User:WayneRay/Archives 03 to July 2008

New pictures put on Commons

Hi Wayne.

FYI, I have just put new pictures taken today of two rare plants I have in my garden: Lathraea clandestina (2 pics) and Cyclamen pseudibericum (one more pic).

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 14:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

News from Belgium

Hi Wayne,

In Belgium the weather is turned upside down. After an abnormally warm winter, we had a very wet and cold beginning of the spring. Currently we have more "normal" weather, i.e., covered sky and milder temperatures.

In the meantime have created a page Erythronium on fr.wikipedia and I am reviewing the page Bouleau (birch). Next week i am in the US for a conference. Despite I am becoming 63, I am still full-time working.

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 06:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

.pdf files

Hi, I notice you've marked large numbers of .pdf files for deletion as outside project scope. Could you explain your rationale for this? Commons:Project scope seems to allow them. Durova 06:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Here Here is the original discussion in the Commons Project Scope section Talk page. Basically I am cleaning up and organizing the over 12,400 pdf files that are not linked to anything. While I was doing so another User was requesting text based pdf files for deletion as they were out of the Commons Scope of images only. I am now setting the text based pdf files aside so that an Admin can look at them for possible deletion. Some are images pdf files within the Categories, but it is a file by file process for the next level. I am hoping that a decision can be made about keeping relavent text based pdf files as some are Wiki projects already ok'd. WayneRay 11:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Wikimedia Commons has a specific scope

---

Thank you for your contributions. Your image or other content was recently deleted, or will soon be deleted, in accordance with our process and policies, because it was not, or is not, within our scope. Please review our project scope, but in short, Commons is targeted at media files including photographs, diagrams, animations, music, spoken text and video clips. Wikimedia Commons does not contain text articles like encyclopedia articles, textbooks, news, word definitions and such. Each of these other kinds of content have their own projects: Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikinews, Wiktionary and Wikiquote.

If the content seems to fit the scope of one of those other projects, please consider contributing it there. If you think that the deletion was in error because the contribution really was in scope, you can appeal it at Commons:Undeletion requests, giving a reason why it fits our scope to help others evaluate the matter. Thank you for your understanding. Kanonkas_(talk) 14:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I see you helping out with notifying deletion requests & the like on user pages. Can I ask when you do place a tag on a user page that you also place the {{Welcome}} template as well if they have not had one. It is a good multi lingual one which may help people to understand rather more (or get some help).

Thanks for the help - regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! I never thought of that and it is built in so well in one word. Thanks WayneRay 16:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Thanks a lot. It is easy to forget how multi lingual Commons is - I think it is easy for some new people to be confused. Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 06:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I also found a Spanish version for Not In Commons Scope I am using as well delete|reason=Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto.Out of Commons Scope WayneRay 11:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

PDF files, redux

The latest batch of PDF files you nominated for deletion were a better catch than you thought (e.g this one). They were actually RAR files with dubious (probably copyrighted) contents. If you get time, next time you find a PDF file that's disproportionately large compared to its contents (like a few lines of text being several megabytes) you might want to open them in your favourite RAR extractor in case they have any surprises embedded.

Keep up the good work. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 11:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks when I started there was no category PDF files and then when I found 12,800 of them with no categories I took on the task myself. It is only recently I was informed of the Scope and the need to delete some that I am going through the whole list. Thanks again. RAR is unfamiliar to me I don't understand that??? WayneRay 11:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

The simplified version: RAR is a compressed archive format, not entirely unlike ZIP files. It has the ability to tag itself onto the end of other filetypes; because the identifying header (and "this is the start of a RAR file") data can be anywhere in a file (not just at the beginning as with most file formats), disguising a RAR archive as something else is as simple as appending the RAR data onto the end of a file format that doesn't require software to read past the "this is the end of this file!"-type data. PDF is one of these; JPEG is another.

^^ That's TL;DR anyway. You have an enormous task ahead of you. I'm glad there's someone doing it. :) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 12:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

(BTW, the category has been deleted. :) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 14:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC))

Deletion matter

Replied here. I don't do much work on Commons so I wasn't sure where or what to reply to your message on my talk page. --Gwib 14:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the swift reply. Your picture on your userpage (if indeed it is you) reminds me so much of Richard Dawkins. --Gwib 15:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Too funny . . .WayneRay 15:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Wikimedia Commons has a specific scope

---

Thank you for your contributions. Your image or other content was recently deleted, or will soon be deleted, in accordance with our process and policies, because it was not, or is not, within our scope. Please review our project scope, but in short, Commons is targeted at media files including photographs, diagrams, animations, music, spoken text and video clips. Wikimedia Commons does not contain text articles like encyclopedia articles, textbooks, news, word definitions and such. Each of these other kinds of content have their own projects: Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikinews, Wiktionary and Wikiquote.

If the content seems to fit the scope of one of those other projects, please consider contributing it there. If you think that the deletion was in error because the contribution really was in scope, you can appeal it at Commons:Undeletion requests, giving a reason why it fits our scope to help others evaluate the matter. Thank you for your understanding. abf /talk to me/ 14:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

??????????? I haven't uploaded anything You have lost me on your note to me???? WayneRay 14:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Thanks

Thank you for helping out finding PDF files which are not in our project scope. We appreciate it, if their is anything then just leave me a note. Best regards --Kanonkas_(talk) 08:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure upgrade to Pdf Admin status and I can go through them myself LOL. Thansk, there are 12,800 pdf files and i have only organized and gone through about 1000 so far, long way to go. I was originally told there were no pdf files and poof there they were hidden away with no connecting Categories etc. On a more serious note, most seem to be in Spanish so maybe something should be put on the Spanish language wikimedia and pedia about filling in the Simmary and Licensing and categorizing pdf files Hmmm WayneRay 12:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

deprecated function in your monobook.js

Dear user, I noticed that you use the includePage function in your monobook.js page.

This function is now obsolete, as the importScript function was introduced with rev:35064 to the MediaWiki Javascript core library wikibits.js. It also keeps track of already imported files.

To allow us to remove includePage from Mediawiki:Common.js I'd kindly ask you to replace its use with importScript (same syntax!). Thanks! --Dschwen 17:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Gladiolus byzantinus02.jpg

Hi Wayne,

I have uploaded several photos of plants taken in my garden.

When uploading Image:Gladiolus byzantinus02.jpg I have made a mistake, i.e., forgetting to add the license. I have uploaded it again with the correct license and reverted the previous version. The current version is thus the good one. In the meantime I have used it in pagina Glaïeul.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald (To reply) 14:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear Wayne,

The botanical, thinner gladioli from central and southern Europe (Gladiolus communis, Gladiolus illyricus, Gladiolus imbricatus, Gladiolus italicus and Gladiolus palustris) are quite hardy and can in our region (center of Belgium, zone 6) be left in the ground.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald (To reply) 06:53, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Category:Law related Pdf files

Nice idea for a new category, this will prove useful over time. Thanks for creating it. Cirt 11:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You deserve 10 barnstars for your tireless efforts when it comes to dealing with PDF files. You do an amazing job. Keep up the good work!!! ShakataGaNai Talk 01:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, this means a great deal to me and I appreciate the Barnstar. Can you delete the errant pdf files or do we have to wait for other Admin's? There are about 3000 I have looked at and will still be editing them into Categories or for deletion. WayneRay 13:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Actually as of 23:00 UTC today I will be an admin. There is bound to be something we can do that makes this proccess easier for you. I was thinking that maybe you can just make a post/dump on my talk page with the links to all of the out of scope documents. I will look them over and delete them. If that makes things easier for you, that is. Otherwise I think we managed to get all of the last batch. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

More than likely, help is needed: Category:Systema Naturae

All of a sudden, this category exists. I think that there are people who know better than me how to handle it and where it should subcat to, etc. You are one of them :) -- carol (tomes) 08:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I thought about Botanical illustrations but the book has more words than illustrations. There were a couple of times when I considered uploading the page with the species description for an article. Regardless of all I just mentioned, thanks for looking at it. -- carol (tomes) 18:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I see your point, There is also a Category for Book covers and it only links to itself really so I linked it to illustrations and am going back in to clean up the whole file. WayneRay 18:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

The category you created for Britton et al, it is kind of cool how it stacks up well with good file names. I am certain that like the gallery it too will become large, difficult to download and manage, but at the onset, it is kind of pretty, eh? Thanks again for the expert decision making. -- carol (tomes) 20:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually if my intro is right, these images will have to be put in the Gallery so the Category page should be empty, thanks for reminding me. And you're welcome. WayneRay 20:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Those .pdfs

Hi - firstly .pdfs are not outside scope just because they are pdfs (if you didn't already know that). However the one you just listed (& I closed & deleted) certainly was. If you find that sort you can always tag them as speedy ones - it is then up to the deleting admin to decide. If the admin does not delete them they can always then be tagged for a full deletion debate. Thanks for the work & regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Please stop

please stop. -- carol (tomes) 22:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I do not undo your work, please stop undoing mine. -- carol (tomes) 22:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Carol, thought I was making it easier for people to fing things. plus the similar things from last year or so when I was told there should only be Galleries and not duplicate Cat's. WayneRay 17:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Dear WayneRay, please dont remove images from categories. From Commons:Categories: Do not remove categories just because an image is in a categorized gallery. Multichill 23:02, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

My understanding is that all images should be in categories. Where appropriate galleries can be used in addition. The gallery is very necessary here (to allow sorting), but I need the "automatic" category listing to keep track of the images I have cleaned and cropped - I will add the cat tag as I go.

Do you (or carol) have the knowledge/sources to allocate captions and titles where multiple names exist? I think we should keep Sturm's original caption, but where he was wrong, we should show a correct (or current) name as well. Finavon 23:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I had set this one up under the same circumstamces Category:Britton & Brown, Illustrated flora of the northern states and Canada for the image repository and the Gallery article has the alphabetized list. Britton & Brown, Illustrated flora of the northern states and Canada, why is Sturm any different? There was a discussion last year and I thought it was agreed that the Gallery was all there should be and not a duplicate Category. I was trying to make it simpler for the novice to put images in the Category and then I have been moving and organizing them in the article galleries. WayneRay 02:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

The process might have worked if all the images were first put in the category. However, they were, roughly sorted, in the gallery. As I began to cleanup the images, you began to re-order the gallery. I needed a way to identify which images I had "done" - hence the introduction of the category. Aside from the merit of retaining both, I was put out by the un-discussed mass reversion, which appeared to differ from practice elsewhere. It is still going to take some time to cleanup the rest of the images, so let's discuss any major changes. I don't have the botanical knowledge to complete the sorting, so value your input. Finavon 06:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes I see now, I just saw the mixed alpha order in the gallery and as I have been doing in Seed and Britton @ Brown and many others, I decided to clean up. I will leave the Cat's alone for now. I don't know what happened for the mass reversions, let me know when you are enough along I can alphabetize the list. WayneRay 17:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Australian botanical photos

Hi, I'd already started to link the botanical names on my new uploads and I've now made a start on inserting the links in my older uploads. Melburnian (talk) 12:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Question

What was going on here. It seems you were removing the category because it was in a gallery? --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 16:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It is not necessary to have a Botanical image in both a category and an article gallery. Look through most of the Botanical images. Leave it if you want both. Others are on the opposing side. WayneRay (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Per Commons:Categories#Categories and/or galleries? - "both systems are equally valid and should be used concurrently. Do not remove categories just because an image is in a categorized gallery." Plus, we have a bot that runs around and tags images as uncategorized automatically, so if you remove the cat - it is just going to get tagged to be categorized again. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 18:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Communication

Instead of looking for a template or my other options and after a certain amount of thought, I have decided to put this message and its response here so that you have something to look back on when in need of knowing when and how to communicate. I think it is a fine example of the quality of work I have seen from you here!! You should be proud. -- carol (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Britton and Brown project of yours

User:Bob the Wikipedian is uploading many photos that should go in this and other categories and/or Gallery. If you look at his Gallery you will see that most have no link to your Britton and Brown project. Should you notify him of proper links or should I. I would go ahead but didn't want to interfere. WayneRay (talk) 21:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Heh, not a project actually, just a speedy way for a human to upload. Thanks for the pointer though. -- carol (talk) 22:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Template

Thanks for showing your appreciation. I actually finished going through the "mammal articles without images" list recently, and now am working on the plants. (Trying to tackle the largest lists first!) Today I managed to work through the last of the Liliopsidae, and am now on the dicots. I guess I must be about a third of the way through the list at this point.

I will certainly try to make use of your template wherever possible...it looks fairly simple to use. Thanks for providing the code (without even my requesting it!) I was actually beginning to hope there wouldn't be any more from that book, since those are so tedious! Now they will be the easiest ones!

God bless, Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Uploaded a new version

Hi Wayne,

Thank you very much for your cleaning activity. I enjoy your pictures very much. See you and your pictures

Best regards, tea ≈Dl (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for forgetting to mention that I was talking about my upload: Image:Carduus nutans 9527.png‎. Your erasing of one spare category there pointed out that an order in cataloguing should thwart being too redundant. Thank you again. tea ≈Dl (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Carex

Carol, I would like to clean up the Category:Carex by placing illustrations in the galleries or same named Categories and leaving the photo images. Many are ones you put there of the illustrations from Sturm. I will be creating new gallery pages for ones that dont exist. Do you have any comments or suggestions before I start and get in ^%$# again LOL I am trying to comprimise between my thoughts that images should be in Galleries and galleries in the higher order Category and others as we discussed that think there should be both available., Thanks in advance WayneRay (talk) 21:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

I am doing most of my work in the category for Asteraceae and it many subcategories. I have this year (not so much when I first started and without much "how-to" or "what we do" from others interested in the same images) when I encounter a subcategory which contains "articles" and images or just one or the other, I leave the "article" in the category and then categorize it additionally into the subcategory I am making. This is a violation of something I read here about not having a category or article live both in a category and a subcategory, but I am not aggressive enough to remember or start a spam war for such good and logical guidelines. I honestly do not care what you do, what I do care about is that there be really good reason before things I have done become undone. To have a gallery (even some of the really stupid and unmaintained galleries I have seen) displayed in two locations is about as much asskissing as I am going to be doing for this situation. The existing galleries speak for themselves.

To summarize, I don't care what you do. I have been forced to maintain and double nest galleries both well maintained and pathetic. Please do not undo my work without discussion first and do not participate with others who do this. -- carol (talk) 00:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

This is the discussion. Categories should be clean with just the links to the galleries. I don't like the clutter or the arguments so I will go do something else, sorry I disturbed you (and others) who like to double up everything. Bye. WayneRay (talk) 02:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Hello Wayne Perhaps I am confused, and if I am please accept my apology. Father Dennis Kelleher is considered a world renowned Redemptorist Priest with a gift of healing who has been acclaimed by the Catholic Church as a great leader of his time. He founded the Marian Healing Ministry. As vocation director for the Redemptorist, he was responsible for the vocation of many seminarians. He was responsible for the first catholic prayer line. Catholics and non Catholics alike would fill the churches worldwide to overflowing capacity when and where he served mass. In the Catholic church he was one of the first priests who encouraged prayer groups, responsible for healing masses (sanctioned by the Redemptorist order and blessed by the Church) after the second vatican council. He met the greatest of greatest over his life, and they respected him. During his lifetime there were many articles about him and his gifts in the newspapers, magazines, on television, written on him over the years. A book is in the works and if you google his name you will find his homily and other important requests and information on him. I respectfully request his information on wikipedia on behalf of the universities who will research him, the seminarians, the redemptorists, those who are interested in any articles on healing, those who are interested in the beginning of the prayer lines, as will tens of thousands of his other followers worldwide. This great and humble man made a significant impact in this life for so many and is so worthy of mention in wikipedia. He is a true example of a life well lived, selfless and many say one of the more popular Redemptorist priests of our nation and of our time. Thank you for your consideration.

Ecozones and category deletion

Hi WayneRay, Your user name came up in a thread at COM:VP. It is this thread. Do voice your opinion there if you feel like it. Best wishes, -- Slaunger (talk) 23:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There is yet another thread here Commons:Village pump#non-TOL v. TOL; categories vs. galleries. -- Slaunger (talk) 13:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Deutschlands Flora in Abbildungen images

Thanks for filling in some titles. Are you happy that these are current names that should be shown in the Image Decription? I do not see any point in listing the simple plate number - they run from 1 to 64 and then start over again. I think you originally uploaded categorised the images - is there a more significant digit, that would provide a unique identification of each plate? Finally, was there a reason for not uploading including some of the plates (746 of 883 I believe)? Finavon (talk) 01:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I think these are the plate numbers on the original drawings. I remember decades ago seeing similar labeling. I haven't gone through and found the plates you mention I will check them out and place them in the Gallery. If the ones you have finished that are in the Category, can be deleted from there if they are in the Gallery then I could see what is left to organize and alphabetize in the gallery. WayneRay (talk) 12:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Thanks. Yes the plate numbers are on the original images (above the border). However, my point is that they do not appear to be unique - probably 12 or 13 of each number. It would be more useful to include the icon number (1 to 883) from the definitive archive site. We should probably have a direct link to each image on one or other archive.

It is easy to see which images I have "processed" - I am removing border and caption, which are visible in the thumbnails. I intend to compare the gallery and category to confirm completion. If you feel you need to work on the gallery at the same time, could you ensure that all entries have an approved title. I will sort alphabetically. I hope you think the compact TOC is an improvement.

I can see how past limitations of categories may justify not having living things directly in categories based on taxonomy, but I don't see how this extends to a non-taxonomic category such as the book source. I wish to be able to generate an automatic list of all images from a book like this. It may be that all 883 plates are already on Commons, just not in the gallery. If only they had started off in a category! Can we wait and see if there is any consensus on the gallery/category issue before removing anything. Finavon (talk) 13:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I started or created some of the larger galleries actually quite easily and almost everything in Botanical illustrations and Seeds, I did Birds of India, Britton and Brown and one other similar in size to Sturm with 400-700 images and it took me about 20 minutes initially and as I like the tedious detail stuff I then alphabatized everything. If something had already been in a species category I would have just linked it to the Genus or higher order Cat's. It's the duplicate Galleries/Cats I disagree with but Carol and others seem to go with the larger picture, I like simplicity . But you are right It is a Book page not really a taxonomic page so (maybe LOL) I could be wrong. WayneRay (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Image Tagging Image:WreckCoveFortuneBayNL.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:WreckCoveFortuneBayNL.JPG. This image is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org).

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. -Nard 02:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

You state "Fair Use" of a copyright image in the info box. This is not valid on Commons, only on an individual wiki. Finavon (talk) 08:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

My old computer with the permission e-mail burned out 6 months ago, He (the photographer) just wanted his name creditied if it was used. I was just beginning on Wikipedia and Wikimedia so I probably didn't know the proper one to use. I changed it to pd self for now, I will have to e-mail him again for the original permission WayneRay (talk) 12:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

So not PD either. I suggest {{self2|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0|author=Aiden Mahoney}}. Finavon (talk) 13:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

That sucks. I won't nominate it again but there are some people with overly srict interpretations of the rules that will say that's not good enough permission. Put as much info as you can on the image talk page. -Nard 13:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I just corrected with additional information all 6 of his photographs for the Wikipedia articles This is just a image repository of an article by the same name on WP WayneRay (talk) 15:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Village Pump - Summary of responses

Here is a summary of responses based on the above. A * signifies that I interpolated the vote here based on the response above. Please remove the * if you concur with my interpolation. User:Thisisbossi

I have no idea what this means so I can't remove the * on my name or figure out why it is there and under that heading????? WayneRay (talk) 13:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Based on the responses people had written, I attempted to place them into the pro-category or pro-gallery group. However, in your case, I was not quite sure which stance you were taking (if any). Therefore, feel free to move your name into whichever group you feel more accurately fits your viewpoint. Cheers! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 18:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

cats vs gals, time has passed for this?

I have not really liked the feeling that I have that the shortening of the words is being abused both during discussions and via summary messages that appear in watchlists. I will apologize both personally and officially if this feeling of the abuse of the abbreviated word is only a feeling and not a fact. To make it to be not a fact, you could (it has always been your option) type the word category as consistently as you type the word gallery.

I have recently participated in a gallery making bot, btw. I do not like the either/or aspect to how the group mentality works. Galleries have had a place for my ability to work here (select photographs without magnetically going to certain photographers is one of those good things a gallery does, as an example).

I requested a renaming of an image that you uploaded very early in my plant article writing. When I saw it, and that you as a user here had presented yourself as someone who knows something about botany -- my thought was either, "that rat" or "that idiot" and I kept the problem to myself.

If I am in a situation like that again, what do you suggest is the way to handle it? I make mistakes. I am on record as saying I make mistakes. This wiki stuff seems to be not made for people who are able to admit mistakes were made. Was it a mistake or was it something else and when I renamed the image, I put your user name into it. That also might have been a mistake.

In summary: no more "cats" okay? and how to handle mistakes that people make? -- carol (talk) 10:52, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, can you remind me of the mistake I made? I have or had been in horticulture from 1970-1994 and an avid plant and seed collector and taxanomic organizer so no University degree there just my old Britton and Brown etc.. And I only picked up the jargon of abreviated words from reading other Users comments etc. I have aa program called TypeItIn (dot org) that I use for creating Categories and Galleries and other things that automatically types it in with the click of a mouse. The Gallery templates I have been using and adding to over thepast two years is with that. I think it is similar to your templates as well. I admire your photography by the way, I have to get back into it myself and have a few hundred more uploads I am procrastinating at. Cheers. WayneRay (talk) 14:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

If I see the image again, I will point you to it. I don't think you should need a specific image to answer my question though. That question was: If I am in a situation like that again, what do you suggest is the way to handle it?

Is this what you were talking about?? More than likely, help is needed: Category:Systema Naturae

All of a sudden, this category exists. I think that there are people who know better than me how to handle it and where it should subcat to, etc. You are one of them :) -- carol (tomes) 08:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I thought about Botanical illustrations but the book has more words than illustrations. There were a couple of times when I considered uploading the page with the species description for an article. Regardless of all I just mentioned, thanks for looking at it. -- carol (tomes) 18:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I see your point, There is also a Category for Book covers and it only links to itself really so I linked it to illustrations and am going back in to clean up the whole file. WayneRay 18:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

The category you created for Britton et al, it is kind of cool how it stacks up well with good file names. I am certain that like the gallery it too will become large, difficult to download and manage, but at the onset, it is kind of pretty, eh? Thanks again for the expert decision making. -- carol (tomes) 20:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually if my intro is right, these images will have to be put in the Gallery so the Category page should be empty, thanks for reminding me. And you're welcome. WayneRay 20:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

The other question you have not answered is this one: Cats vs gals, time has passed for this? Out of respect, I only typed "Gals" a few times. Do you understand respect? -- carol (talk) 14:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes I do and I have started using the full word, I mentioned that on the new Commons page. I think now that species galleries might be linked to Species Categories if there is one and higher level Categories if not. I personally have no trouble creating Galleries for species collections and as there can be a bit more information Galleries are best for me in most cases. Hope this answers your question. WayneRay (talk) 22:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Scope proposal

• Can you comment on Commons talk:Project scope/Proposal, please? See the last section. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
• Please see Commons talk:Project scope/Proposal#Pdf examples to discuss --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Query

Why exactly did you create this?--Nilfanion (talk) 18:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I was tired of all the penis pictures, I will delete it I just thought we all needed a good laugh. WayneRay (talk) 20:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

OK, no problem (its gone). Bad jokes on that type of imagery tend to be vandal-related not from established users - just curious as to why you'd have done that.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Uncategorized

Please do not remove {{Uncategorized}} without actually categorizing the image or making sure that image is in a proper category.

Categories PD-ScottForesman and Pearson Scott Foresman publisher are about source of the image (donation from Pearson Scott Foresman), not about the content of an image. Categories about content of an image are useful when looking for images of certain subject. --Igno2 (talk) 06:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit: sorry about that, my browser is having a bad day. --Igno2 (talk) 06:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought that was the category? It shows up on my screen as a category. You mean not one single Foresman image is in a gallery or category, they are just listed in the source page? Explain please WayneRay (talk) 12:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Deleting category

I have seen that you recently deleted the category of photos I have made from plants. I fully agree with you that the category is not required and even may disrupt the existing organisation for plants. The problem is the bot BotMultichill that labels each image that does not have a category. There has been a long discussion about it in particular for plants. I had even created a categoy "No category required" that could be added to avoid the label generated by BotMultichill. That was almost immediately deleted. I will consider the label of BotMultichill as spam in future images that are well organized in galleries. Probably you have not seen the discussion about the subject. See [[1]] as the most recent comments about it. Wouter (talk) 17:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Removing categories

Dear WayneRay, please dont remove categories from images. It's considered disruptive behaviour. I reverted your edits. Multichill (talk) 20:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)