User:JarrahTree/Talk Archive

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

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons. Snottygobble 22:19, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:StrettleRoadParrotbushNo.1.jpg[edit]

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 10:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Image:StrettleRoadParrotbushNo5.jpg[edit]

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 01:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

gallery cat[edit]

all fixed Gnangarra 14:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Example.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  Comment Location and sculptor are missing. Zil 23:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment Geocoded...but sculptor currently unknown, no web sources on sculptor have contacted local government officials by email. Gnangarra 13:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Excellent. I don't think we need to wait on finding the sculptor, chasing that sort of thing down is a hassle, and would just delay promotion ages. Let's just presume it will be found. Adam Cuerden 16:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 CommentSculptor was Rayner Hoff Gnangarra 05:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! John gale 02 satusuro.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  Comment Location and sculptor are missing. Zil 23:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment Geocode, Sculptor, and Casting Foundary added Gnangarra 13:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Excellent, perhaps even FP-quality. Adam Cuerden 16:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Gastro[edit]

Good job he has a helmet on as he approaches that thorny Dav. Melburnian (talk) 03:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Towns in Tasmania[edit]

Category:Towns of New South Wales has regional categories such Category:Towns of the Riverina, New South Wales and Category:Towns of the South Coast, New South Wales. No reason why Category:Towns in Western Tasmania couldn't exist, sitting under Category:Towns in Tasmania and Category:Western Tasmania (not yet created I see), I don't think? -- Mattinbgn/talk 12:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't see me for advice about commons either, I just make it up as I go along! I figure if I am doing the wrong thing, some one will tell me eventually; just not as quickly (and with less drama) than on enwiki. Good luck with the backlog. Cheers, Mattinbgn/talk 12:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Flora Cat[edit]

Yeah its starting to get to the point where division is needed I was thinking along ABRA line but Hesp had trouble there before, hence some of the inertia. Looking at the Nevill book I recently got he splits WA into three Provinces(presume theres some authority behind this) they all can be divided further as the time and media progress. The three provinces are Northern(Kimberley), Eremanaean(pilbara, Gascoyne, deserts, and Nullabor) and a South West Botanical for every thing from the Murchison down. That'd be the I think to go but havent checked far enough into it nor discussed with the gurus yet. Gnangarra 05:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep, they're Beard's provinces. Perfectly acceptable. Hesperian 07:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok I've started Category:Northern Province, Category:Eremaean Province and Category:South-west Botanical Province Gnangarra 11:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Flora of WA now broken down, interestingly 3 species that arent in WA were in there along with three aliens who are now in Category:Alien Flora in Western Australia, checked against florabase Gnangarra 13:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Rambling[edit]

Do "September Hills Forest rambles" images include cultivated plants? Melburnian (talk) 07:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Ta Melburnian (talk) 00:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I didn't explain myself properly, the locality checking is just for me to work out the plant id's against local flora lists and I was just checking whether some were cultivated as that means that the flora lists don't apply. I agree that the locality of cultivated plants isn't of much significance beyond that they are in "Perth" or "Melbourne" etc (unless it's grown in a botanic gardens which serves as a kind of verification if labelled). Melburnian (talk) 12:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

WIKIBREAK[edit]

Not back till 2009 probably- cheers SatuSuro (talk) 22:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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

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

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

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

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

BotMultichillT (talk) 20:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply its gonna take time - cheers SatuSuro (talk) 12:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Does not make sense - most of these do have categories or links - unless it is explained further I assume there is a mistake of some sort SatuSuro (talk) 06:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Things are looking up!
Do you still need some images turned around?


Perh, Australia[edit]

You can start a COM:CFD I did one over two years ago the extensively limited discussion in which opinion was equally divided was closed with the current format. Obviously opinion can change Gnangarra 13:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for out of scope[edit]

  • File:Starr 010526-1342 Scaevola taccada.jpg
  • File:Starr 010526-1341 Scaevola taccada.jpg
  • File:Starr 040410-0206 Scaevola taccada.jpg

- they are not in scope or are too close to out of scope for reasonable expectations of what scaevola taccada means SatuSuro (talk) 02:09, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Swan View, JFNP and beyondSatu.jpg[edit]

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


File:ViennaCentralCemeteryDome2.jpg[edit]

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 14:56, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Kings?[edit]

I have never seen the Yogya or Solo rulers/royalty ever called kings - was the category for simplicity? I think a qualifier needs to be put that they were never called by that usage - would you agree with that? SatuSuro (talk) 04:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Bringing text over - your mutiple identity is very confusing

if you read for instance A History of Modern Indonesia since c. 1300 by M. C. Ricklefs (ISBN 0-8047-2195-5) of the Australian National University, who is considered as one of the most respected historians on Indonesia,

I should know he, if he hasnt thrown the towel, is based in Singapore now and he read my attempt at a thesis about a royal graveyard (sic) and didnt like it - my life was taken up for 10 years plus thinking about sultans/susuhunans as rulers and never kings - apart from having had communciations with him over years - I also did his bio stub on wp en.

you will see that he calls entities like Pajang, Mataram, Surakarta and Yogyakarta "kingdoms" and their rulers (as a logical linguistic consequence) "kings".

Convenience for english speakers

In Indonesia, we say they are "raja", of which the closest translation into English is "king".

menurut pendapat orang translator - I would never use king - and my first supervisor ahli Jawa agreed ruler is far more appropriate

So I can't agree with you.

Thats fine - we are here to try to resolve issues, and as I say my ahli jawa always advised ruler as being far more appropriate specially for Mataram and Yogya and Solo polity.

"King" is a general term to designate the ruler of a polity called "kingdom". The kings are Surakarta bear the title of Susuhunan, which is untranslatable into English. Those of Yogyakarta bear the title of "sultan", which has been adopted by the English language. But both are titles born by kings

I cannot agree with you - as I would always, after spending ten years + utilising the horrible orang belanda translations of the Javanese cultural world, and having lived and listened to the conversations amongst juru kunci at my royal gravesite will always defer to 'ruler' - so there we have it.

Cheers and thanks for your response - I am not going to actually change anything - but, but If I add any text where I come across usage as saying that the term 'king' I will probably parenthetically add that 'ruler' is far more appropriate.

Just in case you want to haul out the usual kamus definitions of the use of raja - please dont bother - they lack any sense of etymological depth or any sense of where things come from or the variances of usage in time or in space - I simply am claiming that to ascertain from any one source as a definitive usage simply doesnt carry any weight with me - specially when we start looking at basa jawa - indonesian word play. At the point we hunt down Revo or readup Romo Zoet's work - for some third opinions :) SatuSuro (talk) 10:11, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I do hope I am not misunderstood here - I am not trying to ask you to change it - or to change it - I was very keen to get your reasoning for the usage - and I appreciate you using a specific text and offering your interpretation. I hadnt outlined my experience dealing with usages during my internship in Central Java of some 15 years ago - and would not expect you to know - but hey I am extra cautious when making a claim to authority over meaning, so it was good to get your side. Cheers SatuSuro (talk) 10:44, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello again, and sorry for my identity, I didn't mean to make it "multiple". I wanted to change it from my real surname to "Humboldt" (who wrote a book on the Kawi language) but have failed in doing so. I misunderstood your intention. I totally agree that "king" is unsatisfactory. Indonesians themselves cannot explain what a "raja" is (think of the Batak raja or the raja in Timor) and that "ruler" is much more appropriate. But how should we name the territory over which a "ruler" rules? A "ruledom"? :-) Personnally, I am ready to change "kings" into "rulers". But how shouf we name their kins? "Rulerty"? :-) By the way, in Wikipedia, the equivalent of "ruler" in French (the language of the country where I was born, grew up and live) is "monarque", which in my view is even worse than "roi"... Not an easy issue as you can see! Kindest regards, Humboldt (talk) 13:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
this may sound strange but commons is a multi-lingual project as such why cant they be categorise by their identifier of raja, then add a comment explain in general terms an english equivillent. Gnangarra 13:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Not strange at all - and I see what you are suggesting - If you were to follow what I have just put into Djoehana/Humboldt talk page - the rulers are originally culturally Javanese rulers - the use of the word 'Raja' is the Indonesian de facto usage with a rather false sense of what they were really known in the Javanese cultural sphere - 'Makam Raja Raja' - can be translated easily from cheaper Kamus/Dicitonaries as the Graveyard of the Kings - but if you find the local Javanese usage - such an appellation is seen as an outsiders usage - the more stratified javanese linguistic levels give rulers and their offspring quite elegant terminology befitting in their status in the status ridden older style javanese culture. The suggestions from both Djoehana and Gnangarra have helped greatly, I think I need to tag some more categories and think through this for a day or so - the ten years of being fixated on one royal graveyard had been discard for a lot of reasons, just need to have walk through my memory vaults for a few sunsets to get it all ticking over again ... SatuSuro (talk) 13:55, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello SatuSuro, doing research on culture as a frame of significance, for the time being I make no difference between a ruler from a Javanese perspective, and a ruler from an Austronesian perspective in general. The Javanese conception seems just to be a fundamentally Austronesian one using Indic paraphernalia and language... Humboldt (talk) 14:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Categories[edit]

I think we might need a conversation at some point about categories - I am in the process of pruning by hot cat from various central java temples - categories that I fee a re grandparent cats sitting with grandchildren cats. You are most welcome to revert any of my changes if you find that I have contravened the intent of COM:OVERCAT or COM:C - cheers SatuSuro (d) 01:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I have yet to really look into it. However, at first glance, I am not convinced with the "Buddhist" and "Hindu" temple distinction. Quite a few Javanese temples have features from both cults. It seems that within the local (Javanese or more generally Austronesian) conception, this distinction may have been irrelevant. In 14th century Malajapahit, the king was Buddha and Shiva at the same time, Humboldt (talk) 14:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


Congratulations, Dear Administrator![edit]

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ +/−

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

JarrahTree, congratulations! You now have administrator rights on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and its subpages), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care. Have a look at the list of Gadgets (on the bottom there are the ones specifically for admins – however, for example the UserMessages are very helpful too).

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons webchat on irc.libera.chat. There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators: #wikimedia-commons-admin webchat.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading. You can find the admin backlog overview at COM:AB.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

— Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 11:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome, and congratulations on the promotion! I'm sure you will have fun here while working as an Admin. :) Bidgee (talk) 12:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Only to happy to give you a boot or two! ;) No doubt you will have fun dealing with the deletion requests, Category:Media requiring renaming, Category:Copyright violations and the odd vandalism ;) . Bidgee (talk) 13:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes you must find those vandal photos! :P Tell you the truth I had been waiting for these buggers to vandalise something made from wood and not painted foam. ;) Bidgee (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Congrats! Feel free to poke me if you need any help. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 13:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Congrats! Welcome to the trenches grab your mop bucket theres enough work to be done, if you need help dont be afraid to ask. Gnangarra 13:49, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Congrats! I've been late for the voting, but I am happy of the outcome. --Elekhh (talk) 22:57, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Congrats! Thought I'd add to the pile-on :) Melburnian (talk) 06:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks you everyone - it is going to be a slow start - but hey I'll get there! SatuSuro (talk) 22:55, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

What! How did I miss this?? Congratulations, well deserved. I am sure you will be a credit to the project. It's a lot more laid back over here ... -- Mattinbgn/talk 01:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations[edit]

A toast to your success. --Sandahl (talk) 16:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

User:RKBot[edit]

Hello SatuSuro, because of your block there, please have a look to Commons:Batch uploading/Minerals from Rob Lavinsky on mindat#Bot blocked. It was and it is needless to block the bot any longer. The bot never had a malfunction and didn't run without control through the complete batch upload. He stopped every time, when 1000 pictures where uploaded, so that we can look over the pictures, if all is ok. Furthermore, the bot owner Reinhard Kraasch is on easter holiday and the bot doesn't run alone. greetings -- Ra'ike T C 22:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Rename file[edit]

Hi SatuSuro, please check your edit here: [1]. You forgot to rename the file! Thanks --тнояsтеn ⇔ 22:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion request[edit]

In case someone else doesn't would you care to delete this, it's only use was a not very nice article at en:wikipedia. Thanks. -- Sandahl (talk) 01:04, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hindu temples[edit]

Yes, it was in some of the 19th century pictures of Borobudur - they have in their titles 'hindu monument' - they did that sort of thing then :( SatuSuro (d) 13:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello SatuSuro, in a way, they are excusable. Indonesian have been combining Buddhism and Hinduism since as soon as the 5th century AD! Witness Batujaya and Cibuaya sites in Karawang, many temples in the Prambanan area, the king being described as both Buddha and Shiva in the Nagarakertagama written in 1365 AD... :-) Humboldt (talk) 13:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

On Indonesian categories[edit]

I personally object to a larger number of categories for Indonesian subjects/things here on commons, but have not done anything about it so far SatuSuro (d) 00:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello SatuSuro, I suppose it depends. For example, if there are plenty of Hindu temples in Java, Hindu temples in Bali, Buddhist temples in Java, Chinese temples in Java, Chinese temples in Sulawesi etc., why not create different categories? In my view, categories allow to differentiate items when there are too many of them (I agree that "too many" must be defined) while they have different characteristics. Besides, categories show the diversity of a topic. Kindest regards, Humboldt (talk) 08:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Seeking help[edit]

The two files are identical. I am sure there should be only one but no idea what template to use. File:Troy Miller dir.jpg & File:Troy Miller Set.jpg. -- Sandahl (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

CAT of KIT images[edit]

I'm not sure which image you're talking about, but I know many of the images in Category:Nature of Indonesia and Category:Flora of Indonesia do not belong there, like this oddity. I found that often the original file name is more accurately describing the subject than the temporary categories. I can't see the light at the end of the tunnel yet... Anyway I'll leave the plants to the botanists... --Elekhh (talk) 12:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I see. Yes Category:Alun-alun sounds good, but probably it's time to have separate categories for the largest cities. Btw, those are remarcable trees though, kind of a Category:Shaped trees+Category:Trees in Indonesia. --Elekhh (talk) 13:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Admin inactivity[edit]

Hello SatuSuro, you might be interested in this discussion: Commons_talk:Administrators/De-adminship#Activity -- A9 (talk) 06:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Geographic categories by province?[edit]

Hi SatuSuro! I found a number of geographic categories by province which make little sense to me, and think it would be beneficial to delete, but wanted to ask you first. For instance Animals, Rivers, Mountains. First of all provinces change through history, second animals and plants do not follow province boundaries, while mountains and rivers are likely to be part of several provinces... What do you think? --Elekhh (talk) 01:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's ok with me too, but I believe that geographic features should be than categorized both based on political divisions and geographic divisions. While for somebody familiar with the country might not be an issue, but for the general international reader is odd to have to search a volcano by going through all the provinces... --Elekhh (talk) 20:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Finally I had time to open a cfd on this. --Elekhh (talk) 08:53, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

File:NW Coast 1897.JPG[edit]

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 00:01, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

- I am looking through some of the changes made to the filenames, and continue to come across reasons not to change them. The following file: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Gardenology.org-IMG_0229_hunt07mar.jpg&redirect=no was renamed. Because of the way I photograph a plant and then the label, I often take multiple views of the same plant before taking a photo with the name tag in it (when available). So, in this case, the previous photo I took also is the same plant. And the one before that as well. So in other words, http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Gardenology.org-IMG_0228_hunt07mar.jpg&redirect=no and http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Gardenology.org-IMG_0227_hunt07mar.jpg&redirect=no are the same plant. This is often the case. So now, you need to name three different files with the same name. You also have eliminated the ease with which me or anyone else who becomes familiar with these files can check for addition photos, as well as the ease in labeling/categorizing the additional photos. So anyway, I'm just saying, I think there is no need to be so rigid with this, and be so insistent that the files all be renamed. The effort it takes to rename files could go towards categorizing other files instead. --RaffiKojian (talk) 10:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

-

New Year[edit]

- Hello SatuSuro, thanks for your heartening words. Given Tropenmuseum bequeathed some 35,000 pictures to Commons, there is still a heap of work to do! :-) Humboldt (talk) 09:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Backlog at protected edit requests[edit]

Hi SatuSuro,

Commons protected edit requests is backlogged. If you have a moment, would you do some? --  Docu  at 12:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Real life[edit]

Allows me a few minutes every day to check things - long gone is when I had 4 - 5 hours straight to edit - perhaps in the next few weeks i might have more time - the next 10 days less than a few minutes a day access SatuSuro (talk) 08:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I will ask someone else. --  Docu  at 11:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JarrahTree/Talk_Archive&oldid=303802493"