User talk:Dustsucker

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=

MakBot

Response on my page. User_talk:Makthorpe#MakBot -Mak

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Dustsucker!

Tip: Add categories to your files

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

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

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

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

BotMultichillT 05:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• Image:BiH name.png is uncategorized since 1 July 2009.

Teviec

Your attitude is extremely aggressive for an image that has toured the world. I urge you to try before you tackle the other to prove yourself. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for publishing your great photos under that license!

This is "extremely aggressive"?

Je suis désolé mais je ne comprends pas votre réaction ... J'ai seulement demandé qu'en plus de l'image existante, on crée une version additionnelle dans un fichier séparé pour des cas où il est préféré d'avoir moins du noir. Le fichier que vous préférez resterait simplement comme il est maintenant. Je n'ai demandé aucun remplacement de fichier ni aux Commons ni dans des articles Wikipedia qui l'utilisent.

By the way, I do not understand what you meant here but I would like to understand it. Do you mean that esthetically having this much black looks nicer? I would agree with that. --Dustsucker (talk) 17:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry it was me who was aggressive. I have a very emotional relationship with this object. To be forgiven, I'll explain. I know this falls since the age of 6. It has always fascinated me at that time. Child I could spend long time looking at it. It was not a morbid interest and I was never scared, I looked and that was all. 2 years ago it was restored and I was able to touch, photograph from all these angles. This restoration has also given us the key to the mystery. It was exhibited in our museum and then to Paris, then this summer at the National Archaeological Museum, Les Eyzies-de-Tayac-Sireuil. I had the pleasure to propose, Francis Thackeray, mount this exhibition in Pretoria, he accepted and the exhibition was inaugurated yesterday. The tomb is in South Africa for a few months. To answer your question: the black is desired for the grave, or at least its reconstitution, appears as an object of art. A separate entity. In 1928 when the tomb was discovered, Martha and Saint-Just Péquart were among the first to photograph and film the search. All items are in their proper place. Reconstitution and that due to Lacomme in 1938 is extraordinary for the time. That is why it appears as on my picture. Sorry for my anger is my anger as short as rare. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)