User talk:Rocket000/Archive

	This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the this page.
	Archive 1 - Archive 2 - Archive 3 - Archive 4 - Archive 5 - Archive 6 - Archive 7 - Archive 8

English: Welcome to the Commons, Rocket000!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 08:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Tux icons

A icon is not similar to its displayed subject. Tux, like “Mickey mouse” is not an icon.

Please, don't impair the classification of files in Commons, as long as you have not understood the basic principles about categorization. --Juiced lemon 20:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You forgot...

... to sign here. Regards. Lycaon 22:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Tango icons category

Hi Rocket000,

The images which you have moved out of Category:Images incorporating Tango icons were in that category for a specific reason: so that they were distinguishable from the original Tango icons. I will be moving the images back when I have time. Please do not make any such changes in the future without consensus, e.g. on Category talk:Images incorporating Tango icons. --bdesham ★ 15:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I also have no idea why you have subst:ed all of the Tango icon templates. There was no need to do this, and now any changes to the template will need to be made to dozens of individual image pages instead of to one template. --bdesham ★ 15:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

note

please see [1]. cheers. Jaakobou 11:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

re: Commons:Ownership of pages and files

Hi,

That line has been part of that page for over a year, since 11 August 2006. The page Commons:Manipulating meta data is about precisely that topic and has been in existence since 28 December 2004, and I have never seen anyone call it controversial. So please show me anyone that thinks that embedding copyright information in EXIF data is "controversial".

Do you think it is controversial? If so, why? If not, then what is this about?

regards, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I see you are very anti-metadata. :)

IMO the extra file size is not a serious concern, and I am surprised to hear that people bother editing SVGs just to remove metadata. That doesn't seem like a good idea to me (not to mention a colossal waste of time).

You are right that the existing pages are written with photographs and JPG EXIF in mind, rather than SVGs. However I don't think there's a good justification for treating them radically differently. At any rate Commons:Manipulating meta data is indeed the place to duke it out so if you feel this is a serious matter, I hope you will start a discussion on that talk page.

BTW, nice contribs :) Always good to have more SVGers around. cheers --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

SVG Logo License

I emailed Harvey Rainer who won the logo competition, and the gist of what he said he just designed it, and that the question of licensing was not a matter for him and should be addressed to Doug Shepers who organised the competition (among a whole lot of other things). I had a brief email exchange with Doug about this license issue, and it seemed to be going well, but for some reason I have had no response in 3 weeks to my last two attempts to contact him. Globbet 21:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC) More: He has updated his blog in the last couple of days - he's been to Japan. Globbet 22:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

No. No progress, unfortunately. I emailed Doug Schepers again on 2007-11-29 but either it is not getting through for some reason or he is ignoring me for some reason. Perhaps you could try: doug@schepers.cc? Globbet 11:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Update: I had an email from Doug today. He has not forgotten, but it is ramified. Globbet 01:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA?

Hey Rocket - I noticed somewhere on one of the admin noticeboards a while back that you implied you might like to be an admin. I've looked over some of your contribs, and would like to nominate you. What do you say? — Giggy 06:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Rocket000 - Good luck! Transclude it when you're ready :) — Giggy 07:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Poty2007 emails

Ah, thanks for the notice. I did fix this problem some time ago, but I accidentally copied the old files over the new ones again ;) I'll fix it when I'm home. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Love it!

"Fair cop" - I was just trying to avoid the sort of en wp stuff that can almost take over RfAs (never mind yesterday's can't think of a suitable word). A reason - for or against can be useful for all - we'll see what happens. Make sure you don't get stuck in anything too nasty elsewhere by the way - you seem to be doing fine so far but as others told me about something (!) there are times just to step back as well. Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Tartan ribbon featured picture candidate

I pulled up some information from the English language Wikipedia where this image has been featured for a year. Hope it's sufficient?[2] Durova 22:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

commons crap

I am going to assume that you exist here and now because I did not finish going through the delta rockets category here and find each payload for them.

This is kind of a boring assumption, yet there is little that suggests otherwise. -- carol 03:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

... Huh? What are you talking about? - Rocket000 03:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Category:Delta (rocket) <-- I was for a while there working through these images. The physics instructor at my university who was really into rockets told me that a rocket without a payload is -- I kind of forgot the quote but the gist was that a rocket without a payload is an embarrassment.

I was categorizing all of the rockets by their launch order something like ~0001 so it would appear at the end of the list of subcategories from the place it was launched from. I was in way over my head with this task for several reasons. 1) my expertise and 2) the number of images and launches. It was a good project here -- I had difficulty not filing the rockets by the actual launch area within the different launch compounds.

I have noticed this tendency at these wiki for new users to start when it seems that a slacker or chatter is on hand. I am not sure what the purpose for that would be, perhaps it is people who are slacking themselves who prefer to become tormentors. I have seen other organizations, both public and private do this kind of thing -- such is my problem with you and your wiki name.

So, that is all I know and think about this -- you should not be hearing again from me on it. -- carol 04:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

First, let me apologize for responding on your talk page instead of here, I never know what others prefer.

Second, I had no idea you were talking about my name. I know nothing about rockets, I just picked it because it sounded cool. I would have never have chosen it if I thought it might cause problems for someone. I would gladly change it for you, but I've been using this name for years now. I use it everywhere and it's the only online name I use (except for Brad, which is my real name). This is how people know me. This is the first time anyone has ever said anything about it. I'm really sorry you have a problem with my username, but I hope you understand. Cheers, Rocket000 04:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I heard that there are 3000 images uploaded to the commons a day -- that in itself is enough to make some people to be various shades of psychotic; I think that this information is fun though. Then there is software which marks images as needing this or that and people that run it. Then there is the war between Creative Commons and GPL -- which, there is a huge difference and it should be easy for people to figure that out. However, in my life, perhaps, people did not understand that donating time and effort did not mean that you donated your stuff and your position in life as well. I am responding (or was) to your sudden appearance voting, your name and the fact that I have that project sitting there not even half finished as well as somethings I saw on English Wikipedia which made my almost accusations here make sense.

My next essay might be "when software votes" or also "when people have a lot of time on their hands so they create a lot of users so they can vote often". I myself have the option to log in to here from three different computers so I could have different users with different IP. I am not so multi-personalitied though, just my sense of humor gets tired. If the inconsistancy continues, and I choose to think that it is human beings there -- then the essay will be "pack mentality" and that is sad and makes me constantly check to see what century it is right now.

So, this was supposed to be an apology and I should stop before all signs of that completely disappear from text and minds. And I also have no idea where to respond to peoples questions and I forgot to watch it so, if you knew that, responding on my talk page was the logical thing to do -- which is all part of the spooky. -- carol 11:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

FP, sunsets etc.

Hi, I work on pl wiki with other users, which want to use all Commons FP images. So, not only sunsets are "useless". Often good photos have not good description, they are often not used in any articles in Wikipediacs to. So, we can't use them to. I found maybe 20-30 orphan's images. The project is on this page. Look at this - where could I use it? In postcard or Tourism? :) The best practice (IMO) is, when uploader use an image on sister project(s), if hi put it on FPC. Don't worry - we will try to use them ;), but the world would be easier.... Best regards (and sorry for my ugly English). Przykuta 21:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Condor mediation

Thanks for your help. Apollon 16:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Small_skew_star.gif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Small_skew_star.gif. 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|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version 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. OsamaK 09:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

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

Rocket000, congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and Commons:Deletion requests), 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.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net. You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading.

Please also check or add your entry to Commons:List_of_administrators and the related lists by language and date it references...

EugeneZelenko 14:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Good to see and keep the good work you are doing --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! RedCoat 16:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

and from me as well. --MichaelMaggs 19:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! :-) I do recognize that I got quite upset seeing some oppose votes that I didn't consider as fair (and I'm not talking about you). However, what you've just said is true: this issue is far from being personal for me. I do think that I can be useful for Commons (even if I will be a part-time administrator) but not being appointed won't be a drama at all. Therefore, I did appreciate your frank comments and the provided arguments (even if I didn't deserve your vote). Congratulations. --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 17:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations :) I will be happy to work with you now as an admin. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 23:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Congrats :) — Giggy 00:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Congrats from me too :) Deadstar (msg) 08:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Help

Hi Rocket000. As you've an administrator now and you probably knows Commons procedures better than me, I'm requesting your help. Which is the procedure when an image is requested to be deleted and also it happened in the past (though being kept)? In that situation, the deletion page already exists and I don't know whether the old page must be moved and a new deletion page be started or just adding the new arguments to the already existing page. The problem is in Image:Sr flg.jpg. At the moment, I'm using the second option, but let me know whether I've done it in the bad way. Best regards and many thanks in advance --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 15:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC) PS: I you wish to provide your oppinion about the image, it would be nice.

A Couple of things

• First, congratulations on your shiny new adminship. A am sure you will be valuable. Just don't spend too much time here.
• A while ago I put a question on the admin noticeboard, but nobody replied. Perhaps it was the wrong place to ask, or just too boring. As an 'acquaintance', would you be so kind as to cast your administrative eye over it?
• Did you notice I replied above on the SVG licence issue? Globbet 18:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

No prob, but I was asking if you would try to contact Doug, as I don't seem to able to. Globbet 23:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC) oops, I did not see the last word of your reply Globbet 00:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Rocket000, thank you for nominating my picture and many congrats for your new adminship. --LucaG 21:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hornby

Hi, the reason I attempted to delete the Hornby page was that I thought it duplicated by Category:Hornby Railways and therefore a potential source of confusion. When I created it I was a novice and was not completely sure of the difference between a page and a category. What do you think about the matter? Oxyman 20:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

??????????

Mas eu usei a licensa adequada no logotipo do Windows Vista. Quem és tu? É dos Estados Unidos da América?Template:Portuguese

Vhg msn 00:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, Rocket. As I already said, I deeply appreciate your comments in my recent nomination. Finally, I've been appointed and I'm ready to go on working (this time with some extra buttons). If you need anything from me, don't hesitate to contact me. I'll be glad to help. Best regards and thank you again. --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 21:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've got a number of opened deletion requests on the grounds of being a derivative work. I'd appreciate your comments (however, it's too late and I'm going to sleep; more tomorrow). Best regards and thank you --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 23:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Here I am again :-) I've left a question in the Village Pump (Commons:Village_pump#Derivative_works). Would you mind adding your comments or opinions over there? Best regards and many thanks in advance --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 22:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Kampania_Przeciw_Homofobii_Ad_sesssion.jpg

Hello, could you tell me why you deleted this file? This file has been released on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kampania_Przeciw_Homofobii_Ad_sesssion.jpg under cc-by-sa-2.5 license. --Plywak 20:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Question_book.png

Image deletion warning

Image:Question_book.png 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!

71.135.39.34 04:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

"I don't know" is not a good reason. Incomplete nom. Rocket000 05:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yep

Got a point there. I've amended it now - I guess I really wanted something to identify bot page type stuff (usually spambot but I have come across vandal bot pages too) from actual link placement. See what you think and thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hum - added another one "no media on page" - any good? Covers IPs attempts to create image pages - feel free to improve on it :) Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Excellent - go for it. And thanks for all the work while I'm here :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hum - for example? However you are right for a conventional image in the there is no drop down. That said I wonder if there is a media wiki page that would allow us to create reasons - I keep finding media wiki pages I knew nothing about which, be default, are blank... --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Question_book.png

Image deletion warning

Image:Question_book.png 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!

71.135.58.25 05:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

OK. What's the point here? You're not even doing it right. Please stop. If you really want this deleted - give a valid reason; I'll even complete the request for you. Rocket000 05:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Hi Rocket, you're definitely right. Even if the request was malformed, I should have taken more care about its processing. I'll be more careful :-) Best regards --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 21:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Image:Fulvia.jpg

You're very right, but I read a debate on what to do with old copyvios (I can't find it now) because they may be linked to many wikipedias and a speedydeletion would create moans, so I prefered to open a deletion request and delete the image after some days. As for the nominations, you're also right, I'll have to practise the damned, complicated process :( Anna 18:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Point Tupper Unfirestopped openings pictures

Thanks for your support! --Achim Hering 04:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Golden backed woodpecker

sorry for the cofusion Rocket. it happened becuase I uploaded the ppicture from my flickr page thinking that I freed the licence when the file was uploaded I knew that it was not free. then I had to change it manually at both the ends. (flickr and wiki) thats why the trouble. Sorry again. --Challiyan 10:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Reported

Sorry, but I had to report you (here) for your abusive closing of a procedure which was getting a large consensus for deletion, and for the vaguely xenophobic nature of such act. I wish I was wrong but you left me no choice. 8 Italian voters are no less valuable than one single American, and you can't cut short our legitimate issues as ridicolous. -- Blackcat it 15:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Understandable. However, you completely misread the situation. Nationality had nothing to do with it. I didn't even know what nationality you guys where, nor cared. Oh well, let's see how it goes :-) Rocket000 15:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You say I misread the situation? So what is the right way to read it, in your opinion? Beside of nationality the abuse remains... Blackcat it 15:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll let others explain that to you, so you know, it's not just my opinion. Rocket000 15:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Reisio is still at it

Another personal attack to me: here he inserted (actually restored) a section heading with my name and a link to the community ban on en.wiki, removing the heading related to the section argument.

He has been attacking me and showing disrespectful manners against me since July, at least; I have been ignoring his attacks for such a long time; when I reported them I was put under trial (you wrote: "Actually, a block may already be in order. Reisio should have been the one that came here"); we were both warned, but he is still at his hostile behaviour. Why he is allowed such a behaviour? Will someone finally take action against him, or hhe is under a sort of immunity? --TcfkaPanairjdde 23:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Many Thanks

Dear Rocket000,
Thank you for taking part in my Requests for Adminship. The RfA was successful and I am now an administrator here. There were concerns over my temperament from respected editors, and I have taken these concerns on board, with the aim of being a more polite and courteous administrator both here and on the English Wikipedia. If you need help with anything, here or on the English Wikipedia, such as history from deleted images and such, please don't hesitate to shout. My door is always open, so to speak. Nick 20:42, 6 January 2008 (UTC). This template was made by Miranda on English Wikipedia.

Your deletion of Ferro

• 13:50, 7 January 2008 Rocket000 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Ferro" ‎ (Page is out of project scope: content was: 'Part of map of Upper Silesia (1746)...' (and th)

I'd say that understanding longitudes given in relation to Ferro (rather than the modern default of Greenwich), as shown on the old maps collected in this project, is very well in its scope. Please restore the page to a useful one. --Matthead 16:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry!

Sorry for the Problem! It was an old bug already fixed but I haven't understood why, there were still processes running from 2007 (no idea, don't ask me why :-S). So now they are killed and I'm checking why these processes were still alive. Thanks for the message! I've really appreciated your warning :-) Thanks again, bye, --Filnik 14:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi

The correct use of the template:Welcome is thus: {{subst:Welcome}}. Greetings, BetoCG 04:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

APWebsite

Hi, you suppressed {{APWebsite}} that I created.
This templates is very important for 2 reasons:

• It is THE web site where the future APG III is in preparation
• It was used by {{Taxonavigation/classification}} as a parameter to {{Taxonavigation}} (I replaced the use of this template by the actual link because, {{APWebsite}} was marked as used in all pages using {{Taxonavigation}}. I suppose that it is was bothered you)
• It is used as description in categories representing families or ordos that does not exist in APG II but still are created by contributor because these taxons are proposed by APWebsite.
  • Sample: Berberidopsidales

Cheers Liné1 07:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, man

You are welcome

Cheers Liné1 08:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi

en-1

This user is able to contribute with a basic level of English.

You seem to be experienced, so- pleas see Image talk:Goldfishs in an aquarium in Tel-Aviv.jpg. chold you help me there? Noy 12:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

SEE THERE. Noy 14:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your tireless work as an administrator and tagging images with the extremely useful {{WideWallpaper-en}}, I award you the Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Great work! --Boricuæddie 20:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Catrinas 2.jpg

Hi Rocket000, could you please provide your opinion on this deletion request (I assume you've read Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks & protections#Administrator abuse of power). Thank you and best regards --Ecemaml ^{talk to me/habla conmigo} 23:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

National voting

Hi. I'm sorry for my comments on FPC, but I've seen comments like (not your of course) "Polish sponsored support" and you know... ;) On Wikipedias ctriteria of quality is not such hard as on Commons. I don't know (sometimes) what I can do to stop national voting and nominate these images which are good in my eyes. QI is good, but not the best - look on my talk page - not every images are FP (criteria for Commons), but they are FP in pl Wikipedia. So, I think of course about FP images in every Wikipedias, but FPC's are in several Wikipedias only. regards Przykuta 13:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:I-80 (IN).svg

Can you delete this file quickly. This image makes no sense and Indiana no longer uses specific state shields. The deletion debate has been on for over 7 days.--SoCal55 20:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I remove the IN normal state shield from IN-53. all the pages have any IN normal state shields should be removed. And this damn image should be delete immediately.--SoCal55 01:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Removing categories

Hi there! I just replaced the existing categories with a meta category that has all the other categories associated to it. Is it wrong? Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 16:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that. I was copy/pasting the edit summary and thought it had the previous category. I am not one to go vandalizing around, even though I can make mistakes :-) Thanks for pointing that out! -- ReyBrujo 16:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for taking care of Image:Stop sign MUTCD.svg for me. I don't understand why User:Rappingwonders2 or whatever he/she likes to be called, likes to revert my image along with other peoples images and/or templates. --Ltljltlj 23:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Seems like he's just looking for conflict and can't get enough on en.WP :) →Rocket°°° 23:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Because Ltljltlj is actually the one vandalizing the image by changing it back to the format that isn't the correct format so please change it back. Rappingwonders2 00:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rocket, User:Rappingwonders2 is a sock of banned user 98E. This checkuser case, Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Rappingwonders2, is not needed because it's already established on Wikipedia via checkuser that they're the same person.[3] This user has a chronic history of copyright violations. After being blocked on Wikipedia, he uploaded more copyvios here on Commons. I strongly suggest a block. Spellcast 09:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I know, I saw the CU report. I'm not one to rush to block people, but we'll see how it goes. →Rocket°°° 16:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't block me, I'm not a sock on Wikipedia, nor here. Rappingwonders2 22:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not blocking you. I don't care what you did on Wikipedia and, personally, I don't even care if you're a sock, but I do care that you have been causing problems here. If you continue this behavior, I will block, but since I'm slow on the trigger, I'm sure some else will do it first. You have made some constructive edits here but I'm afraid that with your history most people are past the "assume good faith" part. Just stay out of trouble and you'll be fine. →Rocket°°° 22:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

but it is used

"It seems like someone's trying to make it that way... but it is used used. →Rocket°°° 16:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)"

Not for long... ¦ Reisio 00:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

;-) →Rocket°°° 00:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Just a quick thanks for categorizing my images :) -- penubag  00:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

No prob. Thanks for uploading them :) →Rocket°°° 08:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

And thank you again, for categorizing all my pictures. Some tedious work :) -- penubag  08:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Your note of thanks motivated me :) Now you got zero orphans!

I was just about to leave you note.. I have absolutely no problem categorizing your images, but one thing I did want to mention is when you upload new versions of files, you should upload with the same name so we don't have all these superseded / duplicates laying around. Especially if your the same author. I deleted a couple of these and even saw in the history that you requested deletion yourself. Commons kinda has a messy situation right now regarding "superseded" files. Many think we should keep them around for the files' history, while others think we should delete them as it adds to the clutter and users may pick the wrong (lower quality, possibly inaccurate) version. To avoid all of this, just upload over the old version. Solves both issues—the history's there and there's only one file. Just something to keep in mind for the future. And thanks again for your contribs! Cheers, →Rocket°°° 09:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad I motivated you to do my dirty work :) I did not know that I could just update the images by simply uploading the file with the same name until just recently (thank God, right? I'd have so many duplicates from my recent uploads). IMO, I think that all superseded images should just be stashed away in the file history, if we have duplicates laying around, then the problems that you stated would result. Well, thanks once more for the tip and cats. Good day,  penubag  09:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

If you have time, can you please categorize this image for me, I'm not skilled enough to know which ones it falls into. Thanks! -- penubag  09:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm.. that was a tough one. Hopefully, someone will come along and find a more suitable category, but at least it's close to where it should be. →Rocket°°° 14:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Which is why I asked you ;). Thanks, that should be suitable enough. -- penubag  16:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Little help please

Hey mate, could you please take a look at User_talk:Giggy#Deletion_requests.2FImage:Flag_of_Nicaragua.svg and User_talk:Lokal_Profil#re._Commons:Deletion_requests.2FImage:Flag_of_Nicaragua.svg (re. Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Flag of Nicaragua.svg) and tell me if I'm missing something...cheers, giggy _(:O) 08:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I <3 you. Reply is on my talk page, if not watchlisted. giggy _(:O) 08:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Keep your eyes on these vandalisms. [4] Tanks. Davidandrade 00:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot too, :D good work. Davidandrade 00:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Look the comment "DON'T TRY A CHECKUSER... THIS IS A DINAMIC IP. FUCK PT.WIKIPEDIA.ORG" from the user. Can we do something against this attitude, a total block? Davidandrade 03:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

We could...erm...checkuser them :P giggy _(:O) 07:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

BTW - I did & sorted quite a few accounts....:) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, nice. - Rocket000 09:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Auawise paper.png

I've just got to hand it to you, that was hilarious. To me, at least. ;) Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 01:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. I'm glad you thought so.  :-) →Rocket°°° 01:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

User:RocketBot

Congratulations! It has bot status now.

Please add {{User bot}} on User:RocketBot.

EugeneZelenko 16:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio

Hello Rocket000, I'm sorry but my english is very bad. I saw you in recentchanges and I had to make you a question, this is a copyvio?, I'm not sure and I want to know. Thanks a lot. Tomatejc 06:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I quit the template (quit is the correct word?), maybe is better if we wait to another opinion, if you heard something please tell me, I'll sleep, see you later and thanks again. Tomatejc 06:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Good work

Thanks & I agree with you mostly (not for the first time :)) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, man. And I just noticed [5], that's what I meant. :) - - Rocket000 09:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Devil May Cry 4 image

Why did you delete an image I uploaded?[6] What do you mean, derivative work? I took the image myself, I own the game. I think you should restore the image. You shouldn't just delete images like that without discussion. — EliasAlucard / Discussion 14:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you do the artwork on the game's cover? It's a derivative work because you used some else's creative work to create that image. I'm sorry but owning the game is not the same as owning the copyright. And yes, we do delete clear cut copyvios here without discussion. - Rocket000 00:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

On English wikipedia there's this image. Is this just a Commons rule or does it apply on all of Wikipedia? — EliasAlucard / Discussion 17:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Our rules are very different than the Wikipedia's. That image on WP should be tagged as fair use as the one I deleted would have been. Commons does not allow fair use but the English Wikipedia does, so you may upload it there since a free image to illustrate that subject is not possible. It's the same as album covers. They're allowed there, but not here. - Rocket000 00:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Joe Ceci head 1.jpg

Recently you declined deletion of this image of Joe Ceci, stating "Kept as it's used". However, it's not actually used anywhere except on the Commons Gallery page Joe Ceci. The image was used on English Wikipedia, but was replaced by a better image. I'm the creator of both images (two different cameras), and I simply wish to replace the lower quality image permanently with the better quality image. So, I'm hoping you'll change your mind, and support deletion (and naturally removal from the gallery).. --Rob 04:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. I didn't realize you made the gallery also. I was thinking someone else found the image useful. Generally, we don't delete superseded images, however, we make exceptions if your the author of course. By the way, I found your request when cleaning out some old incomplete deletion categories. Your request never was listed on COM:DR. That's why it took so long. In the future you can just click the "Nominate for deletion" link in your sidebar, or if you're the author and it's not used, you can tag it with {{delete|author's request...}}. Cheers, - Rocket000 04:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for handling that, and thanks for pointing out the "Nominate for deletion" in the sidebar, which I never noticed, but am happy to see. --Rob 04:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. That will make things a lot less complicated. :) - Rocket000 04:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Tango

Thanks for uploading Tango icons. Keep up the good work! ;) The-Q 20:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Thanks! :) - Rocket000 21:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Croatia.svg

Well it is good that you show interest in the topic. And only as an information Zscout370 is involved with solving the issue. -- Rainman 22:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If you have some information please share. I think that you once said that both I and the other side (which oppose my proposals) are off when it comes to blue colour of the flag.

I have listed some of users points of view on the Image talk:Flag of Croatia.svg under the headline Some colours which were used for this flag, also as a helpful tool there is a headline Some comparisons.

Rainman 23:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Well you once had an oppinion, but if you do not have it now, its OK, yust please answer so I would know where I stand. (alone or...) -- Rainman 04:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall ever saying anything about the flag itself. I just commented on the edit-warring and page protection. My solution to solving issues like this is simply to create different versions and let our users decide what they think is correct. Rocket000 04:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

And the solution is to protect them indefinitelly. This is not the answer. You protected files that were already protected. Why? And finally have you noticed that there is no oposition to my proposal where is Minestrone, he abandoned his claims and refused to talk it over. Do you really think that this protection will bring him to the "table". Also why haven't you locked the orriginal version done by Nightstallion, wouldn't this be most neutral thing to do (because Minestrone suggests to leave thing as they were and I contest his reluctant oppinion). This is a clear reward of his position (not talking, not contributing and without any reference claiminig to let it be). -- Rainman 20:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Huh? I didn't protect anything. [7] [8] [9]. Rocket000 01:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Potd templates

I see your bot is adding templates like Template:Potd/2004-11-06 (es) to this category. Is it really necessary to have every template categorised...there will be thousands of these and future ones to come... --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 06:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep. I know it seems crazy right now, but I'm going to categorize every single template we have. :) - Rocket000 17:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Categoria:Agrigento

Ciao, tranquillo, non mi sono offeso, ma vorrei sapere come mai hai cancellato Categoria:Agrigento. Grazie. --ninetto 21:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry this reply is in English. I deleted Categoria:Agrigento because it was redundant with Category:Agrigento, which uses the correct name.

Parlo soltanto inglese ma qui sono una risposta tradotta. Ho cancellato Categoria:Agrigento perché era ridondante con Category:Agrigento, che usa il nome corretto. - Rocket000 03:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Perchè una voce italiana non si può creare? Io sono Italiano e quindi mi creo una categoria Italiana, mi sembra logico.--ninetto 07:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Non potete generare una categoria italiana perché usiamo i nomi inglesi sui Commons. Siamo multilingue ma non ogni lingua può essere usata perché tutto sarebbe un mess grande. Ma aggiunga prego le descrizioni italiane alla categoria ed alle immagini. - Rocket000 07:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

va bene. Allora posso creare la voce Centro Storico nella Category:Agrigento?. Grazie --ninetto 08:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Sì. Inoltre, le gallerie possono essere in italiano se è circa un oggetto italiano. - Rocket000 08:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Err

What is that thing, you know, the one where you use this internet thing to send someone a message - umm, err - oh yeah, mail that the word :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You too, mate :) - Rocket000 09:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

User:FXXX

I saw you comment on User:FXXX. As another example, the Image:Coat of Arms of Canada.svg image is a copyright violation, and I've tagged it as such. I don't know how many other images he's uploaded with inappropriate tags. Regards, -- Jeff3000 20:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Deleted. - Rocket000 22:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Plankton creates sea foam 2.jpg

Dear Rocket000,
I would have never bothered you with my message about this, but I'm really try to understand why in your opinion Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Plankton creates sea foam 2.jpg lacks value. I responded your oppose at the nomination page, and, when I said "thank you for you vote", I really meant it. I like, when my nominations are voted for or against (does not matter). I do not like, if there are no votes or very few votes because to me it means that the nomination is boring. May I please ask you to explain me one more time why IYO it lack value. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 05:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Ariel Sharon

Hello, I was a bit bold on this page. Not generally a good idea on controversial pages I know, but sometimes useful to break an impasse. Please let me know if you think it is really not acceptable. I know it is not your preference but hey - it is not he.wp's preference either. I think it does meet the desires of both sides though (that the images shouldn't be censored - they're not deleted, but displayed on another page. that the images shouldn't be on that page - they're not).

with respect, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Honestly I don't have a strong preference any way. It's a subject I don't know or care much about. I was just getting involved in the discussion because of the strong POVs presented there and requests for censorship which I do feel strongly about. The only real view I held specific to that gallery was that it was unbalanced, i.e. too many cartoons for a gallery on a human subject. Furthermore, too many similar cartoons.

I was seriously thinking of removing all but one cartoon (any one) and underneath that link to the category if people are looking for more. I mentioned this on the talk page. I was ready to do this based on the majority of the comments, but since I was the one that protected the page, I didn't think I should touch it. I guess I'm not as bold as you :) but I think what you did was acceptable. Establishing a clear consensus seems highly unlikely, so there's no point in waiting around for one. You have my complete support. - Rocket000 12:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. It is much appreciated. I also don't care much about the topic, with a slight preference for not including them on that gallery.

Well... so far, so good. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 05:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Many Thanks

Dear Rocket000,
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 20:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

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

Devil in the detail

I noticed the cleanups you did not the Image:Steak-Silhouette.svg and Image:Add Language.svg I uploaded. that is quite some detail you are looking at as to how to layout the wikitext. I am currently uploading files using the new Upload form (see MediaWiki talk:UploadForm.js ) being developed by User:Lupo as i think its a great tool that is being developed there. If you think that the output from this tool is messy its better to draw the developer's attention, as it would be counter productive to have a tool that creates wikitext that then has to be cleaned up. BTW my question about the NavHead on the village pump came up because I was looking for a neat way to have more options on the upload form, which I would be able to recommend to Lupo.

Cheers --Inkwina (talk • contribs) 00:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, sometimes my perfectionist side shows through. Those two images pages weren't messy at all. I just like things a certain way. For example, when I add categories to images I always make sure to make the 'C' in Category and the first letter of the name is capitalized. I don't know why—it doesn't even make a difference visually! I also like categories to always be in the same spot, at the very bottom (unless there's interwiki links) with one space between them and the rest of the text... these are really trivial things and I wouldn't even mess with them if I wasn't editing the page for some other reason (e.g. categorizing). It's more of a personal preference, I guess. I've used the new upload form a couple of times and I see no formating issues but I'll take another look at it. I know Lupo's busy with that script but maybe he'd be willing to write a little css/js for better collapsible options. - Rocket000 01:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Inkscape

Just using this program as a starter.

You seem very knowledgable at it though (your works are fantastic)

How do I convert a JPG or PNG (of logos eg.) to SVG format. SpecialWindler 12:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment :) Unfortunately, converting a raster image (JPEG/PNG) to a vector image (SVG) usually needs to be done manually, that is recreating the image from scratch. You can try out automated "tracing" (in inkscape go to Path > Trace Bitmap...) but as you'll soon learn this gives pretty poor results. You can change the settings so the resulting vectors look nearly the same as the original, however, the file will be huge and completely useless (it will create tons of nodes and layers). Depending on the complexity of the source image, sometimes tracing will give you a nice start but be prepared to do some work. I wouldn't suggest starting off with conversion (unless the raster is really simple - e.g. geometric shapes, solid colors). Become familiar with working with vectors first. Experiment. Learn a few tricks. This will save you tons of time and frustration when you do want to convert a complex bitmap and have little room to deviate. Luckily, inkscape's simplicity helps cut down on the learning curve. Take a look at Help:SVG. A lot of good tips there - things you may have not thought of. Anyway, I wish you the best of luck and look forward to seeing some awesome SVGs from you. Cheers, - Rocket000 02:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

CAT:AP

Why was it deleted? -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh found out already. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

:-) I should of said a little more in the edit summary, sorry. - Rocket000 12:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Request

Is there a place to open a complaint against the behaviour of an administrator? --TcfkaPanairjdde 00:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems to report users that are causing problems and then there's Commons:Disputes noticeboard to get assistance with disputes. Have you tried talking with the admin in question? Maybe he can be reasoned with. If not, try one of those noticeboards (whatever you think is appropriate). Cheers, - Rocket000 00:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Urgent : Commons_talk:Project_Mapmaking_Wiki_Standards#Tools_to_build

Hello, Please restore Template:Maplegend. I need it: I'm testing new feature to improve the current [Template:Legend], to ease the share of maps on wikimedia. Thanks. 220.135.4.212 08:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Testing should be done in the sandbox or in your userspace. I'll restore it, but consider moving it so it won't get deleted again. Thanks. - Rocket000 15:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:License tags

Hi Rocket. I saw your comment to remove info that no one follows. I plan to do some massive maintenance on license tags in the coming weeks/months and actually follow what was written there ;) It improves machine readability and has no real downside. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the downside is it makes it harder to find templates, but of course that just applies to us silly humans. :) Maybe we can create a separate cat like Category:All license tags? Or at least categorize them into sub-cats (which most of them are ). Let me know what you want to do and I'll help. I've been working on template categorizing a lot recently. Here's a rough category scheme I'm in the process of creating. The licensing ones at near the bottom. Cheers, - Rocket000 18:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:All license tags sounds fine, but I am afraid that will break many of Duesentrieb's tools. Maybe we should make sure that everything is findable in Category:License tags as well as a subcat of that? -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

We could do it either way, but can't those tools/bots be updated to use a different category? I mean, the licenses have been split up for a long time now. It's not like we would be causing any new problems. - Rocket000 18:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Probably. I'll have to ask Duesentrieb. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, cool. When you find out drop me a note and I'll start working on it (whatever that may be). I have a lot of saved template lists for my bot to work with. - Rocket000 19:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete

Hi! Please can you delete Image:En-uk-gerundive.ogg and Image:En-uk-supervacuous.ogg. They have gone all wrong and my computer won't let me upload a new version of either. Thanks, Harris Morgan 01:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC).

 Done - Rocket000 01:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks! Harris Morgan 01:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC).

No problem. :) - Rocket000 01:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, can you do it once more with Image:En-uk-gerundive.ogg? I've gone and clicked the wrong file... Harris Morgan 01:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC).

 Done hehe. Slow down. :) - Rocket000 01:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

STOP!

We protect templates with a high-transclusion-rate, because a server could brake down if those get vandalized. Please do NOT uznprotect them. abf /talk to me/ 07:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

They have low transclusions. There are many that unprotected that have a lot more. - Rocket000 08:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

used only a few thousand times... sorry, but templates who are not used as often can stay unprotected, but such templates should better be protected. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 08:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

That's nothing. We have some transcluded millions of times. That's when you have to protect it. - Rocket000 08:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Its point of view, isnt it? I belive it would be really worse if someone would vandalize the GFDL-template. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 08:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess it is, but most our templates are licensing ones. Should we protect them all? I wouldn't think of unprotecting {{GFDL}}, that really is used a lot. (958,669 links, rank #8). The ones I was unprotecting were pretty far down the list. I got them all watched listed and I'm sure of do to. The severs aren't an issue and there was no sign of vandalism, so I honestly couldn't see a reason. - Rocket000 08:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but there is no reason to edit and i know cases where templates where really edited in error and a few days ago one vandal really got the whole german wikipedia down for half an hour by vandalizing one template. abf /talk to me/ 08:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

"No reason to edit?!" This a wiki. That's what we do, even if we don't have to :) There's always some category to change or redirect to fix or something. Look at the edit histories, there's no vandalism, edit-warring, and very little useless edits. We can't move forward if everything's locked down. Trust me, I'm not just unprotecting anything. I looked into the usage and history and only unprotected those I really didn't think need to be. - Rocket000 08:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I trust you, of course, but i really wont see them unprotected with so much use. Lets protect them as autoconfirmed, i belive that would be acceptebale for both of us, isnt it? abf /talk to me/ 08:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that's sounds good. I guess I should have made them that to begin with. Cheers, - Rocket000 08:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I am glad its possible to talk to you in such a nice atmosphear, I really like this about your work :) (not like me, the vandal *megalol*) abf /talk to me/ 08:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

hehe.. doing a little vandalism, eh? lol. Thanks, man. :) - Rocket000 08:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

My license templates

Hi Rocket000,
I don't have time to fight this battle with you but I am not happy at all with your change. Please read through this and revert back to how I had the previously. I sincerely hope this can be done amicably as I won't be able to take this any further till mid year break in June. Regards, --Fir0002 www 11:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that would be against our policy. I'm not sure why your personal templates that no one else has any use for should go in the template namespace. What's the difference anyway? I didn't change your templates at all. I didn't subst: them like some people would. I didn't convert to a standard license. You're lucky I didn't follow other guidelines. Remember, there is no ownership. No one should really be changing your licenses anyway so why leave them in the template namespace? At least, the user namespace gives you a little control of your content. This a good thing. Why are you not happy with it? - Rocket000 11:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to do this to you but I really will have to postpone this argument till June. Incidentally I had a quick look over the policy you linked, and seems my templates are covered in the "acceptable" paragraph: Users can use such templates to specify how they want to be attributed, e.g. by their real name or username. Some "advertising" for the user's work is allowed, such as a link to an external website (portfolio/gallery). (As we discourage image watermarks, the image page is the appropriate place for such "advertising".) Requests for notification about use are allowed. (Only requests, not requirements.) A notice such as "other terms/higher resolution available on request" are allowed. Contact details are allowed. Technical details such as camera model or method of creation of the file/s are allowed. Incidentally if you are planning on removing individual license templates you've a huge task ahead of you as there are many users on commons using them. Many users who will hopefully have the time to defend them. Anyway as I said I can't go into this any more just now and so don't feel snubbed or anything if I don't reply to any future comments you make between now and June. --Fir0002 www 08:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I think you're misunderstanding what I did. I didn't replace your license at all. I just renamed it. It's perfectly ok to have templates like that. It's the same for personal galleries, they're ok, but they belong in the user space because they're not useful to anyone else. - Rocket000 21:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Template {{Information}}

Hi, there's a problem with all the images using this template: now they show the data contained in the other_versions field twice: in the template and again below it. Example: Image:Witte by Repin.jpg. I think that it might be related to the last changes made to the template. Could you check it? Thanks for your attention. J.M.Domingo 10:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. After testing in my sandbox, I found out it was related to this addition. I'm not sure how to fix yet it but I'm looking in to it. It's a very heavily used template so I want to be extra careful with editing it or I'll put too much load on the severs. I can always go back to an earlier version but I'm not sure what that code was added for. Removing might break something too, Anyway, I'll get working on it. Thanks again. - Rocket000 11:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

It works! Thank you for your help! J.M.Domingo 13:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) Thanks for letting me know about it. - Rocket000 13:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Typo

Hi,

There seems to be a typing mistake that was introduced by your bot: see [10]. A final ']' is missing. Several pages are concerned. Regards. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 20:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Dammit. I swear I checked that. Ok, well, I'm on it. Thank you very much for pointing that out to me. I appreciate it. Cheers, - Rocket000 15:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

It's OK now. Thanks. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 18:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Featured desktop backgrounds

I noticed that you've been tagging many images with Category:Commons featured desktop backgrounds that aren't actually featured pictures. I've undone a couple of those tags, but I'd rather talk to you directly than clearing your work as you do it. I don't think that these tags should be on some of these photos, because being featured on Wikipedia is part of the criteria for that tag. When non-featured pictures are tagged as backgrounds, people looking for dynamic images for a desktop have to sort through mediocre images in order to find what they're looking for. Anyways, I'd like to hear your thoughts. --Hotshot977 09:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I only transwikied en.wp's en:Category:Wikipedia featured desktop backgrounds and en:Category:Wikipedia featured widescreen desktop backgrounds per this CfD. I just did the transfer so if there were some mislabeled on en.wp then those were transwikied too. Keep in mind that the templates {{Wallpaper}} and {{Wallpaper-en}} both add images to Category:Commons featured desktop backgrounds. It doesn't mean that all are featured on Commons, some may be just featured on en.wp. - Rocket000 09:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I just noticed another issue. For example, Image:Delicatearch.jpg is a featured picture on en.wp (see en:Image:Delicatearch.jpg), however it's called Image:Delicatearch.png on Commons (which is also a Commons featured picture). So most of the mis-tagging of images is due to naming conflicts and not mislabeling over on en.wp. - Rocket000 09:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Valued image templates rename pro~blem with broken functionality

Hi Rocket, I appreciate your work with fixing my capitalization error in the VI template cat name using SieBot. However, unfortunately, the change has also broken some functionality. I had functionality implemented which added declined/promoted VICs to special categories when the status field was updated. I see SieBot has removed these categories. Could you fix that please? Best wishes, -- Slaunger 08:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm really sorry. I didn't think it would break anything. Should I just have SieBot undo it all or is there another way I can fix it? Rocket000 08:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I think the easiest way to do it is to manually go thorugh the difs on the templates. Only a few are affected I think. Then undo the ones affected and change the capitalization by hand in these few templates. I am busy right now with real work so I can't really attend to it. -- Slaunger 09:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm on it. Rocket000 09:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I misunderstood the problem. I thought the system you set up needed the category to be called that or something, now I see it was just SieBot's fault for changing something he wasn't suppose to. :) I notice he does weird things like that somethings.. anyway, I looked at all the diffs and only found one that needed undoing, so I hope I didn't miss anything. Rocket000 09:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think only the {{VIC}} was affected. However, the previously declined/promoted VIC subpages are no longer in the cats. I guess it is because, the subpages need to be rerendered to put them back in the cats? Is there a way to refresh those pages (they are no longer linked to other pages only linked via the promoted/declined cats)? -- Slaunger 09:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

They should be back in there soon. The job queue is just a little high right now (thanks to me, hehe :) Rocket000 09:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I see they are coming back... Did not realize it was on a job queue. Cheers, -- Slaunger 09:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, anytime a template is edited (even if it's inside <noinclude>s!) it throws the updating/rerendering on the job queue, so if a template auto-categorizes, then that will be affected to. Rocket000 09:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rocket, Ehmm, sorry to say, but adding thet noinclude valued image template in those two VI nom preload templates is not really a good idea as the text is included in the preload edit form when adding a new nomination. It is not supposed to. I think we simply have to live with that the two preload templates areb't cateogirzed but simply referred to from other VI templates. Alternatively, their talk pages could be categorized. It has been a big struggle to make these two templates preload the form correct... -- Slaunger 05:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, you're saying I can't categorize them!? There goes my goal of categorizing every single template. I think maybe MediaWiki namespace would be more suited for what you're doing.. We should able to simply categorize templates :\ Rocket000 05:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I am pretty annoyed too, that these two templates cannot be categorized. But the fact is that if they are categorized the way you have done, every single VIC and VISC subpage will be associated with the Valued image templates category, and we do not want that. In addition, they are (helper) templates so I really do not think it makes snese to move them out of template namespace. Rules are rules if not overruled by them very few exceptions were commons sense have to break the rules. Sure I could move the templates into Commons:Valued images candidates sub namespace, but does that make Commons better - it is still a template? -- Slaunger 05:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not really a big deal if they're categorized or not. It just interferes with my own little project. :) I actually looked at the code, I'll look in to a more elegant solution. If I broke anything else, just revert me. Sorry again. Rocket000 05:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

OK ;-) The templates are quite ugly. I would surely appreciate a more elegant solution, if possible. Cheers... -- Slaunger 05:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey! I might take offense here ;-) --Dschwen 20:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Let me put it this way: They are brilliantly implemented despite the ugly MediaWiki syntax. ;-) -- Slaunger 20:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. It's not your fault, Dschwen. You did good with what MediaWiki gave us. :) Rocket000 22:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

User boxen for BF

It is a commentary on the rankness of ranking. I will not argue that it is a useless user template, but are the user boxes that announce skill useful at all?

Did the commentary go over your head? I suggest BF-0 for you if it did. -- carol 01:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Heheh.. Well, the category's empty. Nothing is making any use of it, hence useless. I figured putting it in that category was better than deleting it. I didn't mean anything about the templates themselves (which are being used). Feel free to remove it from that category if you want. Rocket000 01:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Message on Wikipedia

Hi, I left you a message on Wikipedia (I'd rather have the discussion there than here as I'm usually on Wikipedia.) Thanks! Gary King 15:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd like a response please, as to why you deleted my image. Thanks. Gary King 20:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh sorry, that's why I like to keep things here. I responded here. Rocket000 01:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Categories for The Historians' History of the World

These categories most certainly do serve a purpose; I'm in the process of extracting images from that encyclopedia. If you're really anxious about having empty categories, let me know and I'll do a bunch of quick crappy cut-and-paste jobs just to get something in the categories. Otherwise, I'm taking the time to create quality touched-up images, so please don't delete them and make me re-create them.--❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 17:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, ok. I didn't say I'll delete them. It's just empty categories don't stay around for long. I'm not sure why you couldn't just create them when you actually needed them, but whatever. It's fine. Take your time :) Cheers, Rocket000 17:30, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Because they've got Roman numerals they need to be alphabetically sorted and they contain sort key tags - it was much easier to create them all at once. --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 23:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

{{{category}}}

What is the purpose of adding {{{category}}} to templates? Reply to my talk if you don't mind. Superm401 - Talk 03:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That makes a lot of sense, though it's certainly a hassle to add it manually to every template. Are there any bots that do it? Superm401 - Talk 03:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

svg error

Hello Rocket, Image:Nuvola gnome-fs-trash-full.svg has an error if you view it in full size:

XML-Verarbeitungsfehler: Präfix nicht an Namespace gebunden
Adresse: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Nuvola_gnome-fs-trash-full.svg
Zeile Nr. 20, Spalte 3:		<ns:sfw
----------------^

Would you kindly fix it, if possible? Thanks. --GeorgHH • talk   11:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that's some ugly non-compliant code. I don't have time right now but I'll work on it later. Rocket000 12:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you in advance! Have a good weekend. --GeorgHH • talk   15:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It should be fine now. Have a good weekend too. Cheers, Rocket000 02:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

My image erased :(

hi mr. Rocket000, i want to know what was my mistake during the image's upload, i am still a rookie, so if you can help me to upload my files or teach me how can i ulpoad correctly an image, I will be very happy.

byebye! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oleksazo (talk • contribs) at 16:27, March 30, 2008 (UTC)

I would love to help you out, but some links would have been nice or even a signature so I know who you are and what image your talking about. :) I guess it would be Image:HERELIVE.JPG. This was deleted because it's a copyrighted album cover. Commons only accepts free content. Please take a look at Commons:Licensing for more information. Thanks, Rocket000 16:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

ajá, I got it, i'm from chile and the spanish page for licensing has been deleted and replaced with other things, vandalism. I found the image surfing in the web, and i downloaded it to my hard disk may weeks ago. The only copyright that appears there in http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.es i hope that is what i am looking for. thanks for all--Oleksazo 17:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

in

Hmm.. well, that license is accepted here, however, I truly doubt a BeeGees' album cover is really released under that. I'm afraid the website was incorrect. And COM:L should be back to normal now. Rocket000 01:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

{{PD-chem}}

Thank you. I'd been meaning to relicense all my structures under {{PD-chem}} and it would have taken forever. Fvasconcellos 14:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Thank goodness for bots, eh? And I'll make sure to get the rest of yours, too (except the 3D ones, I never know if those are PD-ineligible or not). Rocket000 14:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your bot, at least for now, from converting all chemical structures to PD-chem. It may be appropriate for many structures, but not all. Is there a discussion indicating consensus for this action anywhere? Edgar181 16:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've been going through all of them by hand before sending them to my bot. I'm only doing the ones that are clearly PD. If you see any that shouldn't have been tagged, let me know and I'll go review them again. Thanks. Rocket000 17:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that makes me feel much more comfortable with the process. Thanks. I haven't had a chance to look through much of the bot's contributions - I haven't seen any edits yet that concern me. It appeared to me that all chemical structures were getting converted. I'm curious: what criteria, in your mind, determines what is ineligible for copyright, and what isn't? Edgar181 17:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit conflict] Yes, please stop your bot. The wording of the template is awful, and I shall nominate it for deletion as soon as I can. The position of buildings in New York City is "publically available information", but that doesn't mean that NYC street maps are necessarily public domain. Physchim62 17:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, it's stopped for now. I suggest improving the template instead of nominating it. My main goal was to organize Category:PD ineligible. Take a look through that category, I was only selecting the simple structures (nothing 3D or too complex). It's pretty established these are ineligible for copyright. Are there any ones in particular that you're concerned about? Rocket000 17:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

If an uploader has designated a chemical structure as PD-ineligible, I don't see any problem converting it to a (well-worded) PD-chem template. But if you are converting all simple chemical structures to PD-chem, you may be making a judgement that contrasts with the wishes of the uploader. For example, I have uploaded thousands of chemical structure images all with the PD-self template, which explicitly states that I hold the copyright, but that I release it to the public domain. You have changed them to say that I never held the copyright in the first place, which may or may not be true. I don't think that is a judgement that is proper for you to be making, at least not without discussion and consensus of the community. Edgar181 17:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Example please. Rocket000 17:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

There are ~100 images I uploaded using PD-self that RocketBot has already changed to PD-chem. Here's one example: [11]. Edgar181 17:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I meant ones that you contest. Anyway, this might help explain my criteria better than words can. Rocket000 17:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I contest every change from PD-self to PD-chem that has been made to an image I have uploaded. Those images that were once tagged as inarguably released into the public domain are now tagged with a claim that relies on a subjective decision. I don't think that's a good idea.

Thanks for the link to the gallery of images that indicate what you think is copyrightable and what it not. I would probably draw the line a little bit differently than you, though. This is why I think it's good to have some kind of discussion or consensus about this before proceding. Edgar181 18:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, why? You think there's original authorship in any of those worthy of copyright? Copyright laws aren't formed by consensus. If you have no rights you can't release them. This is not something you or me can decide. If it's that you just don't like someone else changing your license, remember COM:OWN. Let's say you somehow did have the copyright at one time; you released them to the PD, which negates any sense of ownership. Honestly, I'll give it some time, but this really isn't controversial. I'll go back to doing the {{PD-shape}}s :) Rocket000 18:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, I do think there is original authorship in some of the images, but I don't want to get into that yet because it will be quite a discussion - as you say, it is not something you or me can decide. The problem is that you are putting images into a debatable situation when they were previously in a situation that was not debatable. The advantage of PD-self over PD-chem is that it doesn't matter whether anyone thinks there's original authorship involved or not. Edgar181 18:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, yes, that boarders on copyfraud. You shouldn't claim ownership to things you don't have a right to (where you can help it). That's dishonest and gives the wrong idea about copyright laws to less-knowledgeable users. Sure, it doesn't affect how the images can be used, but it does affect Commons and makes it a lot less manageable (e.g. the mess in Category:PD ineligible). Anyway, this isn't just my point of view, I was just working within a system the community had already established. I'm not going to argue over the actual copyright status of these images. You'll find the law's pretty clear on these if you look into it a little. Rocket000 18:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to make sure that my images are as freely available as possible, and your response is to suggest this borders on fraud?  :( Edgar181 19:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess it would only be copyfraud if you tried to make money off of it. You can't get much freer than public domain. Feel free to help reword the template if you think it will help. Maybe I'll make a new one... something with a fall back option. The bot is stopped for now, and I have no problem sending him back in to adjust/undo the template change. Let's see how the DR plays out. Maybe we can come up with a nice solution. Rocket000 19:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Which law?

Ben 18:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

That was plural. Rocket000 19:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

What I meant was, the law of which country?

Ben 19:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Your choice. There's no country that I know of honors claims to copyright like this. If there is, Commons policy is to not honor that, otherwise we got a ton of derivatives to delete. U.S. law along with their case law probably has the most written on the subject, and U.S. is notorious for having a very low threshold of originality. Rocket000 19:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, as do others. In most cases, there are many different ways of representing the same molecule in 2D - choosing the best representation requires skill and knowledge of chemistry. Making good skeletal formulae is not trivial. If you're sure that US law would regard these cases as uncopyrightable, you'll have to prove it, not just state it.

Ben 21:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. Skill and knowledge aren't copyrightable. This isn't even a gray area in IP. I don't feel the need to prove anything. I'm not going to do your research for you. Take it or leave. If you're looking for an argument, it's not here. Rocket000 21:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not looking for an argument. But your bot is changing the permissions in my images from {{PD-user|Benjah-bmm27}} to {{PD-chem}}, which I object to. I never designated these images as {{PD-ineligible}}, because in most cases, as far as I can tell, they are not ineligible for copyright. They do require significant authorship and are therefore eligible for copyright.

Since you are the owner of the bot that is making the changes, you have to justify its behaviour. So far you have just said "my bot is doing the right thing", without giving proper evidence that this is the case.

I appreciate you stopping your bot while the issue is discussed.

Ben 21:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

You don't designate images as {{PD-ineligible}}. They just are. And I didn't change your "permission". The law is what it is, I just gave it a better template, mainly for categorizing. PD is PD. This is really about ownership, since everyone's worried about their images. I have little patience for that. I don't need to justify my bot's behaviour anymore than the rest of the community should have to justify their actions completely filling up Category:PD ineligible with thousands of chemical drawings like yours. It's obvious to most of us; I'm sorry a few of you don't see it that way. This ownership issue is why it's so hard to get anything done here. Rocket000 21:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I only called it permission because that's the label on the template. Call it what you will. I'm not possessive about the images I create, otherwise I wouldn't release them into the public domain. But they are the images I follow on my watchlist. I'm not asking you to justify your bot's action for my own sake, but so that we can all decide if you are acting properly or not. If you are, we can give a justification, with links to the relevant laws, from a page discussing the copyright status on chemical images.

I agree with you that massive categories like Category:PD ineligible are useless for finding anything. I'm saying that I disagree with you on what is ineligible for copyright. I say many of the images your bot has marked as PD-chem are not ineligible for copyright, whereas you say they are ineligible for copyright. How do we decide who is right?

Ben 22:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Look to the community. This isn't some personal view of mine. Look in Category:PD ineligible, look at deletion requests, look at past discussions, I'm just doing what seems to the general opinion on these matters. If I'm wrong, your issue isn't with me then. It's with the community. (Or your country's and/or the U.S.'s laws). Rocket000 22:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I read all of Commons:Licensing, but nowhere does it state exactly how much authorship is required to make something copyrightable. Maybe we should get the opinion of a lawyer on this issue.

Ben 22:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

A lawyer? Really? Wow. I just reviewed your images and I don't even see anything close to questionable. They're all text and lines, nothing original. Sure, it takes "authorship". It can take knowledge, skill, talent, and even hard-work. But enough creativity to warrant copyright status? No. How about you choose one you think isn't ineligible that my bot tagged and ask ask on CT:L. You don't need to take my word for it. Rocket000 22:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

How about Image:Carbaryl-xtal-2D-skeletal.png. This was drawn from a 3D model of the molecule based on x-ray crystallographic data. I could have chosen any angle to draw it from, but I chose this one because I thought it looked best. That's creativity, which is copyrightable.

Ben 23:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The direction you draw lines in is not copyrightable. There's a threshold of creativity that one must pass. A trivial amount doesn't give you exclusive rights over something that was PD. But enough from me. → Commons talk:Licensing#Ineligible for copyright? Rocket000 23:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup

Hi Rocket. Just wanted to say what a great job you're doing with the tidying up of pages, fixing stuff and so on. Your name keeps appearing on my watchlist with yet another fix. --MichaelMaggs 17:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you very much. It's nice to get a little recognition once in awhile. :) I appreciate you taking the time to leave this message, it encourages me to spend even more time on here cleaning up. Cheers, Rocket000 17:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

categorizing images

I've upload a few images; mostly under the Davenbelle account. Care to offer some advice about how I should categorize them? The older ones may well have been tagged by me previously, or by others. I'm just starting to review. Cheers, "Jack Merridew" 10:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm.. Well, all your images are at least categorized in something, which is a good start. Putting them in more specific categories takes a little more work as you got to know something about the subject... but I'll see what I can do. Thanks for uploading! Cheers, Rocket000 11:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Adapting/copying templates/categories from other wiki projects

Where are the guidelines on this cross-project issue? Is there a good reason we are not using the same names? You commented on {{Smallsup}}, so I just want to educate myself. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 18:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

We can definitely use the same names (I actually strongly encourage it, although we got to keep in mind Commons is multi-lingual). My comment was somewhat misdirected; we had problems in the past of users importing templates en masse from en.wp. This caused a couple problems. One, we had no need for most them or they didn't fit in here and conflicted with similar templates that we've been using for awhile. We have our own established way of doing things. When users import templates like that (not meaning you), they are assuming that we are or should be just like the English Wikipedia. Many times user just copy and paste things in whole, without adapting it to Commons. They leave internal links the same, "See also"s to non-existant pages, protection notes if the template was protected on en.wp, and sometimes they don't even change "Wikipedia" to "Commons". Another issue is, in the same way you shouldn't copy'n'paste move pages on Wikipedia, you shouldn't do that across projects also. Many times these are copyright violations because the conditions of the GFDL are not met. I hope you understand. (BTW, I think what you did was fine, I was just "Commonifing" it, if you will :) Rocket000 11:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hum

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For extremely dedicated work helping in many areas of Commons. A large amount of good karma with this too!

Not totally appropriate but you certainly deserve something for all the work you do - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow! I love getting these :) Thank you very much! Rocket000 14:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

PD-chem

Hi Rocket000. I saw the discussions on different user talk pages. I just wanted to drop you a note that leave PD-chem you and Lokal Profil inserted in my images as it is. I do not care about this minor difference. ;-) --Leyo 21:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I appreciate it. And very nice contribs, by the way. :) Cheers, Rocket000 21:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, the same to you! I try to tidy a bit here, especially concerning chemical structures. I use {{Disputed chem}} and {{Low quality chem}}. Unfortunately, it almost impossible to get poor images deleted, because of this IMHO not really consensual agreement (see also here). --Leyo 23:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the whole "superseded = not deleted" thing has gotten to be a little much. People say there's no reason to delete, it doesn't even free room on the servers. They forget the benefits of deleting. It's makes things easier to manage, people find good images faster without having to wade though tons of crap, more time is spent on categorizing and describing the good images when the poorer quality ones are gone. Also, users may use those poor quality ones thinking that's all we have. But... I'm not sure where the consensus is right now, so I try and stay out it. Some of us still do little housekeeping when we deem it necessary... ;) Rocket000 01:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

SVG

I think you could be interrested by this: Image:Wikipedia Checkuser.svg & Image:Wikipedia svg logo.svg Well, it's not really perfect put it's a really good start! Cordialement Otourly 21:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, not bad! Thanks for sharing. Rocket000 03:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome ;) Otourly 07:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Poster Dutch film Swingers deleted

Hi there. I don't know why, but the poster of the Dutch film Swingers was deleted. I am the rightful owner of this picture (the jpg AND the film). I granted the use on Wikipedia on both English and Dutch pages. Not only through licence, but through email as well. Please inform me how to get this picture back or a clear reason why you thought there was a copyright problem. It was mentioned with the upload in the article. Thanks Sbrenn 22:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You may own the the picture, the film and even the poster, but that doesn't mean you're owner of the copyright. Did you create the poster? Did the creator give you full rights? It's the same as if I bought an album; that doesn't mean I now own the copyright of the music. See Commons:Derivative works for more information. Thanks. Rocket000 07:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I created the poster myself. I am the owner of the copyright, as stated here: [12] ... So how do we solve this problem?Sbrenn 13:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

And you took the photo that's in the poster? If so, why is it being used under fair use? Commons doesn't allow fair use. Also, we don't allow exclusive rights. You need to allow everyone to use your content, not just Wikipedia. If you agree to this, you may forward your permission to OTRS. Rocket000 21:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The first question is 'yes'. It is a still from the film and as such my property. Crew and cast sign contracts in which they give me ALL the rights, even the music used. If not, there's no way I would be able to sell the film to distributors. They buy the film from me, and only me. They don't want to be bothered by artists who claim their share.

I have no problem with the poster 'floating out there'. I uploaded it myself. Maybe I picked the wrong license, but that's not made easy here, to be honest. I also don't understand what you mean with the OTRS, so a little help would be appriciated. Thanks. Sbrenn 22:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I misunderstood what you meant by "owning the film". This is different. OTRS is just our way to verify we really do have permission from the copyright holder to host the material in question. All you need to do is send a statement of permission (i.e. declaring you release this poster under a license that is allowed on Commons) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Rocket000 05:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Le Behnam

Le Behnam is leaving new messages on my talk page and calling me NisarKand for no reasons. [13] He is aware about the disccusions we're having on the adminstrator's noticeboard. [14] He still removes categories from images [15] after I've added those correct categories and fully explained my reasons as well as provided clear evidence. [16], [17] His talk page is mostly filled with warnings to stop doing what he does. I hope you now understand that it is Le Behnam who is unwilling to follow the rules here. As for me, I had already indicated that I would accept the conditions you've created for me and him.[18] About my last message to you on the admin noticeboard, just wanna say sorry about that. I was just a little upset and I won't mention race, religion and that sort of stuff in discussions again.--Executioner 03:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this message. I understand why you were upset. No hard feelings. I am well aware of Le Behnam's actions and wish he would join in our discussion on the administrator's noticeboard like you have done so. I appreciate your efforts. Rocket000 07:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm being accused by Le Behnam as making false claims. [19] Can you help with choosing the correct category for Suhaila_Seddiqi?

My claim of her being an ethnic Pashtun is based on the following latest reports:

• USAID, from where the image comes from, states: "Minister of Public Health Sohaila Sediq, a Pashtun, is one of two female ministers in President Karzai's cabinet and the only female general ever to serve in the Afghan army..."http://www.usaid.gov/missions/shadows/leadership2.html
• Los Angeles Times or St. Petersburg Times states: "Seddiqi, a member of Afghanistan's dominant Pashtun tribe, is respected among medical colleagues as a capable and indefatigable administrator." [20]
• Research Professor and an expert on Afghanistan, Thomas H. Johnson, has Public Health Minister Dr. Suhaila Seddiqi's ethnicity as Pashtun [21]

Le Behnam' claim is solely based on a single December 6, 2001 report from BBC News. [22] The Pashtun claims are made after December 22, 2001 and onwards. I believe that the BBC report mistakenly claimed her ethnicity as Tajik and was corrected later to Pashtun during the Bonn Process when the Afghan leaders met in Germany to form a new government. So therefore, adding Category:Pashtuns to Category:Suhaila Seddiqi is correct.--Executioner 09:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the sources you provided, I must say I agree with you. However, since at least one reliable source supports Le Behnam's claim (even if it's dated), I think solution is to place the category in both categories. That way whatever information a user is going on can find the images they want (especially if coming from en.wp, which currently says she's "of Tajik ethnicity"). Rocket000 12:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds ok with me as long as Le Behnam does not remove the Pashtun category. I say that because Le Behnam has a habit of breaking agreements. He will try to stick to his POV and ignore facts. The Wikipedia article is unreliable because it was created by his sock puppet (en:User:KabulHospital). [23] The Wiki ID is Le Behnam. [24] --Executioner 15:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, even if en.wp, or more importantly if BBC is wrong, people may look for the images based on that information. Anyway, if Le Behnam continues to remove the category, let me know and I'll step in. Cheers, Rocket000 20:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I hate bothering you again but Le Behnam is now removing the image of a famous Pashtun (Image:Mohammed Nadir Khan of Afghanistan.jpg) from Pashtuns gallery. [25] This should not be treated as a dispute but vandalism because it's beginning to show that he hates Pashtuns and would attack them anyway he can. King Nadir Khan became famous enough to even have his portrait hung inside the Presidential Palace in Afghanistan. See Image:George W. Bush meets Afghan politicians in Kabul.jpg Le Behnam, who claims to be an ethnic Tajik [26], is coming up with ridiculous reasons for removing Khan's image. [27] This kind of behaviour is very disturbing and should not be allowed to continue. I don't understand how many times more do we have to warn this person to behave before a block is rewarded to him. The only thing we see from his contributions is that he logs to this site just so he can attack ethnic Pashtun related images, with no other work being done. He is a banned editor on Wikipedia (en:User:Beh-nam) and is currently engaged in sockpuppetry (his current undetected sockpuppet en:User:SwatiAfridi)[28], he is involved in edit-war with en:User:Carl.bunderson at en:Talk:Afghanistan and en:Afghanistan. I believe trouble makers such as him should be not just be blocked but banned and their IP range also blocked.--Executioner 20:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

userboxes

Hi again,

The other day I made a local version of the mellow userbox for my user page. I wanted the box to center in the right column and the underlying BUser had built-in l/r margins of 1px that interfered with this idea, so I parameterized the margins and invoked it from my local copy. I'm thinking that exploring and tweaking such templates is a good way for me to explore commons a bit, meet people, and demonstrate value. I actually don't think too highly of user boxes - but that's more a view of the en:wp sort that scream This users plays Doom or This user lives for TV. In doing this, I don't want to break anything or run afoul of conventions here that are well established. I've seen that you've edited a number of these templates and thought I should do the not-too-bold thing and ask first.

There seems to be a norm of wrapping user boxes in a right-floated box that the individual boxes float-left in. This is really only one way this could work. I'm unsure if this will cause stir and, if so, will focus elsewhere. If I proceed, the next step would be to make a box like mellow accept an option parameter; left, right, center, none; with left being the default. For centering, the float would be none, while the l/r margins would be auto - for old browsers, the parent would have to text-align: center; too.

So, I'm open to suggestions and expect that I should avoid messing with too many templates until I garner some interest in the idea.

Cheers, "Jack Merridew" 09:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

That sounds fine to me, just take it slow in case it causes some unwanted affects or others don't like it. Rocket000 10:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Wikiportrait

Hi, thanks for cleaning up my {Wikiportrait} template. I'm not that handy with templates myself, so any help is appreciated :) Husky ^{(talk to me)} 21:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh no problem. I like working on templates :) Cheers, Rocket000 05:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Hi. Nice to know who to go to with all those messy loose ends. Hopefully not too often. Cheers, Tom

Petersent 03:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

ImageTalks

Why do u delete image talks?--Sanandros 14:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Because when new images are uploaded under those names, people get confused. :) Rocket000 14:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

But u could transfare these talks to the new pics.--Sanandros 20:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Huh? The discussions are about deleted images, they wouldn't apply to new (different) images uploaded with those names. If the image was simply renamed and not deleted, the talk page should be moved to the new location, otherwise they're just as useless. Rocket000 21:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleting redirects

I notice you deleted several redirects I created today. Redirects for images now work, and the instructions for dealing with, e.g., duplicate images have changed, so that we are now supposed to use redirects, so that universal replacement is no longer necessary and projects can use language-specific image titles. See Commons:Village_pump#Image_redirects.--Ragesoss 00:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh crap, I missed the memo. I knew it was coming soon, but I didn't know this soon. Sorry about that. Rocket000 01:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!

Thank you! But I was wondering, look at this I see the note where it says "All rights reserved" but then it says also "Public" I'm a little confused, but will it get removed if it was uploaded to wikimedia as copyright? --Kanonkas 17:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Unfortunately, that image is not allowed on Commons. It's says "public" because the photo is viewable to the public (verses "private", where it would only be visible to those the author allows to see it). So it has nothing to do with the copyright status. See http://www.flickr.com/help/privacy/. Don't worry, this happens to be a common misunderstanding. Rocket000 17:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick message, if I got any questions about anything I'll ask you. If you don't mind :) Take care --Kanonkas 17:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll be glad to help. Cheers, Rocket000 17:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Look at this if I am correct, that one can be uploaded? --Kanonkas 17:39, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep! If you click on where it says "some rights reserved" it will take you to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en, which is definitely allowed here. Rocket000 17:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, hehe I've learn that I just need to ask questions. It's better then just risking to get a warning. I see their is less requirements here on commons to be a admin? Not that I'm trying for it, but if you don't mind again. On Wikipedia, their are those "Special pages" is their some kind of that on commons, or similar? --Kanonkas 18:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

You mean Special:SpecialPages? (The link's in the sidebar.) And yes, the requirements to become an admin here are a lot less demanding than en.wikipedia's. And there's a lot less policies to know :) If you're interested, just spend a little time on here (2-3 months), participate in admin-related areas (e.g. COM:DR, marking things like vandalism for deletion, etc.), and most importantly, let us get to know you (while you get to know the community). Also see Commons:Guide to adminship. Cheers, Rocket000 18:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll try :) But are there any scripts to do the job a little easier? On en.wikipedia their are scripts like twinkle, friendly, etc. I can also help with translation, if that is ever needed on commons. Where can I find templates? Like for speedy deletion of images/pages I would have found it on wikipedia by using WP:template but I tried here with COM:template no result --Kanonkas 18:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I just saw a user who seems to advertise, just look here --Kanonkas 18:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, unlike Wikipedia, we don't have a short version for "Commons:", but we do have some shortcuts that begin with "COM:". Take a look at COM:COM, which lists all the major shortcuts. That's a good way to find important pages too, like COM:T, COM:MT, COM:CT, and CAT:T for templates. For scripts see Category:User scripts, however, most of the most useful ones can be turned on as gadgets under your preferences. You may also find useful tools under COM:TOOLS. Many WP scripts work here also (like Popups) although I don't think Twinkle/Friendly work, but you'll see there's not much need for them here. I should point out the "Nominate for deletion" link in the side bar as many people overlook that. And I'll look into that user's contribs. Thanks. Rocket000 18:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh thank you very much for that, I see you blocked him. I forgot to ask, are there any tools like Autowiki browser, huggle etc. Automatic? --Kanonkas 19:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ouch! That was gross shouldn't it be removed? I know mediawiki isn't censored but what is that picture needed for? --Kanonkas 19:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

(←) Wow. Thanks again :) We're not censored, but we do have a scope Yes, AWB works here too. Rocket000 19:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW, you're approved. Rocket000 19:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again! :) I'm going to look trough this tool now, what kind of contributions can it do here? --Kanonkas 19:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It can be used for pretty much anything it's used for on Wikipedia. The only think that doesn't work too well is the spell checker since Commons is multilingual. If you never used it before you may want to take a look at en:Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/User manual. Rocket000 19:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Now this tool was a little hard to use, can you give me examples on what to write in each of those boxes? I'm reading trough the user manual but a little hard. --Kanonkas 19:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... well it depends on what you want to do. Usually it's used for mass editing such as renaming categories, converting templates, fixing links, adding or subtracting something from a bunch of pages.. things like that. I can help you with regexes and that stuff, but first you need to decide what you'd like to do :) Rocket000 19:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I did my first csd. Well I want to do renaming categories, converting templates, fixing links, adding or subtracting something from a bunch of pages, but I don't know how to do that. Could you tell me? :) --Kanonkas 19:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if you watch Special:NewPages you'll see lots of spam/test/vandalism pages. As for AWB, let's say you want to rename a category. First, you click on the [Normal] button under "Find and replace" on the "Options" menu. That will open up a form where you can add the old cat name under "Find" and the new cat name under "Replace with". Now click [Done] and make a list by selecting "Category" and typing in the category name (the old name), then press [Make list]. This will give you a list of pages within that category. After that, click the "Start" tab, type a edit summary, and click [Start]. This is a very simple set up, but you'll see how it works. Rocket000 20:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I just did that, thanks to you. Now I was wondering, can you give me a old category and a new category I can do with this tool? Btw, on the admin issue, I know a long time too but does the csd count as contributions? Because, I can't see them in my history. I belive their "deleted" contributions? --Kanonkas 20:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, personally, I always look at a user's deleted contribs during their RfA and I know many others do too (mostly it's admins that vote anyway so they can see them). Right now the bare minimum is 200 edits (nothing!) and I would say that applies to non-deleted edits only but I would encourage you to have more than that if you self-nom (say, at least 400 with 50 or so in the Commons namespace). A good amount of deleted edits will definitely help too. Knowing other languages is also a huge plus. For category renames, take a look in Category:Category redirects—all of those should be empty. Rocket000 20:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

If you're looking for a little more work, there's Category:Requested moves. Usually, these are given to a bot to do, but you can do them too if you want. Just stay away from any potentially controversial moves. Stick to things like capitalization and other established naming conventions until you become familiar with how things work here. Rocket000 20:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, if I ever try I hope you will be the nominator :) On the subject, on awb. In "Find" I put in "Category redirects" but what do I put in "Replace with" "some category here" --Kanonkas 20:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

For example, let's say you want to rename/move Category:Boat types to Category:Boats by type. First you create the category (you can simply categorize it by adding Category:Boats; you can also add a description, but you don't need to). Next make a list of everything in Category:Boat types (those images shouldn't be there, though). Open up the find & replace menu and put [[Category:Boat types]] in the "Find" column and [[Category:Boats by type]] in the "replace with" column. And that's it. Now, some pages in that category may have a sort key (i.e. [[Category:Boat types|something]]) to avoid this, simply search for [[Category:Boats and replace with [[Category:Boats by type leaving the ]]'s off. Rocket000

21:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Correct? Please see the image, I understood what you said but on the make list place, do I add "Boats by type"?

And can I do the action, because the page have a notice regarding a move but no discussion have happend. --Kanonkas 21:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

No, put Boat types there to make the list (Category:Boats by type is empty right now) and yes you can go ahead and rename this cat as it's pretty non-controversial and there's usually not that much discussion anyway or else it would be better off being listed on COM:CFD. Rocket000 21:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, here I got another picture, this time it's correct? Just push start, I just uploaded a picture to show this so I don't do something wrong. --Kanonkas 21:39, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, just push start. Don't worry, right now it's only semi-automatic so you'll get to preview every change before you save them (if you get skilled at using the tool, you can later apply for a bot flag to go completely automatic). One more thing, I would change the edit summary to something like "Renaming Category:Boat types to Category:Boats by type". Rocket000 21:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but can you make the Category "Boats by type" --Kanonkas 21:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. You may want to turn off the "Add replacements to edit summary", an option on the Find & Replace menu. Rocket000 22:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done I did it very good if you ask me, but then later it started to lag/or not work I don't know :/ but I got trough it. Is their anything else like that I can do? By the way, delete this thanks. --Kanonkas 22:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Good job! Sometimes it lags a little when it loads pages (more the server's fault than AWB's). Anyway, there's always plenty of work around here. For something a little different, look at the top of Special:RecentChanges. There's a bunch of things you can work on there. If you do some manual categorizing (like going through Special:UncategorizedImages) make sure you use Hotcat.js (click the little '+' on the category bar—I think this gadget is turned on by default). It makes things so much easier. Rocket000 23:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I'll leave that category "redirect in place just in case someone tries to use it in the future. There's some links to it, anyway. Usually we don't delete categories after renames unless it's a typo or a similarly unlikely name. Rocket000 23:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, I was wondering if you could, directly point out. Just like you did with the boats, if you don't mind? Is this one a category I should add to "Schools"?. You're great here, keep up the work :)! --Kanonkas 23:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, with that, I think "School" should stay a parent category of school-related stuff including "Schools" (as in the actual places), so some discussion would be nice first, but go ahead if you think it should be merged. Let's see... there's also Category:Saint Michael's Churches, Category:Reliefs of Egypt, Category:Pincio (Roma), Category:Theater of Marcellus in Rome... just some non-controversial ones I saw in Category:Requested moves. Rocket000 23:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, currently it's  Not done --Kanonkas 23:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Category:Saint Michael churches  Done Now I'm going to do the Category:Reliefs of Egypt --Kanonkas 23:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done now to the third, thanks for watching my back and change it to a good one like here. Phew, I am really tired of the page moving. --Kanonkas 00:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Hehe, don't burn yourself out now. There's plenty of other things to do here :) Rocket000 00:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

All  Done, now that was hard but I helped :) You got anything else for me? --Kanonkas 01:16, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Now I got a question regarding flickr, look at this I see it's licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic. But I don't see any templates that have that, I've just found 2.0 templates but none with noncommercial use. Can I upload it? --Kanonkas 11:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

No, non-commercial licenses aren't allowed on Commons. All our images have to be free for any use. Rocket000 20:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thought so, I saw it on the flickr review article. "Only these licenses " I've got over 200 contributions already, well I'll talk to you tomorrow, I need to sleep. Meantime I'll try to find a picture and ask you again. --Kanonkas 20:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay :) Rocket000 20:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rocket! Check this one --Kanonkas 12:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess I can't upload this one either. I looked trough the tags, this one is the closest I get. --Kanonkas 12:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice find. Of course you can upload it. Just use {{Cc-by-sa-2.0}}. It should be an option when uploading. And for future reference maybe Commons:Creative Commons copyright tags will help. Rocket000 13:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, going to upload it here (right?) and I know you can't adopt users here, but can you be like a guardian? :) --Kanonkas 13:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. I'm always willing to answer questions :) For uploading images from Flickr, I suggest using this little tool. It fills in all the info for you (sometimes you got to make little changes though). Rocket000 13:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait, I forgot try this instead. Rocket000 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait! I see it's already here on commons, I belive if I upload this, then this one will be a duplicate? --Kanonkas 13:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess it is. No need to upload it again. Rocket000 14:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Finally! It's hard to find free pictures. Look at this one I don't belive it's on Commons? --Kanonkas 14:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. Upload away. Rocket000 14:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Uploaded it, look at Image:A fountain in Chillon Castle.jpg and review it :) I've got more flickr images I wonder on 1

2 and third --Kanonkas 14:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Those look good too. I think you're getting the hang of it. Rocket000 14:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I learned from you! Time to upload them. --Kanonkas 14:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done Now I've contributed with some images! Could you please see them? While we're on it, you got anything I could do? (Sorry to ask, just thought you might need some help) --Kanonkas 15:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Well done! As of recently, I've been working on cleaning up our project pages/categories, working on new internationalization headers, and trying to categorize each and everyone of our templates (while still working out the details of the scheme). I would love some help, but unfortunately these tasks might be a little too much for a newcomer as yourself, so I'm not sure what to suggest. Maybe go and explore Commons a little until you find something that you would like doing. Rocket000 15:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the pictures, here I've got some more 1 2 3 4 5 6 and 7 I know the licenses now, I just want a confirmed clear yes by you.--Kanonkas 15:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, indeed I can do that. I just need to see you doing it on some pages (I've seen your contributions about it) but it would be nice if you could show it again! Don't I fall in the category - A little more experienced then a novice? --Kanonkas 15:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice choices. Licenses are all allowed and they're good quality. And yes, you're more experienced than a novice, however, even I have trouble sometimes finding the right category or figuring out what to when working on those things I listed above. For example, here's a recent little mess I'm trying to clean up: Category:Commons maintenance content, Category:Commons maintenance, Category:Commons administration, and even the content cat Category:Maintenance. Also, look at all the translations in Category:Commons projects (that's a Category:Commons-en subcat so it should all be English pages). Rocket000 15:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You sure got a lot to do! I'm going to help you later on, but I got another image which I need a clear yes on. I just noticed, you can have these pictures way larger, good thing I noticed that now. --Kanonkas 16:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that's good too. If you the Flickr upload bot it should upload the biggest size by default. Rocket000 16:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Good to hear! Now I'm more experienced about Flickr images and their rights, time to upload more pictures! Please look trough them, thanks for taking your time! --Kanonkas 16:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Sphinx_Observatory.jpg I did something wrong. I looked trough this 3 times, could you move it and I'll take care of the information? --Kanonkas 16:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

We can't move images. Sorry, just reupload it. Rocket000 16:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I made a mistake, I'll be even more carefull now. Could you review the pictures? --Kanonkas 16:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

3 Pictures left to upload, I was wondering if you looked at the english wikipedia on "Blood orange" you'll see a picture, could I add my picture instead? The flickr image is higher resolution --Kanonkas 17:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, it's a wiki :). Rocket000 17:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done Ohh I see Rocket isn't doing anything now, well I got a boring but needed task. Review my pictures :P --Kanonkas 17:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rocket! You got anything I could help you with today? By the way, do you belive I know the licenses now e.g I could try to request to be a trusted user?--Kanonkas 14:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

(←) Well, I trust you of course, but I can't speak for the rest of the community. I think maybe you should do some more work with marking copyvios for speedy deletion first to show others that you know your stuff. I good place to catch copyvios is Special:NewImages. Any maybe even add some comments/votes on COM:DR (that would be good experience in order to become an admin too. First thing I look for anyway.) Rocket000 14:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

As you say, I got no rush. Look at this user the uploader seems to upload almost identically pictures eg "Greil Marcus 13, 14, 15, etc. I'm currently not sure if this goes under COM:D#Duplicates --Kanonkas 14:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

From what I saw, no. Images are only duplicates if they are exactly the same or are scaled down versions (not cropped). Rocket000 15:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, because I've seen some pictures getting deleted even though they're not exactly same. But do you have anything? --Kanonkas 15:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... look for copyvios? Create a new gallery? Upload some images? Vote on COM:FPC, COM:QIC, or COM:VIC? Help some users at the help desk? I don't know, whatever you would like :) Rocket000 15:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

When I searched on white cat, it came up with this seems to me that the username that comes up should be blocked for a good time for a username like that. --Kanonkas 15:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

And it was blocked by White Cat herself. Rocket000 15:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Was going to see the block history but forgot. I'm doing some csd tagging now on articles, you can handle them if you want. When I'm done I am going to check pictures on commons --Kanonkas 15:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Look at this user seems to vandalize even though s/he got a note about his/her page, which was deleted. Now s/he are making another page. --Kanonkas 15:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! (P.S. Don't be afraid to make a new section on this page, I'm gonna have to archive soon :) Rocket000 16:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Nah I like to make this section bigger! Anyway, I pretty much got a little sick when I saw this I don't see the value of this beeing here --Kanonkas 17:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It could potentially help illustrate that specific act (unfortunately). We have some others like it and I wouldn't say it should be speedy deleted, however, it could be nominated for regular deletion. Images like this we try to keep to a minimum. (I'm not going to remove the speedy tag though as there are other admins ;) Rocket000 17:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thought so I saw the category before. Just wanted to notify you about the picture, someone else putted the csd tag though. --Kanonkas 18:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rocket! Sorry I've been busy with reading to a important test of mine. Anyway, I was wondering if you could see my deleted contributions (Are they good?) --Kanonkas 18:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

(←) Excellent. I see you're catching a lot of out of scope pages, which we seem to get more of than outright vandalism (I think people confuse us with Wikipedia). Good job welcoming users too! (P.S. Hope you did well on your test). Rocket000 11:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I wrote 4 pages on the test :)! Oh that's good! You've listen to Madonna's "4 Minutes"? I don't really like the song but with Timbaland it's pretty cool. Back on business, I was wondering if you needed help, and how is your day? --Kanonkas 11:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Haven't heard that song. If you want you can do some recategorizing of any images in these categories. For some reason upload bots like to keep putting images in those but they are main categories and should only contain subcategories. I have my bot clean them up sometimes.. but really they need human review to help put them in more specific categories. Rocket000 11:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure I'll review them, but that's one huge list. --Kanonkas 11:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Just pick one that sounds good to you (maybe Category:Music by country?) Rocket000 11:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflict. Oh well, how did you know I was going to take that category! Anyway look at this there I see the pictures are not in the sub category, should they be? --Kanonkas 11:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

No never mind I found it out here that's where I should clean the pictures --Kanonkas 11:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. That's what I meant. (However, you could categorize even deeper if you want. Those images don't need to be in a subcat, but usually they can be put into one. For example, Image:Skambankt.jpg can go in Category:Concerts in Norway. If you can't figure out what subcat something should go in then it's likely that it belongs in main category until a new category is made.) Rocket000 12:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Uhh!! The hard thing is, their is no category for some things like "People in netherlands" I knew exactly where that picture was from and then later found it, their is no sub category for that and have to revert my edit. --Kanonkas 12:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Just look at the subcats of Category:People by country. Rocket000 12:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Now that was kind of annoying, I didn't see the "Next 200" thanks! --Kanonkas 12:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Look at this category, it's backlog is soon fixed. If you could help me with the images remaining that would be great --Kanonkas 13:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done Rocket000 14:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Now I'm going to help you with clearing another one. [See my Speedy deletions] --Kanonkas 14:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't usually make pages but look at this picture, I don't see a category for indian police. The category will be "Police of India" if you disagree please tell me what's wrong (Got another speedy) --Kanonkas 14:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I would go ahead and make Category:Police of India. All you need to do is categorize it. Don't worry about a description, as the title is pretty self-explanatory. (Usually, when I create a new category, I try to fill it up with more than one image/page, but for something like this, one is ok since nothing else for it.) Rocket000 14:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Taken care of, now look at this what category should this one be in --Kanonkas 15:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes you just need to totally recategorize. :) Rocket000 15:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, now that category is  Done --Kanonkas 15:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Should I move this and this one. I was wondering if their are cat's like "Chipmunks in rome" should it then be possibly moved to "Chipmunks (Rome)" Yes I know it was a bad example. --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

(←)I always thought it should be "____ in ____" but I'm not sure now. Rocket000 18:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

It sounds really better with "Template (Rome)" instead of "Template in Rome" but could you ask someone, and if the answer is no it should be _in_ instead of _(rome) Then it'll be some page moving I will be doing. --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... this is something I'm not really experienced with. Maybe you should list them on COM:CFD? Rocket000 19:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll ask at the IRC or COM:HD --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I'm done with that but nobody seems to answer it. Could you list it on CFD later on (if needed) because it seems to me you need to discuss about a certain category. While I'm just looking for a answer on "In Rome" or (Rome) for example in this case. Anything you got for me? --Kanonkas_(talk) 09:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Got anything I could help you with? --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Um.. I'm working on filling the number categories right now. It's pretty easy—whatever has a number in it. Rocket000 13:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Do I have to browse image files, to find these pictures then add them to a certain "Number" cat? I'm not sure how you find them so quickly. Tell me how you do it. --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well usually, I start by just searching for a number. That will give you a good start, then there's some categories that have a lot of numbers. Anything that involves signs, cars, trains, games (like pool, dice, and cards), and sports. If you just search for them, you'll likely mostly find road signs, which are kinda boring so better to find other ones. I tend to skip over the roads signs a lot (unless they're photos). Rocket000 13:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, look at this one. Does the picture need to have 15 in it, or just be like "Boeing F-15 Eagle" then get added to number 15. --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it should have a very visible number in the photo itself. However, you can put the category in Category:15 (number) since there's a number in the category name. Rocket000 13:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, look at my 2 contributions. Is it correct or wrong? --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I just simply can't find it when I search, all I get is like cat's or media file names with it but no pictures with number(s) on it. Anything else? (Sorry if this is annoying you) you're doing a great job, keep it up :) --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess I should have mentioned that you should use the advanced search. For 15, here's what I would start with: the first 500 images. And you're not annoying me at all (but please start a new section so I can archive this at a reasonable time :P) Rocket000 11:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Valued images evaluation

Dear Rocket000,

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 20:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:FxAnimated64.png

Hi! I have just noticed that you have deleted images FxAnimated64.png and FxAnimated128.png with explanation PNG's aren't animated. But they were animated in apng format! Just like this image that is on APNG page in English Wikipedia. I know that not all browsers support this modern format (like IE), but I think that is not the reason to delete these images.--iricigor 21:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm.. Completely static on Firefox 2, and technically, GIF is the only supported format for animations but I'll take your word for it. Restored. Rocket000 21:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Flickr

Oops. Methinks my browser hates accented characters. Sorry for the confusion. :/ Keilana 03:29, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Award

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your great contributions, even though you're tired you do the job --Kanonkas 17:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

If anybody needs a barnstar, then it's Rocket! --Kanonkas 17:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! Thank you very much! Rocket000 17:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

question

Hello rocket, I have a question that is annoying the hell out of me. If you take a look at Image:Information icon1.svg what color do you see? If you see blue, which is what I'm seeing, why isn't the image updating? I've uploaded different versions and don't see the changes. I've purged, cleared the cache, cookies and everything but the image is still blue. Do you have a word on this? Another comment is that I've created a whole new file (Image:Information icon2.svg) but still see the image from Image:Information icon1.svg! Maybe it's inkscape?--penubag 01:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I have no idea.. I never experienced that before. I'll look into it. Rocket000 03:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well it finally updated. I guess the servers were really lagging or something. Rocket000 03:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I think it was the coding that screwed it up, since Image:Information icon1.svg was the only one that updated. I guess it's about time I learn svg coding...even though that wouldn't explain how it showed up correctly in the file history. --penubag 04:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The reason it showed up correctly in the file history is because those are the actual SVGs and not PNG thumbnails, but honestly I have no idea why one updated and not the other. Maybe it was the simplified code.. edit a few SVG's in notepad, or better yet, with the XML editor in Inkscape, and you'll get to know the code fairly quick. With nearly every SVG I make, there's always a point where I finish tweaking it by hand. Inkscape and Illustrator (especially Illustrator!) are kinda sloppy with their output. Rocket000 04:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, weird. I did not know that I was viewing a png thumb all along! Well, thanks for the tip, I'll look into it :) --penubag 04:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Jorghex Violation

Thanks Rocket000 for block me, now I know how to upload archives (I think), thank you very much Jorghe

Well, that's the first time someone thanked me for blocking them! Hehe.. I hope we don't have anymore copyright issues. Cheers, Rocket000 22:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Flickr web tools

Bah, my database got corrupted. Will fix it someday. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

user: Executioner making false claims with categories

Can you please take a look at this image? I have provided 2 scholarly sources that he was from Iran but changed his name later but he ignores them. It would be great if you could step in please. Thanks. Le Behnam 19:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I repeatedly explained to Le Behnam and another user that it does not matter where al-Afghani was born because I'm not adding country related category. I am ONLY focusing on his ethnic background, I've uploaded the image of al-Afghani and added ethnic Pashtuns category. Le Behnam keeps removing the cat by claiming that al-Afghani was born in Iran, which is strongly disputed because most sources say he was born in Afghanistan, but I am not interested in finding out where he was born. I'm explaining that his ethnic background is Pashtun, regardless where he was born or what language he spoke. I have presented strong evidence to indicate that he was an ethnic Pashtun so the 'Pashtuns category' should be ok.--Executioner 22:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to get in the middle of this, but as I suggested before, just don't remove each other's categories (unless you agree something should be removed). I appreciate both of you using the talk page, please continue to do so because simply reverting doesn't solve anything (as you know :) Rocket000 23:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Man oh man! User:Le Behnam is refusing to listen and is removing Categories that I added. He pretends everything he says is the truth and everything others say is totally false. Rocket000, can you please protect Image_talk:S._J._al-Afghani.jpg or warn Le Behnam to stop removing categories just because his knowledge is low on this subject and refusing to learn or use the talk page at Image talk:S. J. al-Afghani.jpg. I have proven that the person in the image is of ethnic Afghan (modern term: Pashtun) background. The following is another Pashtun figure-head whos father had simlar al-Afghani last name.

• "Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan s/o Muhi-ud-Din bin AhmedAI-EssaAI-Khoashki Al-Jamandi Al-Afghani, was born in the year 1345 (1927) Al-Hijri, in Qasur, a city of the Punjab Province, in Pakistan. His grandfathers emigrated from Afghanistan escaping from the wars and ribal strifes. Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan belongs to the famous Afghanese tribe AlKhoashki Al-Jamandi. The residence place of his tribe was the valley of Arghastan south east of the city of Kandhar (Afghanistan)."[29], [30]

These are ethnic Pashtuns but of a distance Arab descend. They consider themselves as ethnic Afghans but today the term "ethnic Afghan" is not widely used so instead only Pashtun is used. The reason for this is due to ethnic Afghans or ethnic Pashtuns being divided into 2 countries, Afghanistan and Pakistan. All the citizens of Afghanistan are called Afghans and all the citizens of Pakistan are called Pakistanis.--Executioner 22:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I left him a message. I think you meant protect Image:S. J. al-Afghani.jpg not the talk page :) which I'll do if this continues. I have the page watched, but let me know if I miss anything. Rocket000 00:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Wikipedia equivalents

What's with the removal of the Wikipedia categories? (also on Commons requests, and probably elsewhere. Unless the template is to be deleted, should we not make use of it? Please explain. Richard001 04:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

That's what those interwiki links in the side bar are for. That template should be deleted because it's redundant,completely English Wikipedia-centric, created as part of an inactive cross-project-rejected WikiProject and many times those categories have nothing to do with ours. Linking to them may encourage users to think our category system is just like en.wp's (or that it should be). This has caused so many messes in the past it simply best not to even link to those other categories (what good can it do anyway?) Rocket000 04:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I didn't think of the interwiki links and basically agree with you that it should be deleted. The categories are and should be quite similar (though obviously it's not always going to work - we're a different wiki and we have a different sort of content on top of that). If you don't think the template should be used though, you should be proposing it for deletion, not manually removing it. A bot can do that sort of thing surely. Also, if you're going to remove it, please add the en: links to replace it if there isn't one already, as in Category:Commons requests (I've done this for you). Richard001 10:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

My apologies for not added the interwiki link for en. I forgot to check for it. Most already have them but I'll be sure to check for it in the future. I thought of nominating it for deletion, however, usually that doesn't do so well for non-license related templates. They get very little discussion and the deletion is usually based simply on if they are used or not (not unlike how we treat "out of scope" images). COM:DR really isn't the best platform to discuss things like this with it being so dominated with copyright issues. This is one area where I wish we were more like en.wp, where when used templates are nominated, policy-based or guideline-forming discussion follows. It would help us figure out what should be done in certain situations, but we're kinda more on our own here. I've found the best practice with templates like this is just to gradually remove the uses and when it's completely forgotten just non-controversially speedy it (sometimes they get nominated anyway in this time as "old unused template" or similar, which works too). And I doubt with this specific template, but who knows, sometimes they can be transformed into something that shouldn't be deleted. Rocket000 11:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

If you're not going to nominate it for deletion I will. Richard001 08:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Might as well "vote" I guess. ;) Cheers, Rocket000 13:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

number categories

I notice that you added Caroll Shelby's picture to Category:33 (number). Are you sure that you wanted to do that? There are hundreds or thousands of images of racing cars where there number is clearly visible. (Scarcasm begins) You can have real fun by added all of the images in the subcategories of Category:Racing cars to these number categories! I bet it would take you more than...a minute! Royalbroil 03:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Kinda silly, isn't it? ;) But I don't think just because a few of them are added to a number category that we to go and hunt out every last one. If people simply want a picture of a car with a certain number, they'll find one. (And why would they search for that? Don't ask me. :) Rocket000 11:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Delete

Would it be possible to format the link to the deletion log (step no. 2) so that it is functional even when accessed from another WikiMedia project (e.g. en:Image:France Preseren.jpg)? Thanks a lot if you'll be able to fix that. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 09:24, April 28, 2008 (UTC)

Actually I saw your comment on the talk page a few days ago and I was going to try to make it work, but I'm not sure if it can be done with simply changing the template since it deals with the way MediaWiki handles the link (it treating the external links as a wiki link). I'll look into a possible workaround. Rocket000 11:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Questions

Now you can archive it:) Thanks, for the the advanced search tip. Look at this it's numbers from 1 - 15. Should I add all of those, or just 15(number)? --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ;) I would go with just 15 (since there's 15 total). If images contain a lot of numbers, you can just add it to Category:Numbers. For example: Image:Eight Ball Rack 2005 SeanMcClean cropped.jpg, Image:Numbers grid in NY.jpg, and Image:Bingo numbers (red).jpg. You may want to pick another number because I think I got most of 15. Rocket000 13:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure I'll leave you to 15. I'll go with 20, 21, 22, etc --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. Rocket000 14:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

One good place is road signs like you said --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I belive I've found 3 duplicates --Kanonkas_{<fontcolor="blue">(talk)} 14:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've come across many duplicates. Some of those may be place holder images because it looks like they were uploaded knowing full well the others existed. Sometime when I feel like it I'm going to go through those categories and see which ones should be deleted. Rocket000 14:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Another thing, I know the users that are part of the route shield project on en.wp have a certain naming scheme and I would have to look in to it more before to know which one has the "correct" name. I don't wanna screw up their system. Rocket000 14:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, for this time you would like to wait. That was some work I did today, hope I helped you out :)! I've got 702 contributions (Including deleted, and this one) --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you very much. Rocket000 17:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem! I was wondering if you know a flickr user with very nice image(s), and high res which could get a featured status?--Kanonkas_(talk) 17:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Not any that don't already have their FP-quality images already on here. Although, you may find some ones that haven't be uploaded yet from those Flickr users or they may have new ones. Usually if you do a search (with both the Creative Commons options marked) you find some good quality photos. You just got to hunt for those FPs :) Rocket000 18:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll get a featured picture! But why haven't you tried to get Bureaucrat rights? --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, right now, I don't think there's a need for more bureaucrats. The ones we have do a really great job. Also, there's a few other admins I think should become 'crats before me. Anyway, good luck finding that FP! Rocket000 18:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh I see, well good luck when you try though :) I haven't been doing deletion requests, but do you belive I still could get the trusted user rights, or do you mean I should do more image tagging, and COM:DR? --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I would do a little work on COM:DR first to show people you know what's allowed on here and what's not. (Marking copyvios helps too.) BTW, I think you're well on your way to becoming an admin. As soon as you reach the 2 month minimum, I'll probably be nominating you. Rocket000 18:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

That made my day :) Thanks, I'll try to do some deletion requests --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I just got vandalized today :S I tried to do my 2nd Deletion request today, but I contacted Collard on IRC, and he deleted it before I got to say "delete" oh well. --Kanonkas_(talk) 12:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm still doing category (Integers), is their anything you need help with today, other then that? --Kanonkas_(talk) 16:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Nothing yet. Right now I'm cleaning up cross-namespace redirects which means deleting (so you can't really help yet :). But I made a list of the integers to show us what categories still need to be made (at least 0-100) and which categories have very few images. (The number after the category is the number of images/pages in the category.) Rocket000 17:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I noticed that, I just made one category, and that was "52" which you helped me with. --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

(←) Yep. All you need to do now to create a new category is add {{numbercategory|number}} it will categorize and sort for you. Rocket000 17:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know of that. I've made some categories (Yes, indeed I know we should have more pictures in each category) But each category starts somewhere! --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

What are you supposed to do on meta? Is it like where we discuss eg, global blocks, spam list, etc? --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's part of it. Meta's for the coordination of all Wikimedia projects. Like Commons, it's multilingual. Mainly it's for dealing with global policies, user rights (where there's no local system set up yet or where a steward is needed), SUL/usurpation, interlanguage co-ordination, help on MediaWiki software (although this is slowly moving to mw:), among other "meta" things. Rocket000 19:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the informaton! Are you doing something I could help you with? --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh I'm just messing around with regexes and doing some database scans (with AWB) seeing what I can find. :) Rocket000 13:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Good luck with that! I'll try to do more deletion requests, and image tagging, category, gallery, etc. Tell me if their is something I could help you with! :) --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I will. :) And good luck with your tasks. Rocket000 13:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Rocket! Hehe, your other account. How many deletion requests do you belive I should do? BTW how is your work going? :) --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

You're doing good. I would look for some potential (not just CSD-obvious) copyvios to nominate. That will really help show you know copyright laws as well as our licensing policy. So far, you made it clear have a great understanding of our scope, however we generally like to see more work in the copyright area if (you are still considering becoming a trusted user, that is). Of course, you're not expected to be an expert or anything it's a really complex area, it's just good to give your opinion on some of the tougher issues rised on COM:DR. Rocket000 17:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and my work's coming along fine. I just found a bunch of old temple->Commons namespace redirects to clean up. Rocket000 17:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

That's good to hear! :) Well I got a question regarding derivative works is it for example: I have a disney logo on my t-shirt, then a friend of mine takes a picture of it, then uploads it for example "Commons" and licenses as "Public", now that's where the derivative works come in? But! If my friend took a picture of me, and a friend with the disney logo still on my shirt. But on that photo, we weren't trying to the disney logo, but instead us two. --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

See that where it gets complicated. We're so used to living with "fair use" that we tend to forget the true legal power a copyright holder could have. You'll hear rationales like "but it's low resolution" or "it's not even the main subject of the picture", these are almost always fair use rationales, which don't work on Commons. What you got to keep in mind is, an image uploaded here can be used for anything including commercial uses, so even though you're not infringing on anyones rights, reusers may be. However, if the logo is so small or out of focus that it could be considered de minimis or if the logo is ineligible for copyright (e.g. it's just plain text and simple geometric shapes) then it's allowed. Of course, trademark laws can protect the logo just as much as copyright laws can, but they can still be allowed on here. Files only have to be free in the copyright-sense. Rocket000 18:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Look at this image, the image is trying to illustrate the person. In the background, you see "Pirates of the caribbean" and in this image, you clearly see the "Star Wars" characters. Shouldn't this one be deleted due to COM:DW? Sorry, but I'm not so experienced with this subject. Also look at this I belive this is fan art, and is a subject to COM:DW. --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I would say the first one is fine since most of the logo is covered up (discussion would be needed). As for the second one, I don't think anyone really knows. Right now, I don't think there's really a consensus (see related discussion). And yes, that last one looks like fan art but I don't recognize the character. I think you found a good candidate for deletion. Rocket000 18:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what I thought, the first one wasn't, the 2nd one I was not sure. While the third one is a subject to a COM:DR. I'll take this into deletion requests, but I still don't get COM:DW so much. Because as you see in the 2nd picture, they are trying to illustrate a "Star wars" character which should be a violation of COM:DW, has this anything to do with COM:FOP? --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

No, because it's not on permanent public display. I think it clearly is a derivative (how can it not be?), but I think we're still trying to figure out what to do in these situations. You can always nominate that one too. Rocket000 19:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thought so, I was "mumbling". Should I give this note when nominating it with "Nominate for deletion" - "This image is a fan art for Star Wars which could be a violation of COM:DW, and the source does not exist, or is outdated." what do you say? --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. I just realized I'm late for work. :( Talk to you later. Rocket000 19:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Here it is I got some help from Lewis but I'm not sure on some photos like this --Kanonkas_(talk) 23:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the first screw up I made, my pardon Rocket. I'm sorry if I disappointed you. It's just, he was a admin, and I belived he knew this. --Kanonkas_(talk) 00:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(←) Not at all. You didn't screw up. Even if it's decided most of those shouldn't be deleted, it's always good to discuss things like this. Your nomination may not result in mass deletion of Star Wars images but it will help all of us know what to do in future situations. Like I said before, copyright law is a very complex thing; deletion requests aren't about who's right, they're about working together and making sure all our content really is free. You did fine. :) Rocket000 12:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so my chances aren't blown up? I belive I need to talk to you more about copyrights, I want to improve my knowledge on that. If you could that would be nice, but I'm still very confused with COM:DW could you give me a quick lesson? Eg, is this a derivative works --Kanonkas_(talk) 12:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely not—if anything your chances improved (IMO). I just went though all of those and completely support your nomination. Lewis Collard is a good guy who's very active on COM:DR and knows his stuff. Another very knowledgeable user is Lupo, he has helped me out before on copyright issues. I strongly recommend going to him if you have questions (especially related to {{PD-art}} issues, something I have a hard time making sense of). As for Image:Yoda_says_hi.jpg, yes, that's a clearly a derivative work to me. I just went though all the images there and am about to comment there. Rocket000 13:05, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's good to hear. I'll contact Lupo if I need help on art. I'll talk to you, and some others before doing a mass deletion like that again. Lewis was very helpfull, I'm not saying it was his fault, because I still nominated those images, and have to take responsibility for my actions. --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You're sounding like you did something wrong. You definitely didn't. Many people (including myself) are unsure of these images. The nomination was well made (many times people are lazy and just nominate a whole a category without listing the actual images in question) and I'm looking forward to seeing what comes of it. Rocket000 13:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was just I got very bad responded by other admins on the IRC about those images were not COM:DW. Now I know that's their opinion, and I have my opinion on the case. That's the reason we have a COM:DEL so we can discuss these kind of cases. Thanks Rocket for your support ;) Means a lot that you're helping me here on Commons! I'm glad you gave me that welcome template :P --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Me too. (Better than being welcomed by a bot, eh?) I never expected to "adopt" a new user by simply by welcoming them, but I'm glad it work out that way. :) And I'm glad it was you. Mass deletion requests always get a little backlash simply because you're nominating so many images at once but it's much better than nominating them one at time (our COM:DR page is always way too long anyway). Don't worry if people disagree (admins or not), we're all trying to do what we think is right. Rocket000 13:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! :) Yes, I don't like "welcome bots" it's not the same as getting it from a user. It's honour to have a very experienced user, like you Rocket to help me out. I really mean it! Is it anything you need help with now/later? --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. That means a lot to me. :) Actually, I'm sure what I want to work on right now. What about you? Do you have anything for me? hehe... Rocket000 14:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, keep up your good work! :) Actually I do. Look at this deletion debate. I agreed with the nominator, it's a copyrighted logo from Club Atlético Huracán I strongly do not belive the user have made this image. --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's what I like. Easy one. Now where did you find the link to that other image? It may not technically be "on" Commons. We all share the same server so unless it has a image page here and it's probably ok, otherwise it's likely to have been uploaded under fair use on a different Wikimedia project that allows that. Rocket000 14:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I did a google search. Here is the the page Yes, I know it might not be on commons, it was just what I had in my mind at that time.

I'll try to find more debates for you :)! --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I found it. It's on the French Wikipedia under fair use. Rocket000 14:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

See, I told you, you are the best! You found it in some mintutes. How do I get Twinkle here? I've seen Maxim using it here. Although I'm not sure if it's really needed here. In july I'll be sure to vote for your new status (What can that be?) --Kanonkas_(talk) 15:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

My new status? Huh? I'm not sure about the TW, I don't see it in Maxim's monobook.js. Rocket000 15:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Maxim#Twinkle. Rocket000 16:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's a secret :P! You'll have to wait for july. Thanks for asking Maxim, I never thought of that. Weird. --Kanonkas_(talk) 16:05, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rocket! I got a new user on commons, his name is Addshore very experienced indeed, with just a low count of edits like those. I belive that's a good thing. I'll keep a eye on him :) Back on subject, I've been very active on COM:DR now, what do you mean about my work over there? Do I need to use a better tone, more information, etc? --Kanonkas_(talk) 20:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, seems like it. He has great contribs so far :) I think your work on COM:DR is fine. You're doing everything right. And see what I mean about that Star Wars nom you made. We needed to discuss the issue. Rocket000 20:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I think it's time you become a trusted user. I would nominate you, but we don't really nominate others for that :) Rocket000 21:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok! I'll do it today. Sorry for not responding yesterday, my keyboard (wireless) had no battery, but I got it fixed today :) Yeah it's good that the DR discussion happend --Kanonkas_(talk) 07:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

How are you today? I was out almost whole day, that's why it's not much edits today. Anything I could do help you with? (other then COM:DR discussions ). Thank you very much for your support on my trusted user request! :) --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! I don't really have anything right now, but I'll let you know if I think of anything. Rocket000 00:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh okay, it's a new today :) I got promoted to trusted user thank you Rocket! I'll be trying to reviewing some flickr pictures, but could you check my back? It's just for some days so I know I'm doing it correct. Thank you :) --Kanonkas_(talk) 08:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello Rocket! Today I've seen a admin beeing in a "possible" edit war, and then fully protected the page without consensus reached. Admin Guillom unprotected the page for the same reason. I just wanted to notify you about the issue. Keep a eye on him for some days (I sure will). You've got anything I could help with today? :) Hope you have a nice day. --Kanonkas_(talk) 15:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out to me. That's one thing I don't take lightly. I think protecting a page in a situation like that is one of the worst abuses an admin can make. I don't have much time right now, but I think I'm going to work on closing some old deletion discussions if you want to head that way. Go to the oldest ones you can find and see if you can comment on them. They stay open so long because people just don't know what to do and really need more input.. but that can be hard too. :) Rocket000 21:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem! I've notified the admin in action, and belive I've resolved the issue. Is it anything I should improve on now? Yes, I got confused with what the user actually meant, and come up with this silly comment, thanks for resolving the little issue. --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC) --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, don't sign your name twice. :P No seriously, you're doing doing fine. I responded to your comment there just to clarify, I wasn't sure what you meant. I'll looked at some of your Flickr reviews and they were all perfect. Keep up the good work! Rocket000 18:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Hehe! I did that so I didn't confuse the two users. I'm just asking you because I like to know Rocket's opinion :) --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

(←) Today the flickr review category has a backlog. I see you've been in some hard talks on your talk page. If their is anything I could help you with, then you know who to tell it to:) --Kanonkas_(talk) 16:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. :) I'm glad you're were working on that backlog. And if there's anything I could help you with, you know who to tell it to. Rocket000 20:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm still checking it. Today I had to go such a long trip, then I went up and saw the bus coming on that side. While I was on the other side, now that was pretty annoying. Then I went further, and saw another bus comming. I went down, where it was going to stop and finally it was the right bus! Phew, I'm tired now. I'm going to rest a little, do some work and then be back. Hows your week been Rocket? --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It's been good. Kind busy too, but today I got plenty of free time wiki time :) Rocket000 13:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Good to hear! I have very busy weeks now. But their is a problem, Rocket. Osmentjonasfan who have already been blocked before, but is now evading a block using File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske) to upload his/her images again. See his/her request for checkuser. Recently the user has been uploading the same images, using the file upload bot. Emily Osment is the latest one getting deleted. Now Rocket, I don't know if we can do anything more. Everybody can use that file upload bot which is pretty annoying when it comes to cases like this one. --Kanonkas_(talk) 17:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It appears the upload has been blocked for now: COM:AN/B#Block request for User:File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske). Rocket000 21:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. New section time. ;) Rocket000 21:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

substituting {{Unsigned}}

Is there any particular reason for Rocketbot to substitute {{Unsigned}} with markupcode? --ALE! ¿…? 15:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

To preserve history. :) I made some changes to those "unsigned" templates and didn't want the uses to be updated. There weren't that many transclusions anyway as it's almost always subst'd. Rocket000 15:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)