User talk:Jkadavoor/Archive 2017

Identification help

Hi, Could you help identify File:Coleoptera_@_Kanjirappally.jpg? This beetle is bigger than mupli beetles I saw. About size of 2cm in length.--Praveen:talk 03:31, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't know Praveen. Posting at https://www.facebook.com/groups/InsectIndia/ may helps. Jee 05:11, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Help

Hi Jee, could you help me, i cant find that template, which put talking into sepperate gruop, i think i have a lot of talking on my FP page, so want to put commentary into one gruop and votes only to be shown. --Mile (talk) 09:01, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

• Solved. --Mile (talk) 09:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Improper use of parameter "Place" of User:Jkadavoor/spec

Hi!
I have just noticed that in parameter "Place" you specify the place where you took a given photo, which is misleading. Value of this parameter is passed to the parameter "discovery place" of Template:Specimen, which usage is self-explanatory. Example photo: File:Parthenos sylvia-Kadavoor-2016-06-25-001.jpg. --jdx ^Re: 21:35, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• jdx, I didn't get what you meant. Jee 03:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC) Changed to "depicted place" as mentioned in File:StrausseNgorongoroKrater1977.jpg. Hope better. Jee 04:11, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
• Now I doubts which is better to mention the place in Template:Specimen where the subject is photographed; "Depicted place" or "Place of discovery"? Pinging George Chernilevsky, MPF, Wsiegmund and Archaeodontosaurus for opinion. Jee 04:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The place of discovery and the place where the object was photographed are two different things. The specimen model shows this. But this point is useful only for objects in collection. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Archaeodontosaurus. So can we assume both are same (and use any one of them) for in situ photographs of living organisms? Jee 07:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

For an image of a specimen in nature, the field of the discovery site can be filled with a range. The place where the species can be found. The place of the shot does not change it is always useful. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:27, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

IMO "depicted place" is alright, however I am not a biologist. I translate into Polish descriptions of Pictures of the day and I have noticed that a lot of species photographed by you have been discovered in "Kadavoor, Kerala, India", which seemed strange. --jdx ^Re: 08:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

jdx: I understand. The issues is, many of our templates are designed/defined by non native English speakers. "Place of discovery" is indeed confusing as it means where it first discovered. Better wording may be "place of observation", "sighted at/place" or "place of sighting". Jee 08:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

• My images are geocoded automatically using data from a GPS carried with my camera. Consequently, I specify the camera location. For macro images, this is nearly the same as the location of the specimen. For other images, I generally include the heading, i.e., the direction the camera is pointed. Consequently, the location of the specimen can be estimated, and the image may be repeated at a later time. Walter Siegmund (talk) 01:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Reversal in Commons FAQ

You reversed my correction of a wrong direction in Commons FAQ, line 168. Why? Your directions to "history" is wrong, my direction to "view" is right. It took my quite some time and frustration to find out this error. Please do not trip up others and put this word back to "view". Have you tried it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxWyss (talk • contribs) 00:40, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

MaxWyss, check the file you overwritten. The "Upload a new version of this file" link is under the subhead "File history"; not "View". There is not even such a subhead, "View". Jee 03:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

We are talking abut different things, let's forget it.(MaxWyss (talk) 17:26, 5 February 2017 (UTC))

Category talk:Birds of Gambia

Thank you for moderating the moderation, unfortunately she has fallen asleep.

Unfortunately the Edit-War continues ([1]) without a reasonable compromise was found. --Atamari (talk) 11:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Archaeodontosaurus, it seems our decision is to keep both categories (Category:Estrilda caerulescens in Gambia and Category:Estrilda caerulescens) until a consensus achieved (though it is redundant). I've no idea how a solution can be arrived. Jee 11:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Alas no. This way of making artificial and artificial categories must be fought. They have no scientific basis which is the very essence of all our projects. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:44, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

OK; please continue the discussion at Category talk:Birds of Gambia. Jee 13:00, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Oversight_bans

I am failing, repeatedly, to successfully ping people. Typos suck. - Revent^talk 04:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes Revent; ping will not work when a comment is edited. Replied there. Jee 04:44, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Commons:OTRS

Hello,

Your modification changes the process. The problem with your new order is that OTRS will contain a permission for an image which is not yet uploaded into Commons: basically OTRS agents cannot do anything about it. It obviously cannot contain the URL of the image the permission is valid for since the image is not yet uploaded, so it's extremely hard to identify the image, especially after a while since we don't know when it'll be uploaded.

I propose to keep the original order of

1. talk to the copyright owner
2. upload the image, otrs pending
3. ask the owner to write to permisssions@ (and include the URL)
4. OTRS agents match up the permission and the image
5. or if 30 days have passed admins remove the image.

The other way it'd be really uncomfortable for the OTRS agents. --grin ✎ 21:51, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi grin, thanks for the post. I'm happy to discuss and you are free to revert if you prefer so. Let me make my points. 1. See the wording of Template:OTRS pending: "An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with Commons:OTRS." It is "has been sent"; not "will be" or "may have if the copyright holder will not change his mind". 2. What the emai required is a link to the web page of the content or images as attachment. It doesn't require a link to Commons where the files are uploaded. In fact, such files will be speedy deleted even before the copyright holder a get a chance to see it. Even if they see it and included the link in the permission mail, it will be deleted before the OTRS volunteer process it. The current backlog is more than 50 days whereas we can keep a copyvio only for 7 days here. The 30 day allowance is only for if we get a mail and is not fully processed so far.

I'm inviting KDS4444 too as it was he who updated the pages recently after I left OTRS. I think now OTRS has an auto-reply with ticket number. If true the copyright holder can mention it using {{OTRS received|id=NNN|reason=1}} which may be more helpful if the copyright holder is planned to upload as instructed at Template:Email_templates/Consent/en note 4. Jee 04:08, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply!

This have been raised on Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Jcb where I have tried to figure out what's currently expected; as it turned out there has been a disagreement between the OTRS template and the OTRS guidelines: the original guidelines told:

1. Before you upload the file to Commons, please identify and contact the copyright holder and ask him or her to release the work under a free license.

The copyright holder must choose one of the licenses permitted on Commons; in particular, restricting use to Wikipedia or Wikimedia projects is not acceptable. See Commons:Email templates for a recommended reply from the author.

2. When you receive a reply, please check that the license authorized by the copyright holder is appropriate to Commons. If so, upload the image to Commons and place the tag {{subst:OP}} ("OTRS Pending") on the file description page in addition to the license chosen by the copyright holder. 3. Following this, ask the author to forward the email with their clear statement of permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, including the full header and any previously exchanged correspondence with you, and a link to the image on Commons. Make sure to ask the author to include information on the origin (source) of the file and its license. 4. An OTRS volunteer will check the email to verify that the permission statement is sufficient and authentic, and will then replace the {{OTRS pending}} tag with <nowiki>{{PermissionOTRS}}.

This wording is pretty clear:

1. You talk to the holder and convince him/her to release under a free license
2. The copyright holder acknowledges his/her intent to use a specific license; you check the authority and if all works out upload w/ pending
3. Ask the author to email the boilerplate signed into OTRS, including the reference of the image
4. OTRS agent checks the permission statement, and acks the image; agent puts image on delete/speedy if it doesn't checks well
5. Within a period the image gets deleted if no email, no agent processing or whatever misalignment happens.

The new wording definitely changes this process, since it now requires permissions beforehand. I do not remember any case in the past where we have asked ©holder to send image as an attachment, it happens very rarely, and I am not sure that even OTRS admins would take this involuntary image backup method happily. If someone would have asked my opinion I would have voted against such process, both as commons admin and as OTRS agent.

Input from others are most welcome, and probably this debate should be moved to a more proper public place then.

Thanks! --grin ✎ 07:11, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

May I move this to Commons talk:OTRS? Jee 07:16, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Moved to Commons_talk:OTRS#Simplifying_the_instructions. Jee 08:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! --grin ✎ 10:14, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

No permisison

Hi Jee,

Too prevent the DRFA from going off topic. Wouldn't it be a solution if we just delete the no permisison tag? The files tagged with this tag are either speedy or DR material in my opinion and I wouldn't be surprised if this template is one of the reasons why OTRS has so many crap quality tickets. Natuur12 (talk) 12:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Natuur12. Yes; a template like that without a custom message which explains the actual issue is quite useless. We need to either add a provision to specify the actual reason in that tag as in Template:Speedydelete or simply delete or depreciate its use. Jee 14:07, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Birds of Gambia

Jee, do you want to make a decision regarding this discussion? I.e. what the structure below this category would look like? I feel you are the person best qualified and neutral to be the arbiter. If you don't want to do that (which I could totally understand), I would re-read the discussion and make a decision in the next few days. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 04:46, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sebari, I missed this as it came on my category talk page. I read that discussion; but feel uncomfortable to make a discussion. The main difficulty I see is both people are not willing to negotiate for a solution. So it requires a bold decision. :) Jee 14:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Side note

Hi, you don't need to worry about my ability to communicate in English, I have a level 6 ICAO Language Proficiency Endorsement, which you can verify here. Jcb (talk) 16:48, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

That's cool! Jee 16:57, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Elaboration

I'm not going to discredit your admirable attempt. I think, due to Mardetanha's inconsistent comments and completely false assumptions, current photos needs to be addressed case by case as we really don't know which non-member bystander has done the photos and which ones are done by the members. As I said earlier. At first he said Darafsh did, then said I'm the owner, then tried to misled us toward the co-authorship claim. Certainly, I'll gather more views on this. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Mhhossein. I've no objections on your attempt to filtering out the works not created by that usergroup as that permission willnot cover them. The problem is you still called it a "still-flawed usergroup agreement" where it is a very sound permission than many we usually see. I saw there another argument between you and him where you stated "per ET he MUST state a license; otherwise, this declaration is invalid". I'm not in OTRS and can't assume what it is; but there can be ticket mails stating copyright transfers. Here, in the usergroup case too, if the members agree for a copyright transfer, Mardetanha become the copyright holder. I explicitly avoided that method as we don't need it now. Jee 02:18, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

The OTRS case is not a complicated issue! AFAIK, he asserts to be the author of those photos in question (photos by Dehbahsi), too. If he's the author why should the copy right holder contact us and if Mardetanha's not the author, he MUST clarify it. --Mhhossein ^talk 05:11, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

ഹാപ്പി ബർത്ത്ഡേ റ്റു യു

	ഹാപ്പി ബർത്ത്ഡേ റ്റു യു
	ഈ ദിവസം നിങ്ങളുടെയും കുടുംബത്തിന് ഒരു നല്ല ദിവസമായിരിക്കും എന്നാണു ഞാൻ കരുതുന്നത്. ഒരു ആലിംഗനം The Photographer 11:38, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

നന്ദി, The Photographer. Jee 13:04, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Exposure

I uploaded A derivated from your image, what do you think about done more exposure to the original image from the raw?. --The Photographer 18:29, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Good; but I think it is a matter of taste. It is only 7:30 am and in a shady area. So I think the dark environment is matching with its habitat. Jee 02:12, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

You are right, sorry for upload it, I will ask for delete. A hug --The Photographer 11:56, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

No worries. Jee 12:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

First anniversary

Our little friends are already preapared for the family gathering!

May 16 is Rani's first death anniversary and a Requiem Mass will be offered for the repose of the soul along with a family gathering. Please unite with us in your prayers! Jee 06:44, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

May her gentle soul continues to rest in perfect peace. Please, permit me to use this image on my facebook page. Wikicology (talk) 19:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Wikicology for your kind words. Of Course, feel free to use the image(s). Jee 01:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Oxyopes salticus

Hi Jeevan, Thanks for correcting the category, btw, It seems like Oxyopes salticus male ? what do you think ?

Best Regards, Deepugn (talk) 14:54, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Deepugn, it is very difficult to say the species. Better keep with the genus level. Jee 16:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Jeevan, i've changed the file name accordingly, what you said make sense. Deepugn (talk) 13:04, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Help request

I was wondering if you could do me a favor. I recently put up 5 photos at QIC. One has been promoted and is waiting for the bot. The other 4 haven't been reviewed. I'd rather get an oppose with a reason so I can learn something rather than have them end up completely unreviewed. If you don't mind, could you look at them? Two are of a Japanese style bridge, one is of a boat in a marina (the other one with a boat and bridge is promoted), and one is of a Japanese style waterfall. IF you feel they are not QI worthy, by all means fail them. If you are not interested, that's okay I understand. PumpkinSky talk 12:33, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi PumpkinSky, sorry for the late response; had a slight migraine, so switched off my computer just after the FPC nom in the morning. See this message now. I checked this and this. Both are good; but lack the EXIF info which may lost while processing. Further, it is very difficult for me to say whether or not they are tilted due totheir complicated shapes. I assume the middle vertical bar should be perfectly vertical. Further, I wonder why those big posts on both sides are slanting outward. Does they are so in real or a perspective correction is required? For this image,I think more DOF is preferred. Will check them again tomorrow with fresh eyes! Jee 15:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I do hope you feel better. Thank you for your kind help in looking at them. Is EXIF data actually required for QI or just nice to have? I honestly don't recall if the end posts are really slanted or not. I'll go drive by there and look again. This park is not far from my house so it's no big deal to take more photos. Tomorrow my polarizing filters should arrive and that will help with the bright sun we get where I live. The waterfall shot is very hard due to the sun breaking through the dense trees, a problem which also affects the bridges--plus the waterfall itself is very dark. I think if I wait for a day with clouds and use the new filters may render the best results. Ideally I'd like to have a QI of the waterfall and all 4 sides of the bridge. Would you mind working with me on that? I don't mind taking more photos if you don't mind giving the feedback. Let me know if you're willing to help. If not, that's okay too. Go ahead and fail the waterfall shot--it's rather borderline anyway and I'll take shots with more DOF. I'll report back on the bridge end posts. Please let me know about the unreviewed boat too. PumpkinSky talk 16:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Jee--You were correct the bridge legs are indeed straight. Maybe its the curved top and bottom of the bridge partly causing this. I took three photos with my smart phone to show this: User:PumpkinSky/Uploads/2017#Views_of_bridge_showing_correct_perspective. Something else you should know is that the bridge photos in QIC right now were taken the last day I shot JPG only. The two boat photos were taken the first day I started shooting RAW (plus JPG), so the camera makes two files when I take a photo now. I process from the RAW file, of course. Given what we now know, I suggest 1) you fail the two bridge photos with "perspective distortion" and I go back on a day with better sun conditions (I'll have the polarizing filters too by then), 2) fail the waterfall with "needs better DOF" and I'll take more of that too, and 3) look at the unreviewed boat photo and decide what to do (it was taken in RAW). Sound okay? PumpkinSky talk 20:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi PumpkinSky, feel much better and refreshed in this morning. 1. EXIF is not a must; but a useful add-on. Without it,it is difficultfor the reviewers to find what is wrong. Embedded color profile is also important to display correct colors properly. 2. I've little experience in photographing non-living subjects; so my comments may not be professional. Keeping columns as vertical as possible unless intended for some artistic reasons is a basic of civil engineering; that's why I doubted about the slanting look. From the other photo I see you use 40mm. I think anything below 50mm (30mm in APC camera) will results in perspective distortion. I don't know what focal length you used. Hope people like Colin, Slaunger or Christian Ferrer can help you more as this is their area of expertise. Jee 02:43, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

OK. Thank you for the input. PumpkinSky talk 03:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

PumpkinSky, I'm not sure which images are being referred to wrt "perspective distortion". There are several forms of distortion that may cause an image to fail (but conversely could be artistic in another).

• Lens distortion due to imperfect design. If you imagine shooting a grid of squares, this would cause an effect like a barrel at the edges, or sometimes a pincushion (curved inwards) and sometimes mustache shaped waves. The first two are generally easy to correct simply by checking the "use lens profile" and making sure Lightroom has a profile for your lens. Some odd shaped distortions can't be corrected perfectly, and some lenses like fisheye are often best left uncorrected. I have "use lens profile" and "remove chromatic aberation" checked as part of my lens import defaults. If you ever take a photo and wish you had just a few more pixels round the edges, try unchecking the lens profile box, as you nearly always lose a little round the edges as part of the corrections.
• Vertical perspective distortion due to not holding the camera perfectly level. This causes a trapezium effect on the grid of squares. For most scenes, the solution is better camera technique (and making use of the camera's built in level if it has one). But often urban scenes will need a very slight adjustment in Lightroom. In the past, we had to do this manually: fix any rotation in the image first by getting central lines to be vertical (or the horizon level if you have a horizon). Then fix the vertical perspective slider to get outside lines to be vertical. Now Lightroom has some automatic buttons but I don't find they always do a very precise job. I find the Guided option in Lightroom is the best, provided you have some true verticals to use. If you are photographing a tall building, and want the verticals vertical, then you need to get back as far as you can. Trying to fix the verticals afterwards, if you are relatively close to the building, just ends up with strange stretched effects where the building can look top-heavy.
• Horizontal perspective problems. This is usually encountered when you are photographing a scene with lots of horizontal lines that are meant to be perpendicular to the viewer. Windows and gutters on a building, or steps or floor tiles in an interior. If you haven't held the camera perfectly straight wrt left/right then they end up angled in the photo and no amount of rotation will fix it. The horizontal slider can fix modest issues but can't work wonders. Also if you are in a symmetrical interior (like a church) then it is usually vital to ensure you stand absolutely in the centre -- that kind of mistake can't be fixed at all.
• Wide angle perspective distortion. This is when you use an ultra wide angle lens (or create a stitched image with a wide or tall angle of view). See File:St Pancras Railway Station 2012-06-23.jpg for an example. The distance perspective effect is stronger than human vision normally sees. Some scenes will not show the effect much at all, where as others that include people or architecture or round objects, will display the distortion strongly. I don't think any of your lenses will produce that -- you really need a lens that goes below 16mm on APS-C to see this. However, there's another time when this effect occurs, which is when you are very close to a subject, and is particularly noticeable in portraits. Too close and it it is unflattering to make the face more 3D. For an head/shoulders portrait then perhaps around 50 or 60mm on APS-C is best and for a closely framed head portrait then perhaps 85mm on APS-C.

As an aside, I'm not sure QI is the best place to get feedback on an image. As you discovered, weak images are ignored rather than given feedback. While awful pictures will be swiftly rejected, and great images swiftly promoted, QI doesn't do so well for in-between. -- Colin (talk) 07:29, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

RE Colin I have "use lens profile" and "remove chromatic aberation" as defaults too. As for in-between, Photo Critiques doesn't do well either because too few experienced photographers respond there. Thanks for the tips; they are helpful. PumpkinSky talk 10:57, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

• I am currently working more than 10 hours by days, and I have to select my contributions, this is why I'm not currently very active in the QIC page. I agree with Colin: "QI doesn't do so well for in-between", but do not be angry it's often due to people who are reluctant to take a stand, it is sometimes difficult and examinations (reviews) are sometimes severely judged . I think the speed on File:Miyazaki Japanese Waterfall 4 LR.jpg is not adapted, too slow to capture the water in details and I think this is why Jee think the DoF is not good because of a little motion blur, and too fast to make a long exposure photo of water. On this photo and on the others I don't like the light, in my words I would have say "background is overexposed", but I'm not sure the term is really the right one when the subject is deliberately well exposed and when the background is out of focus, the issue is maybe more a question of hour (direction of the sun light), or a question of weather, with a sky veiled then light is sometimes more suitable than with a harsh sun light. Specially a harsh sun light on the out of focus background when the main subject is shadowed :( Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:50, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @Christian Ferrer: Thank you for taking the time to respond. It is very helpful. I agree, a big problem in that location is the sun. It's June and the sun is bright and with there being so many trees, but not enough to block enough sun, it's very hard to get consistent lighting. In several of the photos you can see a mix of light and shadow on the same object. I've decided to try again when there are a bunch of clouds in the sky. Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 11:57, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I got wet taking photos again

Jee, Colin, and Christian Ferrer...

Well, only a little bit. I was back at the small stream to photograph the Japanese waterfall and the bottom of my tripod legs, shoes, socks, and lower pant legs got wet. I also took pictures of the bridge.

I went there today because it was finally fully overcast, which meant I didn't have to deal the wild patterns of bright sun and shadows in this spot. This in turn meant I had to set the camera to M mode and play around with the shutter speed, ISO, f-stop, and EV settings. I checked auto and it'd want to use an ISO of 3000+. However, there was plenty of light for the naked eye, just not the camera. The photos are here and at QIC. I have my two circular polarizing filters now too. Hope you enjoy them.

User:PumpkinSky/Uploads/2017#Red_Wing_Park_Japanese_Moon_Bridge_and_Waterfall_RAW_2

PumpkinSky talk 00:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Much better! Three of them already reviewed pro at QIC. For this it seems the focus is on front grass; not on the bridge. This is wonderful! Jee 02:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, the grass kind of got in the way of the one but it wouldn't have been right to cut it down; it's in a public park. Thanks for looking at them! PumpkinSky talk 02:44, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

You need to use manual focus in such cases. Jee 03:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I did, see the exif data. I probably had the single point focus set a little off of where it should be. PumpkinSky talk 11:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

• It is much better indeed, I agree with Jee that the bridge is out of focus in one photo. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Jee and Christian Ferrer...Thank you very much for the feedback. Since the waterfall photo is the one that's been specifically mentioned as being good, do you think it'd pass FPC? If I do nominate it at FPC, should I work on the bright spots in the background more? PumpkinSky talk 11:02, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

• No I don't think the image will pass FP, it is indeed a good quality image of this waterfall, but it lack something very special, it is missing something more eye-catching. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
  • I always appreciate the feedback from you two. It's always helpful, fair, and honest. Maybe one day I'l take my second FP. ;-) PumpkinSky talk 19:15, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
    • Sure! Best wishes! BTW, I had several failed noms before my first FP. :) Jee 02:07, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Dragonfly

I know this isn't in your stomping grounds of Kerala, but 3 of these photos: User:PumpkinSky/Uploads/2017#Back_Bay_NWR_and_Little_Island_Park_RAW are of the same species of dragonfly. Can you help narrow this down to something more specific than Unidentified Anisoptera? The photos aren't great, but it'd be nice to have a more specific ID. I guess they could be damselflys but I think they're dragonflys. Thanks.PumpkinSky talk 22:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Its a Libellulidae female. Sorry; I've no exposure to dragonflies outside Asia. Posting at Facebook groups like Dragonflies and Damselflies Photography Group may be helpful. Jee 03:30, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! That's more than I figured out on my own. The problem with FB is I don't use it. I won't go into why. Thanks again! I marked all three photos as female Libellulidae. PumpkinSky talk 03:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

I also tried some of the online identify-it-yourself websites and I didn't get very far; other than to think it might maybe be a Aeshnidae (darner), but I wouldn't take bets on it either. I'm not an insect person. I'm much more a plant person. Thanks again. PumpkinSky talk 03:50, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

It is very difficult to self identify a female (or juvenile male) as we don't even know the male color whether it is red, blue, green or black. Dragonflies exhibit strong sexual dimorphism. Jee 03:55, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

New gallery for FP

Hi Jee [2] Thanks for suggestion, for my part I would like to suggest a gallery named Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Aerial views which may contain photos taken from or with any aircraft. This would mean, for example, that this or this picture may be transferred there as well. A disadvantage would be, of course, that drones can take photos in very low altitude, so that sometimes their photos are hardly to identify as true "aerial" views :) --A.Savin 22:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Alex, it seems a good idea though one disadvantage as you mentioned above. Another one I noticed is, there seems a quality difference for photos taken by drones compared to photos taken using high-end cameras from aircraft. This may be diminished in future, when drone based equipment developed more. If both are in same gallery, chances that people expect same quality for both drone and other photographs. (It seems the nomination attracted more reviewers after I mentioned about drone photography in my review. Unless we mention it, people may not notice it.) Jee 02:39, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Alex, Jee, I just want to add that if such gallery is created, the images will IMO have to be in two different galleries, e.g. File:RUS-2016-Aerial-SPB-St Michael's Castle 02.jpg is a castle, and if I've nothing on the fact that the image be in a gallery for aerial photo too, its place is obviously also in the castle gallery. So please if you create such gallery, copy the images but don't remove its from the former galleries. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 05:08, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Good point, Christian. Yes; images appear in more than one gallery is possible though uncommon. Further, we are lazy to do such extra works than what the bot do. I think we can think about such a gallery if more drone photos are coming. Jee 05:25, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

OK I didn't know that it's allowed to put an FP to more than one gallery. I'll take it into account. Regarding the quality, Phantom 4Pro has 20 Mpix camera and photos shut with it I would say nearly 16MP-DSLR quality (that is, a 20MP photo, taken by day with ISO-100, downsampled to 16MP, has then almost the same quality as a full 16MP photo taken with, say, Nikon D5100; provided of course proper postprocessing). And also it's possible to make stitched photos. With that said, IMO no big deal with quality differences so that there is potential for nominations. --A.Savin 11:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Then a generic gallery like "Aerial views" may be enough. Jee 12:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Posted at FPC talk for a better audience. Jee 12:11, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

OK sorry ti have forgotten. I still would like to create such a gallery, however each galler has an icon now. I've no idea what icon I could use for Aerial photos? --A.Savin 22:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi A.Savin, what about this or one from here? This seems better; but I didn't find such a free icon. Jee 03:12, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I want to add that some of our colleagues on Commons are able to create icons, and some of the icons used in the current FP galleries have been created for that, example File:Australian Pelican Kioloa silhouette.svg. The only thing is to find a good model. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Note that the gallery is not (only) about drones. But the third one would be better, since it's at least with a camera. --A.Savin 10:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes; I know. And this may be how aerial photography looks like in early days. Jee 12:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

This kind of icon is also good. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Dragonfly

Hi Jee. I was wondering if you could help me again. I was at a pond/marsh today (not the same one as before) and dragonflies were all over. These aren't in Asia, but could you help narrow down as much as you can: File:Oceana dragonfly 1 LR.jpg File:Oceana dragonfly 2 LR.jpg

and do you think "2" is good enough and identified enough for QI? I have them as female Libellulidae, just because that's what the last one was, but for all I know it's wrong. Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 19:23, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi PumpkinSky, I go thorough this and they seem Blue Dasher males. Jee 05:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!!! Those front wings on "2" look blurred so I think I won't put it up at QIC. Very kind of you to help me out on things.PumpkinSky talk 11:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

PS. There were hundreds of these flying around at Oceana Pond. There were some yellow and dull colored ones too, maybe the females. There were also some fat black bugs flying around that rarely land and stay still. PumpkinSky talk 11:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

It's an interesting tiny world! Jee 11:34, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Closing FPC

Hi Jee! I closed a withdrawn FPC, see this. Do I manually remove it from the FPC listing or does a bot do that? Can you close my withdrawn FPC about the big blue chair: Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Big_Chair_at_Little_Island_Park_LR.jpg Thanks! PumpkinSky talk

 Done. Jee 12:15, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

I may have gotten this dragonfly ID correct

Hi Jee!

Can you verify this ID: File:Libellula luctuosa, adult male LR.jpg

Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 20:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes; Widow Skimmer. Jee 02:33, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Thoughts on FPC

I think most of us, maybe all, are baffled by what does and doesn't pass at FPC. I sure am. I think the best advice I've heard about whether to nominate a photo or not is: if you'd vote for it, nominate it. PumpkinSky talk 11:18, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

FPC close

Hi Jee. See Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Miyazaki Japanese Moon Bridge 8 LR.jpg. This is at the bottom of the FPC and some above it have been closed but this one hasn't. The main nomination failed but the alternative passed 8-1. If you don't mind, have time, and no one does it before you see this, can you do the closing summary so it can get promoted? Thank you and hope you are well. PumpkinSky talk 02:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

 Done Jee 03:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. You've done this for all 3 of my FPs. ;-) PumpkinSky talk 09:48, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

New Nikon

On July 25, the 100th anniversary of Nikon, they're supposed to announce a new camera, the name D820 or D850. It's an upgrade to the D810 and will have a 45MP sensor. That's gonna be awful tempting.... ;-) PumpkinSky talk 13:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps my best insect photo

PumpkinSky talk 00:04, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Good. Did you use 85mm macro or a generic lens? Jee 03:29, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

That was my 85mm macro. PumpkinSky talk 10:55, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Question

Please, help me: what is the species? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

ArionEstar, according to the filename, it is Danaus plexippus. Jee 12:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

QIC problem

Take a look at the entries under July 5, 2017. Nothing is from July 5. They're all from 20-22 July, all promoted and yet nothing has been promoted. Why are they under July 5 and why not promoted? Do you know what happened here and how to fix it? PumpkinSky talk 20:19, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Now the whole section is gone. No idea what happened. PumpkinSky talk 22:55, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

FP timing

It's nice to see you back. I'd started to wonder if you were okay. I do hope you are well. I noticed that the two photos I have at FPC right now were taken only 24 minutes apart. Wish I could do that more often ;-) PumpkinSky talk 23:44, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks PumpkinSky; I fell into depression and so decided to reduce my activity here. The weather is also not good. Hope the situation will improve when the spring start in mid August. (I occasionally visit the FPC page to enjoy new nominations; but decided to abstain from any comments.) Jee 02:47, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I hope you feel better. PumpkinSky talk 09:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Lantana camara

Hi Jkadavoor - your two photos are hybrid cultivars of garden origin, not the original wild species (which is only found in the West Indies and Central America) - note the larger flowers, with pink colours, compared to the natural wild specimens like File:Antillean crested hummingbird feeding.jpg or File:Lantana camara 3.jpg. As such, they are better placed in Category:Lantana camara hybrids. See also the pages at GRIN for the species and the hybrids. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 22:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks MPF for the info. I will ask again and correct accordingly. Jee 02:41, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Let me know what they say, I can't see the link (it requires a login & password) - MPF (talk) 07:54, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

MPF, I didn't get an answer so far; but found this page in their website. GRIN mentioned it as a synonym of Lantana camara. But the plantlist consider it as a synonym of Lantana × aculeata. Which is correct? Jee 11:03, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! In a way, both are right; I read the article that GRIN cites, and it seems that aculeata is a subspecies of L. camara which originated through hybridisation in gardens, with L. strigocamara and 4 or 5 other species. So I conclude that GRIN's treatment of these garden plants as a hybrid complex related to L. camara (and thus, Category:Lantana camara hybrids here) is the best way of covering them. The Plant List's citation is just a slightly different way of expressing the same conclusion. I guess it is not surprising there has been so much hybridisation with gardeners wanting to breed new flower colours and larger, more conspicuous flowers. Best wishes! - MPF (talk) 14:59, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

MPF: OK; I restored your move. Saw Category:Lantana × aculeata too. Relevant? Jee 15:50, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Super, thanks! Yep, relevant, I'll deal with it in a bit. - MPF (talk) 18:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Jee 02:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hardcore photographer award

Consider yourself having the hardcore photographer award! Over at an FPC someone mentioned you once did a photo shoot with leeches crawling on you. YUCK! I do hope you are well. PumpkinSky talk 10:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks PumpkinSky. Its a longtime since I visited FPC and found Cart mentioned me! Here we've a lot of evergreen forests; so leeches are very common. They are very sensitive to heat produced by mammals including humans. Here you can see a photo of me with blood on my armpit. Not very fun. :) Jee 12:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Good to hear from you! :) Hope you and all you little flying and crawling friends are well. Leeches were common in the smaller lakes when I lived on Gotland. I saw some but fortunately they didn't bite me. Now I'm more used to spiders crawling on me when I'm photographing in the forests. And of course all the moose and deer that scares the crap out of me when they run out on the road in front of my car. --cart-Talk 12:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes; I'm fine though heavy rain still here. Jee 12:21, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Closing request

Hi Jee. If no one gets to it before you do, could you close this FPC: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Moon Bridge and Fountain, Friendship Pond 4 NBG LR.jpg? The alternative was promoted and people tend to avoid those. Thank you and hope you are well. PumpkinSky talk 00:11, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Jee 02:37, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks! PumpkinSky talk 02:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Great work

I'm looking through your uploads and they're all consistently impressive, not to mention all the varied subjects. Keep it up :). Opencooper (talk) 10:36, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Opencooper! Jee 10:42, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Birds of Kerala Wikicommon page

Hi, just saw this page and its an amazing work. There is a notification says you might need help with edits. But looks like it is almost done! Do let me know if I can contribute in anyway. Thanks. - Jegan 15:11, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Jegan. It is still under construction; a few more order of birds also need to be added. Hope I'll finish it within one week. As you mentioned in the email, it will be very helpful for us if more images are uploaded of the rare species which we have not much images. Thanks! Jee 02:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Plant ID

Hi Jee:

I know you're a bird and bug guy, but any idea (or know who may know) what this is: File:Unknown Plant Test 7 FS LR.jpg. Thanks. PumpkinSky talk 23:56, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm; I'm not an expert; just depending the local resources to identify my works. Earlier I posted at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants for helps; but now saw you are discouraged to do so. Jee 02:46, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you anyway. Peace to the World through great photos. PumpkinSky talk 03:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Id help

Hi Jee, Could you ID the species - File:Dragonfly @ Kanjirappally.jpg?--Praveen:talk 13:34, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Vestalis gracilis male. Jee 13:53, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

 Thank you. Jeevan--Praveen:talk 14:59, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

rename help

Can you please rename the last upload

Chapiquick Island Don Ramey Logan

to: Chappaquiddick Island Don Ramey Logan.jpg--Don (talk) 04:51, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done, Don! Jee 04:57, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Jee --Don (talk) 06:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

rename help again!

Opps, one more please: File:Edgertown Harbor Don Ramey Logan.jpg

Edgartown Harbor Don Ramey Logan

, should be spelled Edgartown Harbor by...-Don (talk) 18:45, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done, Don. I was away in my wife's home; just returned today. Jee 09:28, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Jee.. --Don (talk) 05:57, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Id help

Hi, could you help me id the species [1], [2]--Praveen:talk 12:16, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Praveen, Difficult to identify the species. Syntomoides imaon also looks similar. Jee 12:46, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Okay--Praveen:talk 14:24, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Name Mod

Hey Jee, I need to pay more attention when I load these :>. I just uploaded a classic yacht photo and need to modify the spelling on the title. "Elenora" should be spelled "Eleonora". thank you!

Elenora Newport RI Classic Yacht Regatta by D Ramey Logan

--Don (talk) 18:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done, Don. Jee 02:34, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

FPCBot issues

Hi Jee. I hope you are well. Any idea why

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rose Garden - NATO Vista Bridge 3 NBG LR.jpg

has been skipped by two FPCBot runs? It should be a 5th day promotion. Thanks. PumpkinSky talk 00:28, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

PumpkinSky: May be due to that File:Smiley emoticons doh.gif in comments. I remember bot misunderstood such file tags as alternate nominations and asked to close manually earlier. The bot program is now abandoned by the creator; so difficult to manage. Removing that file from the comments may help. Jee 02:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 02:58, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Didn't help. Can you please manually close this? PumpkinSky talk 11:28, 25 November 2017 (UTC)...Missed a 4th bot run. Something is clearly interfering with this being properly processed. PumpkinSky talk 20:04, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

• Hello Jee, @PumpkinSky: I think the nomination have not to be closed yet, the vote number 10 was added 8 hours after the 5 day and this is why the BOT did nothing. Sorry... you will have to wait at "28 Nov 2017 at 13:13:44 (UTC)" Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:25, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

oups, I did not count well :) the tenth vote came before. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:34, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Yep, it was 10 at 5 days. Now has 11. Thanks though. PumpkinSky talk 20:57, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

ok I closed it, lets see what happens now... Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:58, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

THANK YOU !!! Thanks for closing that. I'm seeing more and more bot problems. PumpkinSky talk 21:02, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

• • • He did it 3 minutes before the 2100 bot run and it processed it the rest of the way. YEA PumpkinSky talk 21:07, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Today's FP

RE: Vanessa indica

Great photo! PumpkinSky talk 02:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the remind! Jee 04:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Another typo in my title

File:Velsheda Topz and Svea Race 7 J Class worlds, Newport Rhode Island by Don Ramey Logan.jpg should be: Velsheda Topaz and Svea Race 7 J Class worlds, Newport Rhode Island by Don Ramey Logan.jpg, I missed the a in topaz --Don (talk) 04:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done Jee 06:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Jee --Don (talk) 06:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Name Change

Hi Jee, I hope that all is well with you and yours! I have a file name change to request: SheratonXiamen.jpg should be Sheraton Xiamen by D Ramey Logan.jpg Cheers! --Don (talk) 03:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done Jee 12:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas & Happy 2018!

Hi Jee, this is your old friend inevercry. I want to wish you and you family and friends a great Christmas and New Year. I already have my 2018 resolution ready: lose weight! I've been sitting around, and I'm now up to 225 pounds! As for my editing here, that will continue into the new year of course. People should remember what Jesus said: "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do." This fits with me much of the time. I let frustration or destructive thoughts take me over and I act like a fool. I'll be working on this in the new year. I'm just a few months from 50th birthday! Pray for me.

If you have time, can you take a quick look at Category:Karawal Nagar. I put it in Category:Districts of Delhi, but that looks like it may be too broad a category. I appreciate any help you can give me on that (there may be interwiki too). Take care old friend. 52.170.26.77 00:15, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

A "thank you" for your support

Wow, nice!!! Thanks! Jee 02:17, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, glad you like it. Question. I rewrote the description but when I use the link provided in the "use the file on a wiki" button, the description is filled with + signs, how do I correct this or do I (you) need to rename the file? I think this is a first for commons, a 10 minute professionally produced video worth watching :) LMK. --Don (talk) 04:15, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Corrected. Jee 05:26, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and wishing for eternal Peace in world

I truly wish you, your family, and your friends Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and wishing for eternal Peace in world. Have a great holiday season. PumpkinSky talk 15:26, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks PumpkinSky; wish you too a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Jee 02:44, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2018! ;)

			* Happy Holidays 2018, Jkadavoor! *
			Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:44, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks George; wish you too a wonderful 2018! Jee 12:45, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

New sunrise, new day, new month and a New Year, Start the year with a smile, and forget the fear, This New Year, may you achieve whatever you wish! Stay blessed with all the bliss! Wishing you a very happy new year! . --The Photographer 14:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks The Photographer; which you too a wonderful new year! Jee 03:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year Jee

--Don (talk) 02:51, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Don; wish you too a wonderful New Year! Jee 04:11, 30 December 2017 (UTC)