User talk:Darekk2

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Darekk2!

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

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

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 00:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Black body visible spectrum.gif

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 11:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 21:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Erasing information about translated images

Ok I really don't get this edit Revision of File:Nucleosome organization.png: why should this information be reverted? It's a common practice for such images to be translated and for information about the translations to be available publicly so that another person wouldn't download the same translation of the same file (e.g. File:Orbit1.svg). And to revert it seems rather extreme... it's not like it was a vandal addition or anything. So, please explain this action. --Helixitta (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I didn't notice that that image was translated and links to translated version (because title is not made as link) and reverted this edit again (restored first version). Darekk2 (talk) 13:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Question regarding File:Moon-Earth distance, Moon phases.gif

Hello!

I came across your image of the moon-earth distance (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Moon-Earth_distance,_Moon_phases.gif) and was interested in how you got the data. On the description, you mentioned that it was calculated using algorithms from Jean Meeus, but I was wondering if you stil remember the formula you used.

I sincerely thank you in advance :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawi17 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 08 October 2015 (UTC)

This is very large set of formulas, many of them very complex too (many lines each one). In Microsoft Access VBA. Darekk2 (talk) 15:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but what do you mean by "In Microsoft Access VBA"? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawi17 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 08 October 2015 (UTC)

They are used in VBA - with its conditions (if ...), loops. Meeus books are for computer calculators. I don't remember exactly at this moment how that distance is calculated, but certainly not in one formula. Darekk2 (talk) 18:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Odonata eyes

Category:Odonata eyes is a category for pictures showing exclusively eyes of dragonflies or eye-secific details are exclusively highlighted. If the whole head is visible as in File:Gomphus vulgatissimus eyes 004b.jpg, every human with a normal intelligence would find it in the Category:Odonata heads category, if he searches for pictures showing the whole head to illustrate a "insect eyes" article. Of course for a good odonata eyes gallery page different rules would apply, as a gallery page named Odonata eyes schould give an overview how Odonata eyes may look like, while a category page schould show all pictures showing Odonata eyes (and NOT the whole head!). - Kersti (talk) 07:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

There are many pictures in these two categories, where eyes are less exposed than in my pictures you removed. Moreover Gomphus vulgatissimus has eyes separated, do not adhering to each other and it is impossible to photograph them without entire head, but you don't know that apparently, because you are able to parasite on work of other people only. Maybe you have something to do with so called ecological NGOs paid by PO party. Moreover between the main eyes ocelli are visible. You probably don't know what are ocelli. I restored Category Odonata eyes so far and maybe will restore Insect compound eyes sooner or later. The only reason I have not done it is that these eyes are sharp only on small area, because this is photograph of an alive dragonfly, in the field. Darekk2 (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I told you: Whenever a photo of the whole head is the best illustration for the eyes of an animal a separate category for "eyes" ist not useful. How one possibly could conclude from this, that I don't know what ocelli (simply look in the history of Category:Insect ocelli, and Category:Insect eyes to see that in fact I know this!) are is a logic I don't understand at all. Sorry but this is really illogical.

For gallery pages apply different rules, as they should give an overview over the topic.

For the question who "parasites" (funny expression in this case) in the work of whom some more version-history-looking may teach you something interesting.

--Kersti (talk) 15:41, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Stop reverting edits without answering.

1. You didn't answer my last comment
2. Your first answer was a thing, which doesn't count as answer, as you neihter seem to unterstand what I tell you nor react on the things I said, but instead made useless ironical comments.
3. You still didn't answer the questien why your photo should be the exemption to the general rule Whenever a photo of the whole head is the best illustration for the eyes of an animal a separate category for "eyes" ist not useful.

There must be a reason why about 1% of my edits are reverted but about 25% of yours are. The reason is not that you are polite and think thorowly about the answers of the people you speak to. Maybe you think that your personal opinion about a topic is an absolute truth? I guess so!

Kersti (talk) 23:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Park nad Balatonem Warszawa Gocław.jpg

You are not allowed to simply revert the closure of a DR. Don't do that again. Jcb (talk) 12:21, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

• I did it again because that version image was uploaded by mistake and has nothing to do with the image. You are not allowed to keep it. Delete that version of image as soon as possible please. Darekk2 (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Reverted that reversion but nominated that version of image for deletion again. Because this is not version but completely different image uploaded by mistake. I don't understand why you doing this. Darekk2 (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Rezerwat Morysin

Witam Pana - oczekuje Pan ode mnie sprawdzenia, co dzieje się z Morysinem? Nieco żartując mogę powiedzieć, że byłam w tym roku na terenie Morysina i ma się on całkiem dobrze, jak na pozostawiony naturze rezerwat przyrody przystało. A tak szczerze mówiąc dawno przestałam kontrolować co dzieje się w zasobach commons z wstawionymi przeze mnie do nich fotografiami. Nie pracuję już na rzecz Wikipedii, ale postaram się ustosunkować do Pana prośby.

Jak Pan zapewne doskonale wie, Morysin to fragment zabytkowego Wilanowa po wschodniej stronie Jeziorka Wilanowskiego. Według mnie dotychczasowa kategoria Morysin w pełni wyczerpywała merytorycznie i nadal, jak mi się wydaje wyczerpuje ten temat . Prezentuje przyrodnicze krajobrazy, ruiny zabytków wpisanych w urzędowe rejestry, oraz inne obiekty tam występujące, które nie są enumeratywnie wyjęte poza teren rezerwatu. A co do plików, mogę wypowiadać się wyłącznie w sprawach zdjęć mojego autorstwa - wszystkie one zostały zrobione na terenie Morysina i żadne z nich nie przedstawia innego obszaru. A czy się komuś podobają, czy nie jest to kwestia gustu? Zdjęcia są niestety już kilkuletnie, degradacja tak terenu jak i zabytkowych obiektów następuje w szybkim tempie, więc niektóre obrazy dziś uległy już istotnym zmianom, a i zabytki mogły także zmienić nieco wygląd, bo choć nie są rekonstruowane, to czasem konserwatorzy przy nich robią drobne prace konserwatorskie zabezpieczające przed całkowitym zniszczeniem. Teren Morysina podlega tak pod konserwatora przyrody jak i zabytków.

Dla mnie osobiście kategoria Morysin jest dokładnie tożsama z tym co winno znajdować się w kategorii Rezerwat przyrody dla tego terenu. Morysin i rezerwat to jedno i to samo. Wydaje mi się, że nie należy mnożyć w commons niepotrzebnych bytów w postaci wielu różnie brzmiących kategorii reprezentujących dokładnie to samo hasło wynikające z prawnych uwarunkowań przestrzeni, której dotyczą.

Natomiast kategorie Pomnik Bitwy Raszyńskiej (Battle of Raszyn Memorial in the Wilanów Park), czy Most Romański (Roman bridge in the Wilanów Park) pierwotnie nigdy nie były wpisane do kategorii Morysin, są natomiast integralną częścią kategorii English Park in Royal Wilanów po zachodniej stronie Jeziora Wilanowskiego, stanowiącego fragment parku w zespole pałacowym Muzeum w Wilanowie. Dostęp do nich jest biletowany, a okolica zadbana w przeciwieństwie do terenów Morysina.

Jeśli powyższe uwagi cokolwiek wyjaśniają i ułatwią Panu dalsze działania, to bardzo się cieszę, jeśli natomiast sprawiłam jakikolwiek kłopot to bardzo proszę o wybaczenie.--Jolanta Dyr (talk) 00:54, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

> Natomiast kategorie Pomnik Bitwy Raszyńskiej czy Most Romański pierwotnie nigdy nie były wpisane do kategorii Morysin
Ale są położone w granicach rezerwatu. Z kolei brama znajduje się w Morysinie, chyba też w tym zespole pałacowo-parkowym, ale nie w rezerwacie. Więc rezerwat i park (a jeszcze bardziej Morsyin) to są obszary w znacznej części nie pokrywające się. Ponadto wszystkie rezrwaty mają swoje własne kategorie, więc dlaczego nie Morysin. Można by wrzucić park do kategorii rezrwat i odwrotnie żeby niezorientowane ososby wiedziały że to częściowo ten sam rezerwat, ale takie wzajemne wstawianie nie jest chyba poprawne i ktoś może to skasować.Darekk2 (talk) 10:38, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Została dodana jeszcze kategoria Rezerwat przyrody Morysin i park Morysin - część wspólna. Jest teraz dużo kategorii ale przynajmniej wiadomo gdzie zostało zrobione zdjęcie. Darekk2 (talk) 12:25, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Szanowny Panie - ja w dniu wczorajszym odpowiedziałam na Pana sztucznie wywołany problem, pomnik bitwy warszawskiej i most rzymski to zabytki na terenie muzeum, jeśli uważa Pan inaczej, to proszę pozmieniać co Pan chce i jak Pan chce i proszę się do mnie więcej nie zwracać bowiem ja już nie pracuję na potrzeby commons i niczego więcej poprawiać, wstawiać i komentować nie zamierzam ani na Pana żądanie, ani na czyjekolwiek inne. Z poważaniem --Jolanta Dyr (talk) 15:53, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Tibet and surrounding areas topographic map.png

Dear Darekk2, I am a PhD student in Wuhan University, i am trying to learn the GMT software, could you please tell me how to plot a map like Tibet and surrounding areas topographic map.png(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tibet_and_surrounding_areas_topographic_map.png), thanks you so much! if possible ,can you show me the scripts with that plot? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EthanWang whu (talk • contribs) 06:30, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

• That map was made using this method:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Captain_Blood~enwiki/GMT_Example
  The original parts are .cpt files (color palettes), selection of tiles, map dimensions, points of interests, the legend.
  Darekk2 (talk) 11:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)