User talk:Adam Cuerden/Archive 1

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Drohnenpuppen 79b.jpg[edit]

You forgot to sign your comment! --Simonizer 07:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Franco-Prussian War- Illustrated London News, September 3, 1870.PNG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Franco-Prussian War- Illustrated London News, September 3, 1870.PNG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 13:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Tagging Image:Memorial_to_Seton_Gordon.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Memorial_to_Seton_Gordon.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Oxam Hartog 22:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Divers - Illustrated London News Feb 6 1873.PNG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Divers - Illustrated London News Feb 6 1873.PNG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--MichaelMaggs 19:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Bienenwabe_mit_Eiern_und_Brut_5.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Bienenwabe_mit_Eiern_und_Brut_5.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 07:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Napoleon III after Death - Illustrated London News Jan 25 1873-2.PNG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Napoleon III after Death - Illustrated London News Jan 25 1873-2.PNG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 09:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Franco-Prussian_War-_Illustrated_London_News,_September_17,_1870_-_Discussing_the_War_in_a_Paris_Café_-_right.PNG[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 08:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PNG images not displaying[edit]

As a matter of intentional policy for over a year now, PNG and GIF images with dimensions greater than about 12 megapixels are not resized... AnonMoos 09:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Crown Prince Frederick William of Prussia - Illustrated London News August 20, 1870 - Crop.PNG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Crown Prince Frederick William of Prussia - Illustrated London News August 20, 1870 - Crop.PNG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 20:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry[edit]

Thanks, Adam Cuerden, but I don't feel offended by the bad rating of my pictures. I realized my photograpies were no high quality, that is truth, so I decided waiting to take good photos with other camera. --Archivaldo 08:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However I continue uploading my photos on Commons. --Archivaldo 08:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Lincoln_Memorial_(south_wall_interior).jpg[edit]

Hm. I just loaded it from both the Tampa and AMS datacenters without any problems. Are you on a really low power system that might choke on a 60mpixel image? Part of the reason I didn't upload the 240mpixel orignal is because it's big enough to give some computers a very hard time (and also because the corners suffer enough at that resolution that they don't need more than 60mpixels). --Gmaxwell 01:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      • I'm glad it works for younow. It's tilted? Hm. By what measure? The structure itself is huge and it's not perfectly straight, (for example the outer edges of the frame around the text are not straight in reality... I actually had to go back and measure to convince myself of that.). I was concerned though and checked the image. Here is the test image I created. I pulled guides down in gimp on horizontal lines on the back wall and compared the extreme left and right. I did the same for a vertical line near the center (there are fewer good vertical lines to choose from in the image). I used an electronic level and was pretty careful to get the camera straight to avoid perspective distortion. But it's still possible that I screwed something up, so if you can suggest another way to look at it, I'm all ears. Thanks! --Gmaxwell 05:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

--Simonizer 07:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:The Princess - W. S. Gilbert.png[edit]

Hi Adam. I've fixed the thumbnail link on the image description page. You just need to use "thumb" instead of "frame", e.g. "Image:Name.png|thumb|left|200px|Unretouched picture". Btw, I noticed one of your posts saying that you didn't have any imaging software. In that case, you might wish to give the GIMP a try. The programme is GFDL so you can download and use it free of charge. Happy editing. Valentinian (talk) 08:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Davenport[edit]

Not much seems to have been written about him, though his life is fairly well documented. He was born in Bedford and was apprenticed to Charles Warren in London from about 1797-1804. It looks like he produced all of his engravings of Hogarth works for Trusler as co-engraver alongside Thomas Cook between 1806-09, but I can't find anybody giving an opinion on his work. My personal opinion is that Gin Lane is fairly flawless. It's not as fine as Hogarth's original, but you'd be hard pushed to find a difference. Beer Street is a little lazier. If you have access to the ODNB they have an entry for Davenport. Yomangani 09:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

--Mywood 15:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP - Fungi[edit]

Ram-Man takes nice pictures too. I tend to agree with him about some distortion from the wide angle, but it doesn't bother me (nor too many others by the look of it) so I ignored it :-)

I think the Geastrum (I haven't worked it out yet either) is a bit grainy to nominate. I need to do the ID and possibly some Photoshop work there... --WikiWookie 00:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Set Candidates[edit]

Hi Adam,

Thanks a lot for helping me bring VI to life! I have tested your adding procedure and it is a good start. I know it is quite some work to do these things so I really appreciate it.

I have run into a few problems with your initial version of {{VISC}}. First of all I had 16 images in my test set, secondly I cant see the captions and finally it does not work when transcluded into the candidate list. I do not have time to look at the templates right now, I hope you do?

A few thoughts.

  • Maybe it would be a good idea just to have a gallery parameter instead of the image_n/caption_n? In the VISC template we then show the images in a table cell as
<gallery widths="depending on orientation">
{{{gallery|}}}
</gallery>

Many would nominate using an existing gallery as the base material. Makes life easier. 

<gallery>
{{{gallery|}}}
</gallery>

What do you think? -- Slaunger 11:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I think it is the pipe (|) characters within the gallery which is being confused as being parts of a wikitable. I tried to have a look at the well-known {{Information}} template, where i know it works to add a gallery to the other_versions parameter. It seems like the problem can be solved by switcing to using table html tags insyead of the wikitable syntax within the table. Not very nice to look at syntactically, but it works apparently. -- Slaunger 16:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion/Proposition[edit]

I'm willing to do some photoshopping on [1] if you're interested in a co-nomination.

E-mail me if you're interested. Jaakobou 10:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated here for now... hope you like... I may make minor tweaks on the colored version a tad more in the future... maybe... anyways, that's what I've got done for now.
btw, thank you for your help on the Chiefs smaller previews.
Cheers, Jaakobou 15:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

--Mywood 09:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:Hey[edit]

Hi, Adam,
Thank you for your question. I responded it at the image nomination. I hope you saw it. Best.--Mbz1 15:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Galleries with parameters[edit]

Hi Adam, Found a way through where parameters can be expanded in a gallery.

Example: 

{{User:Slaunger/Sandbox/TestTag
  |widthspx=480
  |heightspx=360
  |image1=Image:Iceberg near sanderson hope 2007-07-24 1.jpg
  |caption1=Iceberg near Sanderson hope|
  |image2=Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 1.jpg|
  |caption2=...with a hole in it.}}

gives:


Unfortunately, this implies we need to split the input image and captions into seperate parameters as you did previously or educate users into using {{!}}, but it is way through. -- Slaunger 16:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, you misunderstand me. This is the size to use on the review page in the preview page, normal thumbnail size galleries will be used with template switching exactly as is done with the VICs. Get it? -- Slaunger 17:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done! What do you think? I am not too keen on the {{!}}, which users have to add as image-caption seperator, but besides that I think it is darn cool. -- Slaunger 22:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Lohengrin - Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Lohengrin - Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Mywood 12:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Scanning[edit]

Wow, amazing. Great work. Richard001 23:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks[edit]

Dear Adam Cuerden,
Thank you for supporting my Request for Adminship. I’m honored by your trust and will do my best to help build a better site. Durova 20:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Start small, close obvious deletion discussions. Get bolder with experience. Pretty soon Commons will have ten thousand images! (giggles, flees) ;)

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

--Mywood 11:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Le Grand Palais depuis le pont Alexandre III à Paris.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Le Grand Palais depuis le pont Alexandre III à Paris.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Mywood 12:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Spirit's West Valley Panorama (PIA10216).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Spirit's West Valley Panorama (PIA10216).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Mywood 12:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

--Mywood 21:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Trial by Jury - Chaos in the Courtroom.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Trial by Jury - Chaos in the Courtroom.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Mywood 08:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratualations! Durova 16:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scanning help[edit]

Hi again Adam. I'm going to upload the images from Henry Walter Bates' Naturalist on the River Amazons soon, but I want to do as good a job as I can of it, so I'd like to get some more advice from you. Here's a sample image: Image:Naturalist figure 1.JPG. This one is 200dpi (almost certainly too low; what would you suggest?); JPG (would PNGs be better/should I upload both JPG and PNG?); it is in grayscale (this is the best option, right?). Is there any other advice you can give? Richard001 09:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using Microsoft Office Document Scanning. The settings for dpi I have available are 200, 300, 400, 600 and 1200, and the images range in size from quite small to a full page. I'll upload as PNGs, but do you think uploading JPGs as well would be any use? I noticed the texture of the paper as well. I'm not sure if I can fix this myself though, and don't see any graphs I can adjust. The only thing I can see is a setting under 'advanced' called 'Auto-contrast, save as monochrome', which doesn't sound very promising. Would it be fixable after the scan is done, e.g. by the Graphics Lab?
One other thing: there are some images that are non-rectangular, with text in the scanned area (you'll have to look at the source as the page render this all wrong):

______ |P __| |i |T |c |e | |x |__|t

What should I do with these; just upload them as is and let someone tweak them?
Please keep in mind I have very little image editing experience and limited availability to software. Richard001 22:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have scanned 13 of the images today. There are still about 30 more to go. They are all 600dpi and fairly big in file size (10MB each and more). I've cropped them all a little. What sort of prep work do you want me to do first? Should I crop them all down to fairly minimal size and save them as PNG?
It seems I do have photoshop here as well, though I don't have much of a clue when it comes to using it. Richard001 02:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've emailed them to you. Richard001 09:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't heard back from your email so I've started uploading some of these myself. I didn't think you were still active here, but looking at your contribs it's clear you are. What do you think of the ones I've uploaded? Should I continue with this? Richard001 04:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So what do you think of the ones I have uploaded? See Category:The Naturalist on the River Amazons and Category:The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. Richard001 06:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you notice my question about the attachments I sent you? Seems my scanning work might have been in vain if they are all corrupted. Richard001 04:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP pomotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Apollo 15 flag, rover, LM, Irwin.jpg , that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Apollo 15 flag, rover, LM, Irwin.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

-- Alvesgaspar 16:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued images evaluation[edit]

Dear Adam Cuerden,

This is a standard message to the 18 different users who so far have been involved in testing Valued images candidates as either a nominator, reviewer or project editor. We are interested in hearing what you think about the project and what your positive and negative experiences have been. We would be grateful if you would voice your opinion here. Thank you,

-- Slaunger 19:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rocks - Große Heuscheuer..jpg[edit]

Hello. I'm no geologist too, but I think this is sandstone - Pudelek 08:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geologist from Polish Wikipedia tell me, that this rock is sandstone. In Góry Stołowe (Table Mountaine) there aren't granite, but there are many sandstones. Pudelek 17:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Giggy (bureaucrat)[edit]

Thanks for your question here Adam (and in response to your second comment, no, I understood your point the first time...don't worry! :). I've answered as best I could. Cheers, giggy (:O) 07:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Types of Stitches used in sutures, from Dictionnaire Encyclopédique des Sciences Médicales (1884).png[edit]

Hi. In the above iamge you've specified what figures 8 thorugh 11 depict but the image shows figures 7 thorugh 10. If you still have acess to the book could please add the description for fig. 7? Thanks /Lokal_Profil 03:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed with the Valued images project[edit]

As you may have seen, this project is going live for nominations on 1 June, 2008 at 0:00 UTC. Before then, there are a few things to be finished off, and any help you can give will be welcome. The latest discussion is at Commons talk:Valued images candidates#Open action items for Valued images.

When the project launches publicly on 1 June, it will need reviewers who are able to jump in quickly and provide prompt feedback. During those critical first few weeks it will be important to have a decent number of reviewers who are prepared to put in the effort to make sure the first nominations are well-reviewed, as that will set the standard for the future.

Would you help, please, with the final tasks now, and also pledge your help with some reviewing on 1 June and thereafter? --MichaelMaggs 17:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giggy's RfB[edit]

G'day

I just wanted to say a huge thanks for your support in my RfB. It just closed, and I'm now a bureaucrat. If you ever want to discuss any of my actions, as a 'crat, admin, or plain old user, please don't hesitate to leave a note on my talk page.

Cheers, giggy (:O) 10:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued images test review phase has ended[edit]

Dear Adam

Thank you for participating in the development of the Valued images project by test nominating one or more candidates. We have used the input from the test reviews to fine-tune the guidelines, process and templates used, hereby hopefully improving the setup.

We have now decided that on June 1, 2008 at 0:00 (UTC), the valued image project will be opened for official nominations. To get ready for the grand opening, we will close down the last remaining open test candidates in a few hours, such that the candidates list pages are emptied and ready.

Since there has been a certain amount of instruction creep over the course of the test review pahse, we have decided that all promoted and declined candidates from the test review phase will be reset to the so-called "undecided" state prior to the opening. This means that test valued image candidate review pages all end up in Category:Undecided valued images candidates and the test sets end up in Category:Undecided valued image set candidates.

The votes from the original test review will be archived in a previous reviews subpage and reset upon renomination.

Although all nominations will be reset, you, as a test nominator, will still have the advantage that each candidate can be re-nominated beginning June 1 0:00 UTC. The votes from the original test review will be archived in a previous reviews subpage and reset upon renomination. Click on the links to the aforementioned categories for instruction on how to renominate.

In addition, the project has decided to re-nominate all candidates, which were test promoted, unless you tell us not to do so on my talk page. Also, do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or problems relating to valued images.

I hope, you will also take part in the project once it goes on the air, either as nominator, maintainer and/or reviewer.

Happy editing, -- Slaunger 21:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VI seal

WHOOPS!!!![edit]

I am so sorry - I didnt even realize that they were different images. I find this rather funny considering I am intimately familiar with them both!! I have a better scan and colored version of the Illustrated London newspaper image - this image is taken from the original souvenir libretto from 1843 - I can replace the London newspaper image - I got them mixed up, something I dont normally do! Thanks for fixing it :)

--02:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC) mrlopez2681 :)

VIC: DaVinci MonaLisa1b.jpg[edit]

[en] I changed the scope of Commons:Valued image candidates/DaVinci MonaLisa1b.jpg slightly, adding the word "comparison" to make it a little clearer, in case you'd like to recast your vote. — Loadmaster 23:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the svg within[edit]

I have been enjoying the stream of images to be seen in FPC and in QIC for more than a year now. The feeling that the proceedings there is rigged and the actual experience with the rigging of it; I only nominate images that I am certain will fail and not too often either. Such was my bug. I drew that in August of 2006 and it has served its purpose well since then and should for many years. I am only sorry that I did not draw a similar Chevrolet Impala and Dodge Tradesman van for the story.

This should be a slightly too long thank you for your kind words. GIMP makes svg, they are immature (they do not know about gradients and the decision about line width and stroke type are made by the artist and not remembered by the stored simple paths). I considered exporting them and managing them with inkscape which is entirely possible but with the knowledge and the experience that the proceedings there are rigged, why bother? Six GIMP svg made this image, six different line widths -- I am kind of proud of the image. I grew up surrounded by people who drew cars well (instead of taking notes for class and such). This one is not bad; probably because I traced it.

The nomination was the real attempt to make art; I was emulating one of the riggers of the Candidate streams here, as sorry as I am to admit both parts of that, I am not sorry I about what I was emulating, that was quite beautiful actually here I supported it after my attempt was only given a little bit of time. Those nominations went up together on May 27. I tried to do the same thing here and here. I was going to state that occasionally, all three (CFPC, ENFPC and CQIC) get worked similarly but instead I should say that occasionally I am able to see it. Since it is an open forum probably the truth is a little of both statements.

And you are correct, btw. I have drawn with inkscape some and the application is designed for perfect and symmetrical designs. No flaws, no joining errors, no blobs at connections. Fanatical accuracy and perfect shining surfaces. I have had a couple of friends who played coronet; they really liked the musicians who could take that instrument to the extremes. I would watch them listening with both ears and full body while I tried to plug my ears. That doesn't have anything with what I was trying to say about the difference between drawing with GIMP and drawing with Inkscape, but I can't think of anything else....

Thanks for the vote, you should go back there and oppose it though because the damn thing is rigged to do that! -- carol (tomes) 22:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

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

--Simonizer (talk) 11:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Loligo vulgaris.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Loligo vulgaris.jpg/2 has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer (talk) 14:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thespis[edit]

Hi Adam, an embarrassingly long period of time has passed without having closed your Thespis promotion. Could you take a look at my latest post on COM:VIC talk: Commons talk:Valued image candidates#Valued image sets and see if this makes sense to you? The scope in that particular nomination is btw extremely long. That is the reason i propose having an optional titlescope parameter for generating and linking to a Valued image sets:<scope> gallery page. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:52, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/SB Johnny (checkuser)[edit]

Oh, dude. Not you. No. I refer to the rush of users with no, or little, other edits to Commons. The actual clique of users on en that, if you are no longer active there, you may not be aware of... although, considering where you previously edited on en, I would think you surely know. I don't discount all the opposes. But I feel that some of them are exaggerated, and surely canvassing has taken place. I don't believe that the fact that they have no other edits is a reason to discount their vote, however, I find it interesting that they've come here as a group, after denying that they are a clique on en, during RFC and ArbCom, etc. That is what I was speaking of.

I'll go back and look at my comment again. Perhaps I should reword to be more specific. My apologies for offending you. Surely not my intention. LaraLove|Talk 05:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem. I checked back at my wording. I think it seems specific to people who just created an account to vote in that request. I'm not sure how to reword it. Regardless, I feel for people who are concerned about "outing", but I don't consider it true outing if the information has been published by you (the person "outed"). Durova's information, as far as I am aware, was publicized by her on WP and her blog. So she really outed herself and shouldn't be jumping on everyone, screaming stalker and harassment, for her own mistakes. That's how I feel about it. And I also don't appreciate this same group of editors, who I have battled (in a sense) on WP, and who have denied they are a group that work together to further goals outside of their wikiproject, proving themselves as... well, I'm sure you get the idea. They say one thing, evidence proves another. LaraLove|Talk 17:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Punch - Volume 79, Isuue ?[edit]

Hi, I see you have uploaded Image:Punch - Offenbach elegy.png. I want to add the text to Wikisource [2] (the text will align properly on the final page), and I want to know a few details about that issue of Punch, and I thought you might be able to give them to me.

It would seem that this issue from 1880 is part of volume 79 (per eBay[3]), and it is issue 14 (per this page on WS[4]).

I want to know if I got that right, so that I can add the final page in the correct category on WS. diego_pmc (talk) 09:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, yeah deal! =)) I was looking for someone that could scan a whole issue for me anyway, so that I could but it on WS. I'm awaiting your future reply. I'm not sure, but I might not be available in two weeks, but still, please scan those. My unavailableness won't last long.
Thanks for the info so far. If you want you can see the actual page here. diego_pmc (talk) 15:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Valued image candidates/The Great Wave off Kanagawa.jpg[edit]

Hi Adam,

I have run into problems with my own lack of competences in a VI review. The subject matter seems vaguely related to the sort of contributions you make and I was wondering if you would consider reviewing it? -- Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Songs of the Birds[edit]

Unfortunately I'm currently working on Index:Goody Two-Shoes (1881).djvu, and I don't want to overload myself with another book until I finish this one. But in case you have a PD newspaper around the house, I'd be happy to give hat a priority. That's why I'd like to have the scans of that Punch volume you said you wanted to order. WS doesn't really have a well defined standard when it comes to newspapers and the like, and I think I have a pretty good idea, and want to see what the rest of the community thinks. diego_pmc (talk) 06:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued image set: Thespis, opera[edit]

Something, which has staled for too long... What do you think? See also my latest thread on COM:VIC. -- Slaunger (talk) 12:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shakespeare the feminist[edit]

Consider (and perhaps locate if it exists) Shakespeare the feminist as it surely seemed in the Merry Wives of Windsor. One of my personal all time favorite quotes was about the stench that was experienced when they dug the old guy out of the public plumbing system (which I believe they called the Thames) where he was in a basket (?). It has been a while since I have read this and seen it, but the shakespearian semi-prose which was the verbalization of the stench that arose from the old guy -- one of my favorites! My inability to remember the names and the quote exactly is perhaps not the best way to express my love of and familiarity with a few of WS more well known works; I also have a strong feeling that within a medium such as the internet, people should be requested to do what they are good at.

It is difficult for me to imagine that an etching of that scene and quote do not exist -- the quote was a standout both when I read that and when I saw it performed. -- carol (talk) 04:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Valued image candidates/Great Wave unrestored.jpg[edit]

I added Durovas alternative as a competing image in an MVR. Vote on it, if you feel like it. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naturalist on the River Amazons update[edit]

Hi Adam

I thought I had lost these images when I tried to download one attachment that I sent you and found it to be corrupted. It seems it was just the connection, as I have managed to recover almost all of them now. I'm making gradual progress at getting them all online. You mentioned that this image might be good for a featured picture candidate or something like that. What do you think of it? What would it require to become a candidate? Do you think I should leave the caption in or crop it as I have done with most of the other images? Should the other two smaller images of the same thing be deleted now? Richard001 (talk) 06:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VI[edit]

Hi Adam, I've decided to wade into those muddy waters. Could you check the Dead Sea scroll I nominated? Somehow I got the format wrong, but not sure where the mistake is. Probably some small typo. Best, Durova (talk) 19:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Unlike FPC you should not add Image: in the sub page name for the default parameters to work. This is to make the scheme better prepared for an internationalized scenarion. The fix is to edit the subpage parameter on the subpage such that it matches the subpage. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there[edit]

Hello. I'm taking a break from Wiki-politics and aggravation by doing some calm categorisation, chemical structures and wildlife photos on Commons, good to see you around as well. TimVickers (talk) 20:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support cluster[edit]

Thank you so much for these. Cirt (talk) 20:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Care to draft up a "cluster" version of this one as well? Could be something useful at en:Wikipedia:Good topic candidates... Cirt (talk) 20:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you so much! Cirt (talk) 05:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review


Image:박향림 오빠는 풍각쟁이.ogg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:박향림 오빠는 풍각쟁이.ogg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Caspian blue (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I did not nominate it for deletion, but just notify you of this instead of Zginder (talk · contribs). --Caspian blue (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huard[edit]

I've got an illustrator named Huard working ca. 1870-1880, probably in London. Drawing a blank. Any ideas?[5] Haukurth (talk) 16:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it was "L. Huard", active already in 1861. Still can't find what the initial stands for or the death date of the artist. Haukurth (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Louis Huard? Haukurth (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All right, I've satisfied myself that it was Louis Huard (1813-1874).[6][7][8] Safe to upload. Sorry for the spam! Haukurth (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Set Promotion[edit]

Congratulations!
The set of images you created for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Thespis, opera.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
All known contemporary images of the original performance of Thespis, the lost Gilbert and Sullivan opera.
review

Hardly a surprise for you. It merely indicates:

  1. Congratz with the first VIS to be promoted on Commons
  2. I am finally done defining the procedure for VIS closure and make the templates work.

Cheers, -- Slaunger (talk) 22:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothy Hardy[edit]

Any chance you're familiar with a Dorothy Hardy? Haukurth (talk) 23:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Taming_of_the_Shrew.jpg[edit]

Am I right in thinking you don't have a year of death for W. Thomas? (Not a criticism, I'm just trying to figure out community norms.) Haukurth (talk) 20:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it en:William Luson Thomas? Lupo 09:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying this. Lupo 08:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Thespis - Illustrated London News Jan 6 1872.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Thespis - Illustrated London News Jan 6 1872.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Benh (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ragotin.mid[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 informations 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 (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 01:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Ragotin.ogg[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 informations 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 (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 01:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam_Cuerden/Archive_1&oldid=860731425"