning the {{User PH-0}},...,{{User PH-3}} templates, that you may be interested in. Best regards Slaunger 09:03, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

In case you want to influence the conclusion, I can inform you that a vote is now on-going. -- Slaunger 20:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Procedure

What do you mean with proper procedure? The ten days are over. I've counted the votes, the result was unambiguous. Then I put the nomination in the archive and removed it from the candidate list. That's exactly what Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished tells. There is nothing more to do in case of non-featured-pics. -- Cecil 08:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality image

Hi Lycaon. Thank you for taking the time to review my image. I was, of course, very pleased that you promoted it to a quality image. It is very encouraging to receive any feedback. I'm still wrestling with digital technology, so I am a bit out to sea too :) I had to drop B&W photography when it became prohibitively expensive, so it is quite some time since I picked up a camera. However, I think my instincts are slowly returning. Regards for now, your cheque is in the mail :-) Cygnis insignis 10:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgian Air Force Sea King RS01.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}}}

What is going on there?

I smell a election fraud. My edit is overwritten and all votes are merged together. Have a look at the history please. Is this legal ? --09:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Le destructeur

Help! Help! After trying to update my Commons:Meet our photographers entry everything is really weird. Can you please help me ? see the tragic show here :) --Richard Bartz 14:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC) :UUUUps I fixed it! Dont mind :) --Richard Bartz 14:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC) Something is still strange, now iam a part of your entry :) --Richard Bartz 14:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Fangtooth.svg

Colepsis longidens, also known as ogrefishes
that image is correct ? --libertad0 ॐ 17:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it has lots of mistakes.

  1. What is indicated as the vertebral column is actually a bony fortified sideline.
  2. The Weberian apparatus is not visible on the drawing.
  3. The palatoquadrate is misspelled and wrongly represented. Here it looks as if it is hollow.
  4. The mandibulare (mandibular arch) is incompletely indicated: the part underneath also belongs to it.
  5. The orbitale (orbital) is missing.
  6. The operculare is not indicated.
  7. Neither is the pectoral girdle.
  8. The so called median fin is a dorsal fin.
  9. Anal fins are not indicated.
  10. The caudal fin is twice indicated.
  11. ...

Generally, the parts indicated are mostly not discernible on the image as it is too stylized, the sources for the image are not given and the accompanying text is incoherent and inconsistent. Lycaon 19:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Please be more helpful

Ignoring my questions above, removing entries instead of fixing ([27]) - this is not helpful. Please try harder, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

SeaSide and JDrewes

I am afraid you are wrong here. While SeaSide is my father, and therefore "a" drewes, he is not me (Jan Drewes). Is it illegal for family members to promote? Do you see a problem with the image itself? Cheers...--JDrewes 12:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Please help ID

I'm having trouble identifying two garden shrubs where I have taken many of my insect shots lately. The first (here and also in my Eristalinus pics in COM:FPC) has simple lanceolate leaves and 4-petals flowers in a inflorescence. The second (here and also in my Bombus pics in COM:FPC) has simple labiate flowers and serrate leaves. I'll take some pictures to the shrubs if you find necessary. Thanks, Alvesgaspar 22:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops, tough ones (at least for me). Give me some time, I'll give it a go. Lycaon 22:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for pointing that out to me. Rocket000 22:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! O.101 Benny.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}}}

Arctic marine and critters taxo help request

Hi Lycaon, I was wondering if you could help me out with two things

  1. This w:barnacle. By reading w:Semibalanus balanoides (especially the remarks that it is found way up north only limited by pack ice) I find it plausible that this is the species of the individuals shown. Do you agree? Secondly, I am not used to categorization/species galleries of animals and I am an ignorant concerning their taxonomy. I am therefore in doubt regarding the proper categorization/species gallery of this photo on Commons. Could you help me out?
  1. The small red critter on this flower. The photo is from North-west Greenland in a medium arctic, oceanic environment at a coastal location. The number of different critters in the area is rather limited and this one is not to be found in my (incomplete) field guide (which mainly covers plants). Have you got any idea what this can be, perhaps not on a species level, but family or genus perhaps? I have observed a similar looking critter while taking this photo. -- Slaunger 20:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kim. The red critter is not so difficult: just count the legs. Eight legs, so Arachnida and in this case a mite. But to go further I am not qualified. Possibly?? Trombidiidae but the image is not sharp enough to be certain. I'm also a bit puzzled about the two extra frontal appendages, which don't seem to be cheliceres.
For your Cirriped, I'll have to look at some literature at work tomorrow or friday. You're probably right with your id, I'll confirm soon. Cheers. Lycaon 21:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Hans, you're fast! I got as close as "spiderlike" too from counting the legs, but I had no idea it was a mite. And for the barnacle, thank you for checking it for me. I do not have easy access to authoritative literature on the subject. I just noticed btw that there is an even smaller critter on the flower next to the mite. I think that is an insect though as it appears to have six legs, the resolution is too lousy to say more I guess.
No probs :). As for the tiny one, my guess is it is a juvenile mite from the same species as the big red one. Counting legs at that resolution? Hmmmm.... ;-). Lycaon 22:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Concerning the barnacles see my first ogg movie on Commons! -- Slaunger 13:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Lycaon

Well, have each one speak for themselves, don't you think? Now, I think you are a smart man, I looked over your work and basic info. And believe it or not, I do like your photography.

Where I come from in this discussion is truly wanting to contribute to Wikipedia. I have a very solid background in photography, believe me, I know the medium. Just like you have a strong background in marine biology. So what if, for example, I were to talk about whales as fish, not mammals, and influence, or encourage people to explore marine biology based on false premises like that, what would you do? Especially thinking that the forum where I may be influencing people has an incredible potential to do good? Would you not be forced by your own scientist convictions to set the record straight?

I will put this in other words... Take an organism.... Approach it by the path of science or by the path of superstition... Which one will it be? Considering that knowledge is the goal...

Like you, I am a man of science... but this is superstition... Where do you stand?

--Tomascastelazo 22:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Art, science...

Haaaa, you quantitative scientist... If you can't trap it into a lab, isolate it from everything else, the phenomena does not exist... and when it does, it exist apart from reality itself... a contradiction. An observable event

That quantitative vs qualitative discussion never ends.... There is a method to quantitative aspects of knowledge and experience. Even to the dismay of hard core hard scientists..... I know that discussion...

But in this case... So many times I've read that this is not an art forum, when it fits someones purpose to declare that, and all of a sudden it is... when it is convenient.

Well, in either case, there is a method of judging photography, which I will refrain from explaning to you, lest you think I am a know it all. And that method seems to be as rare or unknown as a long ago extinguished anthropod that lived in Atlantida.

Now, seriously, ask any good photographer friend, but a good photographer, show him the site, the comments, the pictures... and ask for his opinion.

--Tomascastelazo 22:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Helsinki

Whites are not white. That's why I voted against. Thierry Caro 23:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Quiet' pa lo fra. Out prosain fotos ma voté pour.
No problem. I'll vote in favour of your next pictures. Thierry Caro 23:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Ayo ! Thierry Caro 23:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes

  • Perhaps I am making assumptions about motives, but certainly some of the proposals appeared to be more about ranking contributors than providing useful information (which is what user-boxes are meant for). I think the rush to vote on proposals was very counter-productive, there are lots of unresolved questions - the first one being what are user-boxes for. Various discussions were started but people insisted on posting  Support  Oppose votes and not really getting into a discussion. The original intent of the first proposals was to clarify how people should rate themselves, ie what did the different levels mean, but this seemed to rapidly degenerate into how do we score users on their ability so that "we" can assign them a user-box. And perhaps this is my assumption - if we define levels in terms of absolute countable things we expect to enforce this (and even if we agree not to, the next generation of users will come along and take it upon themselves to enforce it). But this is not what user-boxes are about. User-boxes are about declaring ones interests or skills, not about ranking users for some unknown purpose (boasting, self esteem? ...).
  • I think that counts of QI and FP are not relevant to user-boxes. Attaining QI and FP promotions is about a lot of things, not necessarily about photographic skill! A count of QI & FP is a measure of participation in QIC and FPC and ones willingness to tailor ones submissions to the demands of the reviewers there (eg downsampling to appear sharp, blurring backgrounds to hide noise etc, etc). If I am not willing to play the QI/FP game I am now going to be told I can't rate myself as a good/expert photographer? User-boxes have never been about community rating or ranking, they are the User's boxes, they are their declarations of self. If I'm looking for an illustrator or photographer etc, I can go look at people who rate themselves as good in those fields and look at their contributions and decide whether they're who I am looking for.
  • To conclude: Even if high QI/FP numbers were an indication of photographic ability, the lack-there-of is not a counter indication.
PS I know of two voters with a QI count on their user page, and I don't know how many QIs I've got. Having reduced my userpage to just QI/FPs due to over population, I'm going to have to find some other selection criteria as it is still rather long (and when I get time to do some more submissions it will undoubtedly grow ;-). And in case it is not obvious this whole ph-x thing won't affect me as I am not bothered about rank (I know my limitations ;-)
PPS In a perverse way, the proposed QI/FP counts allow people to claim photographic skill that wouldn't be recognised by other measures - eg I would be acclaimed to be an 'advanced' photographer with my little experience, poor equipment and elementary photographic knowledge :-) --Tony Wills 02:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Concerning the PPS, this could also be an example of a failure in self-perceived ability. In this case I think you under-estimate your own capabilities. ;-) -- Slaunger 11:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Flattery will get you everywhere ;-). But seriously, I don't think QI/FP counts are a useful measure of ability and anyway Userboxes have never been about someone else measuring your ability using some scale. They are a qualitative declaration --Tony Wills 11:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I got that alright. But as I have stated previously no other user boxes could be based on anything quantitatively due to a lack of available observable measurements. -- Slaunger 11:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, but QI/FP counts are not a *measure* of ability, QI/FP counts are a measure of interest in gaining QI/FP recognition :-). It seems to be a case of "we've got something that we can count so we'll use it to define something else". Some voters appear to want to create a ranking system that fits people into boxes that we can easily define rather than describe the categories so people can more easily use them. --Tony Wills 01:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


Image:Passer melanurus.jpg

I see what appears to be noise in Image:Passer melanurus.jpg, especially at the top of the head. It's not like regular noise from a high ISO, more like something introduced during editing. Kinda like too much sharpening but without the high contrast. I've noticed it in some of your other pictures also and it seems like other editors see it too. Perhaps it's more noticeable on LCD monitors? I hate declining your pictures for something like this, but to me it doesn't look sharp. Calibas 18:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I just want to know why this bird buries its money in the dirt, then stands guard over it (well it looks like a coin at its feet) :-) --Tony Wills 01:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Isn't it obvious? No bank I know of accepts Aves. Calibas 02:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
@ Tony: I Think it is a compressed (by millions of birds trampling) bottle cap. Lycaon 13:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
@ Calibas: Don't hate declining. If you think it is not good enough and you come with real arguments (as in this case), I accept a decline gracefully :-). Actually, I think it is an ISO case after all. I've noticed my Sony alpha is not too good at higher ISO's, and even ISO200 can already cause havoc. I had been sick for some days at that time and have been shooting at ISO200 for a couple of days without noticing. I always use manual settings for ISO, and some other parameters.Lycaon 13:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


Response?

I was wondering whether you were going to respond to my comments above about Userboxes (I was also wondering whether you were going to respond to Carols offer to manufacture votes for you ;-) --Tony Wills 10:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm still ruminating my response to your comments. And Carols offer? If I reacted on that it was only going to get her warned or even blocked :-((, I don't find that very funny. Lycaon 15:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Le_Grand_Heron.jpg Featured Candidate

Since there is no opposition on Fir0002 point of view about the deasaturation background, I've deceided to replace it with the original background version. So you can replace your support in the alternate version since it's the same now. Thanks, ;)

Re : FPC

Hello !
Thanks, but I've got really no problem to see you or anybody else vote against the promotion of one of my images. My comment was only about the link you gave (I didn't know that tool) which displays maps I didn't even knew the existence (like Image:FatuIva_topographic_map-fr.svg).
In fact, I'm more proud to see my maps widely translated and / or modified for other purposes and used through the WPs because it would mean I'm making a useful and good work for the project, even if a FP label makes me happy too, of course.
Good contributions. Sting 15:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

How did it turn out?

There was a discussion in Commons_talk:Licensing a while ago about one of your images used on a game show without permission and in violation on the license. I was just curious how it turned out or if it is still ongoing? --Digon3 talk 19:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Larus argentatus juv.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}}}


FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Lutheran Cathedral Helsinki.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Lutheran Cathedral Helsinki.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Lycaon 18:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


Peanuts

Nothing really wild ... its just that i love them regardless if they hairy, yellow-black or gray ;-) --Richard Bartz 01:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2007/Preparation#Decisions_needed

Hi Lyacon, you previously commented on this page. Input is especially needed on the things listed at the end of the page. thanks, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 05:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Somaticus aeneus.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}}}

Pachipodium_lealii.jpg

Hans, je vroeg mijn opinie over bovengenoemd beeld. De link bij je vraag leidde mij naar de FPC-pagina, maar daar vond ik het beeld niet. Ik heb het dan maar via jouw galerij bekenen. Wat de kwaliteit betreft, lijkt er mij - zoals gewoonlijk - geen enkel probleem te zijn: scherpte, kleur, etc. Het harde Namibische licht, waar sommigen (m.i. ten onrechte) opmerkingen over hadden bij een van jouw andere beelden, nemen we er graag bij en maakt wezenlijk deel uit van de atmosfeer van de foto. Ook de encyclopedische relevantie is onbetwistbaar. Eén bedenking misschien: een iets lager standpunt van de camera zou wellicht beter geweest zijn. De boom "vergaat" nu een beetje tegen de achtergrond, en zou beter uitkomen als er een groter deel tegen de blauwe lucht zou afsteken. Maar achteraf is dat natuurlijk gemakkelijk gezegd. En het is geen plek waar je eventjes terug naartoe gaat om de foto opnieuw te maken. Tussen haakjes: in jouw galerij viel mijn oog op een andere foto (Trollstigen_Hoch.jpg) die je blijkbaar vergat te voorzien van een license tag... Beste groeten, Marc. -- MJJR 11:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Question

I saw your review of my image, and I am wondering how to reduce noise in my photos. I had it on the lowest ISO, so that would not be the problem. --Mark (Mschel) 19:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Marc. I'm not too sure what could've caused it. Maybe it is an in-camera issue: at ISO 80 there should be virtually no noise. Your gallery is not (yet) very extensive, so it is difficult to judge. Try posting your image at Photography critiques for more (expert) opinions. Lycaon 19:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Do the other pictures in my gallery have a lot of noise? --Mark (Mschel) 20:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
My Olympus camera is also rather noisy even at ISO50, I looked up a review of the c5060wz and the reviewer notes "On the whole, image quality on the 5060WZ was very good, though definitely on the noisy/grainy side. This is because Olympus really cranks up the in-camera sharpening (which is why the images are so sharp!)[28]." I have to resort to smoothing the background with editing software. --Tony Wills 20:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. It said something about turning down the in camera sharpening, I will try that. The only problem is that I am colorblind, so it is hard to see the grain. --Mark (Mschel) 20:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


QI nom.s

Sorry for not leaving a link to the moved discussion (which I could of course link to here but I haven't ;-), my only defence is that it was 1am in the morning :-).
At the risk of invoking the rath of some TOLers, who have chosen a usage of categories completely at variance with every other usage of categories on commons, I have completed the categorization of my image by creating a suitable category tree (which will probably be cut down and burnt by the protectors of the faith ;-). --Tony Wills 20:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

QIC rule adaptation

The rules for CR are listed at the beginning of the CR section, I do not think it is necessary to incorporate them into the guidelines for the main page. There was no link from the guidelines to the CR rules, so I have added one, I think the CR rules should remain with the CR images for easy reference. --Tony Wills 09:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Drews Juergen-2007-09-21-by-steschke.jpg There is no such guideline in german language, so your statement is illegal for german users. Please remove it! --Tintagel 20:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

That's a pity, neither is there in Dutch. You are welcome to translate it of course, my written German is not up to par for that. Lycaon 20:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Tell my, from which planet are you? English is not the only language of the world. This is an international project and you have to respect that, you understand? --Tintagel 20:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I do understand, hence my suggestion to translate the message, we don't all speak German neither you know. Ich versuche es mindestens manchmal. Lycaon 20:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
So you also will understand, that this guideline is not translated yet this can't be a point at the nomination. The first years we were informed to place only small images to save server space. But I think you and others like you wont to dominate this project and kick off people not speaking english as well as you do. So go on and you'll loose more and more authors and more acceptance. --Tintagel 20:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
That is not true and you know it. If English messages would only concern English speaking contributors, then 75% of the nominators should not take heed any more. If you manage to get a consensus on a (new/different) German language template for use on FPC, I'll do the effort to understand it and I will follow/abide by it. Same for French, Swahili or Icelandic for that matter. Lycaon 20:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I've got several experience with discussions in commons and allways you loose, because youre english is'nt good enaugh. An I also know several german photo-autors which will never more store pictures on commons. An as you still ignore, you can't make roules s.o. can't understand. That's an international matter of course - only not for you, as it seems to me. --Tintagel 21:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

FP pianos

I'll ask wpedzich, maybe he will be able to do this. I already asked voytek s to fix the turret ;)

--WarX 21:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

357 de la commune Ouest

Hi, stiching errors are now fixed, thanks for reporting. ;) Acarpentier 18:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

RE : Commons:Meet our illustrators

Wow !! Only the second one to access this page ? I'm honoured ! But all the thanks go to the contributors who nominated my pictures and the ones who supported them and/or made useful remarks in order to improve my work. I'll will in short put my profile there.
Greetings. Sting 18:16, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

QI

No worries! ;-) --TwoWings (jraf) * Wanna talk? ;-) 14:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Paint Shop Pro

Paint Shop Pro is crap, GIMP is not only better but also free. Calibas 01:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but I think some of the noise in your pictures may be introduced by Paint Shop Pro. Your pictures are the only ones I see with that type of noise in the dark parts and you also happen to be one of the very few PSP users. Calibas 01:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Australian Pelican

Thanks for the review. I can't disagree. Cheers, Ben Aveling 10:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Colias croceus (Dordogne).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}}}


PH-3

Hello Hans,

I just found out that you gave me the ph-3 tag on the 1st September...ahm...yeah i found that out a bit late ;) How did i get that honor? I didnt't follow the whole discussion - is there a rule now for getting this tag after a certain amount of FPs or did i get it from you because of your personal opinion about my pictures? I would prefer that it is your personal opinion :) --AngMoKio 18:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate that. --AngMoKio 07:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dried vlei at Sossusvlei.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sparganium angustifolium.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}}}

I don't speak Dutch

So if you want to say something to me you'll have to say it in English. --JaGa 07:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cercomela tractrac.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Himba girls.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Equus zebra hartmannae.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}}}

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Carcinus maenas.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}}}


Page extracted

Lycaon, re this edit. Can I suggest putting in a Summary for such restructuring type edits - they're a bit hard to follow otherwise. Regards, Ben Aveling 02:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Potd/2008-01-22

Hi Lycaon, I am mywood from zh wiki. The daily picture of 2008-01-22 is same as the one of 2007-05-21. Would you please change another one? Thanks a lot.--Mywood 16:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. I changed the image. Thanks.Lycaon 19:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Equus burchelli 5 pano.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}}}

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Tugboat diagram-en edit.svg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/image:Tugboat diagram-en.svg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cecil 15:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Giraffa camelopardalis angolensis (mating).jpg

Hi!

I have seen this image and I thought, that it could do with a bit of colour correction. I did a test version. What do you think of it?

Amada44 10:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Well..., it's different :-). But not as I've seen it. Light is quite harsh in a semi desert environment like in Etosha. Lycaon 12:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
D I F F E R E N T??? *ggg* yeah, a bit ;) I just looked at the picture and... couldn't resist :). No serious, the colors and light are a bit dull. But if you don't see it as an improvement I'll mark the image as duplicate and get it deleted. btw: I haven't been in at the etosha park but I've been at the bottom part of the Kalahari desert :). Regards, Amada44 20:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Infected willow - any ideas?

Hi Hans, When I was in w:Upernavik I spotted this infected willow (probably Salix arctica, maybe Salix glauca). Have you got any idea what struck it? If not, have you got any idea of another user that might help? See also here. I would like to upload them to Commons once I know how to name the files. -- Slaunger 21:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

You need not bother about it, I got a very thorough explanation here. -- Slaunger 21:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

ICES

I have almost forgotten. I was once part of an ICES working group on Marine Data Management (or something like that). I remember helping to design some universal format for oceanographic data (which nobody uses). One of the meetings was in Lisbon, around 1995. Does the group still exist? - Alvesgaspar 21:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Giraffa camelopardalis angolensis (mating).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Giraffa camelopardalis angolensis (mating).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Benh 22:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikispecies query

I've left you a query on your Wikispecies page. --MichaelMaggs 09:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

FP promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Shona witch doctor (Zimbabwe).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Shona witch doctor (Zimbabwe).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Benh 21:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Amadina erythrocephala (l).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Amadina erythrocephala (l).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 17:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

'subst'ing personal templates

Hi, why did you do this? Do you intend to subst all personal templates that contain licenses? --Tony Wills 22:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

wish I could. It is better that way. Lycaon 00:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, what difference does it make? Benjamint 06:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, it is not particularly about your template of course, but some people have had their whole contributions put up for deletion because of a personal template. The thing is that you can change the license of all your pictures by just changing the template. With a substitution that is not possible. An elegant solution would be to leave out the licensing part from your template and add it separately. That way the personal template can be used without substitution. Regards. Lycaon 07:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
You mean like this request ;-). I agree with Lycaon that adding the license separately would be the simplest. If the users don't want to do this there is of course no reason we can't duplicate the license given in the template in the body of the text anyway. But I really dislike having those templates subst'd as it defeats the reason for using templates and makes the image page code rather unreadable and more difficult to edit. But going back to Benjamint's question, there seems[29] to be two reasons why people don't like licenses in personal-templates:
  1. ) Because changing a template could change all the licenses without anyone noticing as it wouldn't come up on anyones watch list.
  2. ) Automatic tools can't easily see how the image is licensed.
I don't actually see #1 as a big problem in practice. If they make the license more free who cares? If they make the license un-free we will notice the change of template when the images come up for deletion. If the licensing is made more restrictive (but still free) it won't be the end of the world, and it will eventually be picked up by anyone who cares about the images in question. As a bonus you can put the template on your watchlist, rather than all the images, and be warned of any changes of the user's whole gallery :-)
But #2 is perhaps more of a problem at present, because the tools don't bother to parse the templates (which apparently they can if need be). The difficulty of changing these tools shouldn't be under-estimated, there are plenty of other areas that need software updates, so we probably can't expect a rapid response. Also there will be a performance penalty in the extra processing over-head. And I believe some tools work off a dump of the database and don't have access to the templates anyway. So we've got to work with what we've got, and not the software we would like :-) --Tony Wills 09:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Benjamint 10:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vegetable market in Heraklion.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}}}

Crabs

I have reverted this edit because it is obvious nonsense.

Crab is not an animal species, you should know that. More, in Wikimedia Commons, we have already a category for crabs (Category:Brachyura, in my opinion), and that explains why Category:Crabs is currently a redirection: a single category for an unique subject.

Category:Crab is not similar to Category:Crabs. The first category is a culinary ingredient, and that makes your edit (referenced above) more stupid.

Finally, I have to remind you that this project is not Wikispecies, is not classified like Wikispecies, and that we don't want an isolated copy of Wikispecies in our categories structure. If this was your intention, I advise you to give up this idea, otherwise, I'll be on your way. --Juiced lemon 18:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Juiced lemon the tone of your message (ie calling peoples edits 'stupid') does nothing for your argument and is more likely to engender opposition rather than co-operation! I think Category:Crab needs to be renamed "Category:Crab meat" to make its purpose clear. But apart from that, I personally agree that Category:Crab does not really fit under Category:Brachyura, nor Category:Animal species. And yes this is not Wikispecies, but the project TOL has basically created a taxonomic structure that should not be corrupted with categorys, articles and images not related to the scientific classification. In some ways the taxonomic tree should be parallel to other topic structures, but that may be too confusing. What I have seen in other cases is to put these related categories at the beginning or end of the taxonomic category, eg Category:Crabs is set as a subcat with [[Category:Brachyura| ]], Category:Crab can be stuck at the end of the category with [[Category:Brachyura|~]], "Category:Cancer (astrology)" can go in the same place. What do you two think? --Tony Wills 19:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I wrote this message because this user says on his user page he is a marine biologist. Normally, I could learn something from him.
I don't agree with the notion of “taxonomic structure”. The topics structure is a set of subjects, which are linked following rules. You cannot state that a given subject, like Category:Brachyura, is a “taxonomic subject” and forbid links which don't suit you.
I think that Category:Crabs was named Category:Brachyura to please the project TOL. So, this category regards to anything about crabs, including food from Brachyura species. Then, sorting in this category can be discussed. --Juiced lemon 00:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it would maybe be better if TOL put their energies into wikispecies where it is really needed. But their work should be respected. There is a similar conundrum between Category:Aves and Category:Birds, in that case I thought it was far cleaner to treat them as parallel structures. Aves contains all the taxonomic categories and Birds contains the myriad of other types of categories relating to birds. I think we need to put work into defining a category scheme here (for animals and plants etc) so that we do not have to re-fight the same battles over and over --Tony Wills 08:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Interestingly Category:Sheep and Category:Ovis aries are not linked structures at all, but instead use "See also" links to associate the category trees. I will have to think about whether this is a useful model. --Tony Wills 08:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Admin things

Thanks for the kind words. I tend to step into anything that looks like it needs doing, which sometimes takes me on long wayward journeys through commons :-). I have considered applying to become an admin, but then I think I spend too much time here already ;-). I have taken thousands of photographs and have not put enough time into sorting through them, cleaning them up, identifying them, and uploading them - my primary reason for getting involved! Also my heart is not in what I see as admin tasks such as getting rid of photographs, scrutinising copyright declarations and blocking wayward users (also I am not good at short replies :-). No, too many things to do here already, if I was accepted I would then feel compelled to do even more, or drop what I already do. So thanks for getting me to think about it, but I had best stay a humble commoner ;-) --Tony Wills 10:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Driftweg (Vosseslag).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}}}

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Asterias.svg, 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}}}

Good ! Bravo ! -- Walké 18:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sony Alpha 100 Category

Hello Lycaon,
I have always looked up to your photography and only recently noticed that you take a lot of your photos with the Sony Alpha 100, the camera I also own. Some time ago I therefore created Category:Taken with Sony DSLR-A100 and have added my photos taken with that camera to that category ever since. Maybe you want to fill this category with your amazing pictures? :-) Regards, Florian Prischl 10:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

English words

Hello... I'm the french wikigraphist who have made Image:Schema Grenade-i18n.svg. But and IP have change some terms :

  • Lever to Mandal
  • Pin' to Pim Yuvası
  • Detonator to Ateşleyici
  • Firing pin to Horoz

So it's all right ? Ateşleyici is realy english ?? I asked for you because I don't know a lot of english people.. Thanks.. Walké 18:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok thanks. Other question : I have had a mention (label ?) : amorce . But n° 11 is pâte d'amorçage. But in english pâte d'amorcage is primer.... so i have put numbers ... But if you have the right word .. 'Past of primer ? ( http://www.wordreference.com/fren/p%C3%A2te%20d%27amorcage ) -- Walké 20:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm not Lycaon... but I think that "primer" is ok for "pâte d'amorçage". "Primer paste" doesn't sound right. But why don't you use just "amorce" in French? - Alvesgaspar 21:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
      There are two primer. The first, in the top of the granat, fight (chocked ?) by the firing pin. An the second in the bottom, who is burn buy the wick. So in french the first is amorce and the second is pâte d'amorçage... -- Walké 21:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ardeotis kori 1.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}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Adansonia digitata.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}}}

Image:Schéma abeille-tag.svg

Hello ! It's for the help to the improvement.. But you don't have check the modifcation. Are they correct ? -- Walké 12:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Asterias.svg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Asterias.svg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 20:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lycaon/Archive5&oldid=371812459"