- 1 Picture of the Day
- 2 Image:POTY_barnstar_1.svg
- 3 lost votes ...
- 4 What?
- 5 Huh?
- 6 another diff complaint
- 7 Translation error ?
- 8 To confirm commons username
- 9 POTY - User:Xosé
- 10 FP deleted
- 11 POTY protection
- 12 POTY vote from WODUP
- 13 Editing conflicts
- 14 Image:POTY_Feb_15.jpg
- 15 dug up a diff for a voter
- 16 Closing FP during your vacation
- 17 Image:Male and female superb fairy wren.jpg
- 18 POTY 2006 vote
- 19 Diff guide
- 20 Um...
- 21 QI nomination
- 22 Hoverflie and Blue Jay
- 23 Oleander
- 24 Eadweard Muybridge
- 25 FP manipulation
- 26 Overexposed surf
- 27 Praha kostel SvVaclava.jpg
- 28 Quality Image Promotion
- 29 Quality Image Promotion
- 30 Quality Image Promotion
- 31 Sextant animation
- 32 Image:Yellow_Admiral_(Vanessa_itea).jpg
- 33 Image:Arena pula inside.JPG
- 34 Quality Image Promotion
- 35 Picture of the day
- 36 Image:The_Photographer.jpg
- 37 Quality Image Promotion
- 38 FP Promotion
- 39 Quality Image Promotion
- 40 Quality Image Promotion
- 41 Image:Soviet pocket watch.JPG
- 42 QI Sparrenburg
- 43 QICbot for consensual review?
- 44 odd edit
- 45 Thanks :-)
Picture of the Day
From 2007 on all POTD in Commons must be chosen among promoted Featured pictures or Quality Images. Please note that this is not the proper place for polytical propaganda. Alvesgaspar 18:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok. I don't now this. I put my like pictures those aren't polytical propaganda.Thanks.--Absar 08:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi! hey, I have seen that you have retreated from the POTY. Shame, dont know the story though so I cant comment on it.
Something related: I have cleaned up this image: to this: . Main topic for me was to reduce file size and its now 44kb instead of 234kb. also the centre was quite messy and not exact. I couldn't replace the file because it is protected. Can you replace it? would be cool. thx. --Amada44 21:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help. I'll try to replace it myself with your version. If I can't, maybe the author, LadyofHeats, can help.
- I'm back to POTY, I really hope it will work out. Alvesgaspar 22:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- nice that you are back. I still dont know the reasons,... but whatever it was it is most likely based on the fact that every human (or the ego of humans) thinks that it has the exclusive claim to be right! Fact is, that everything is relative and nothing on this world is set. Everything we know, or think to know, exists only in our (human) perspective. further everything I know comes out of my perspective. everything you know out of yours. There are two things one can do: 1st, to realize that and to learn to 'not always insisting on the imaginary fact that -I am right-' and second to see, that other people have exactly the same problem as oneself. They are, just as oneself, unconscious of that and act out of that unconsciousness and that is what hurts/blames/injures. It now all depends how you react to that. You can react unconscious and in return hurt/blame/injure to keep the cycle of war and madness alive, or you can recognize it and act accordingly.
- Now I don't want to hold a prayer. Its just something which has helped me allot in recent months ;)
- --Amada44 11:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
lost votes ...
Thank you for taking the time to solve this little issue - and for letting me know. It is not that important to me, but I did not know if it were only mine and a few other votes that got lost, or if there is a bigger problem with the counting that affects more people. --Tsui 13:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I have more than 100 edits on my home wiki. I've had a diff, in accord with the instructions, next to my vote ever since I first voted. So why did you tell me my vote will not be counted? Jersyko 19:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Alrighty, thanks :) If it would make things easier on you and other vote-counters, I'll help go through the votes to move the diffs to a uniform location. Let me know. Jersyko 20:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- No worries. I was just afraid you might be using a broken edit counter on everybody. — coelacan — 17:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
On wikipedia:User talk:Chacor you said that "Your vote was not considered because you did not sign as a Commons user. If you don't have an account in Commos, please sign with your IP and insert a "diff", according to instructions."
another diff complaint
I signed with my Commons user account and provided a link to where I claimed my Commons account on my home project user page a year ago. Please be careful to read the links properly, my link clearly shows that my enwiki account has confirmed this Commons account to be mine. NoSeptember 11:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I konow now that this is the same user. But you have to admit that such a diff is a little cryptic... :) - Alvesgaspar 14:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- On an unrelated note, I like instructional animated gifs and your caliper and sextant gifs are very well done. NoSeptember 12:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your compliment, you are one of the very few to recognize it... ;-) Alvesgaspar 14:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Translation error ?
OK, I have not 100 edits in commons, not so important for me ... :-)
Only to avoid future misunderstanding, there is maybe a translation error ?!?
In the german version is wirtten "Who can vote in the Final?" "To vote in the final, you must be an established Wiki editor with at least 100 edits registered either on your Commons ... "
It is over for this award, and I am not worry about it, but you can understand it wrong as a constriction only for the final. It schould be looked after and changed before the next voting.
Or, maybe, I misunder bye. :-) --Flux Garden 21:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
To confirm commons username
I was just informed that my vote was not counted on POTY. I have created the proper diff. Should I edit my original vote, submit a new vote (and do something to my original vote), or just wait? Thanks! - Grubber 21:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I was warned my vote hasn't been considered. This diff shows my identity in the Galician wikipedia. This diff shows that I had already identified myself. Have a look at this: (diff): User:Ligabo deleted my identification, for no apparent reason. Regards. --Xosé 23:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the warning ! -- Atoma 13:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- It seems that the FP-Image Image:Glarus Kloentalersee_edited.jpg was deleted (by user User:Gmaxwell) and removed from the FP-list after being merged to Image:Glarus Kloentalersee.jpg by User:Ikiwaner (who forgot to correct the link in the FP-list). I just restored the link in the FP-list. --Atoma 13:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I won't be able to do the protection myself tonight. However, if you are still awake when this voting phase closes, you can do it yourself: remove the nowiki tags from User:Bryan/Sandbox, and they will be automatically protected. This way of protection is a bug in the mediawiki software, and to prevent abuse, the protection will expire on 00:00 16 Feb, and I hope to have then full protected it myself. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
POTY vote from WODUP
You left a message on my claiming that my vote wasn't counted, however, it isn't struck out on the archive page. My diff lists this Commons account but is not a statement asserting ownership. So here is my statement. Should I alter the diff in the archive or vote again on the current page? Wodup 23:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Orgullomoore 02:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --
dug up a diff for a voter
User:Slartibartfass has limited English skills, so rather than trying to explain in more detail how to produce a diff, I just asked directly for confirmation on the German wiki, and received an affirmative. That should be diff enough, right? Slartibartfass's vote is on Commons:Picture of the Year/2006/Voting phase 1/archive 4. Hope that's not too late to count. — coelacan — 19:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Closing FP during your vacation
Simon, I'll be leaving town tomorrow for a short vacation, with no access to the Internet. Will you please take care of the FP candidates page? - regards, Alvesgaspar 23:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I can do that. Have a nice trip. When will you be back? --Simonizer 07:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey Joaquim, welcome back. Should i go on with the closing FP proceeding or would you like to assume again? --Simonizer 10:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC) Good morning Simon. Would you mind to continue doing the job, I'm a little busy now? Alvesgaspar 10:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC) No problem, I can do that --Simonizer 10:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
You previously voted in the FP candidacy of Image:Male and female superb fairy wren.jpg. This image has now been nominated for removal of its FP status. If you have not already done so, you might like to join the discussion at Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Male and female superb fairy wren.jpg. I'm notifying both pro and anti-voters. --MichaelMaggs 16:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
POTY 2006 vote
You struck out my vote asking me to provide a valid diff link. I have over three hundred edits to Commons and over 200 image contributions, I think that this satisfies the voting criteria. Please consider undoing your strikeout. ˉanetode╦╩ 21:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think there's some sort of mixup, this is the only edit I made to the POTY voting phase 2 page. I'm not sure where you think that I signed twice. Anyway, I'll correct my vote and remove the strikeout, thanks for the swift reply. ˉanetode╦╩ 21:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
hi Alvesgaspar -- Is there any chance that a preliminary vote might be tallied before the end of the voting period? I would consider changing my vote to distinguish between a clear set of frontrunners, but it's really hard to tell how the vote is going right now :-) of course, that might be too much work to be worthwhile. thanks. Bikeable 21:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Uh, while I am not really involved, how is this diff by User:Eric Bekins invalid? You struck his vote at 23:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC), but I can't see why. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 01:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Alvesgaspar, be careful striking some votes where the voter appears to have linked to a userpage elsewhere, like Tixotd here. As his signature, part of his sig links to enwp, but not all of it. This is a valid vote, although you struck it out (I haven't changed it yet, since I assume you will). So be careful to check for those things. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
You miss the point with Titoxd. Titoxd may be an en user mainly yes, and may link to his en page (so?). However, he has over 100 commons edits. Therefore he meets the requirement as a commons voter.--Nilfanion 14:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I see the point now. But this kind of signature defies most careful verifications. Remenber that the rules specify clearly that either a commons username or a IP address should be used as a signature. In this case, if we point to the middle of the signature and click (the normal thing to do), we are sent to the en:wikipedia page Alvesgaspar 15:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Excuse me, but why exactly is my vote invalid? I have over 100 edits here. If I didn't have, I would have posted a diff to my user talk page, but since I have met that requirement, I don't need to add the diff. Also, this is the signature I use in every project I am involved, precisely to make them all point to the same user page. Check MediaWiki.org, es.wikipedia.org, and of course Commons and en.wp. What does my signature have to do with anything, to begin with? Titoxd(?!?) 20:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
How do i do that?--Tempest115
You mentioned some stitching stains on my image and I Wondered if you can point them out to me so I can fix them.--Benjamint444 23:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Hoverflie and Blue Jay
Didn't the Hoverflie become fourth and the Blue Jay third? They both got 70 votes, but in the first round the Blue Jay got 31 votes, while the Hoverflie only got 25. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Nevermind, it happens. The birdie is great indeed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- What's the latest count? The figures in the proposed message on the project talk page are not the same as these. If there really is a draw for 3rd place we should award two equal third prizes. It's unfair to Fir002 to demote his picture to 4th simply because he got fewer votes in round 1. That was never a published rule and it's not right to introduce it now, after the event. --MichaelMaggs 20:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Its not much better. But i agree with your statement that it was not much better to take. In my opinion it was just the wrong daytime to took that photos. The light was too agressive. But Image:Porto Covo FEV07-3.JPG is a very nice picture. Great composition, with the bench on the right. The geometrical form of the water area is nearly the same like the green area in the front, just mirrored along the smooth coastline. Brilliant! The shown colours are perfectly harmonizing. Sadly that the light conditions are not the best as well. --Simonizer 07:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Praha kostel SvVaclava.jpg
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:SMP MAR07-26.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:SMP MAR07-17.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:SerraEstrela-MAR2007-2.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
Moving this here:
- Comment I tried to do the fixes myself, but it would be from second-generation images, so maybe you want to incorporate the suggestions:
- This is going pretty fast and is hard to follow.
- In particular, the viewer need to focus on two things at the same time, so it's better to bring viewfinder and sextant closer together. There's quite a bit of unused space between them.
- The rotation of the sextant should probably be demarked by changing the brightness of the sextant: wiggle up → lighter; wiggle down → darker. Right now it's barely noticeable.
- Step 6 is technically not "Done" but "Read the altitude at the index bar scale and micrometer drum".
- As with all non-rotating animated gifs there should be a transitional slide at the end to signal that the sequence starts all over again.
- Other than that it's awesome to watch. ~ trialsanderrors 23:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Info - Thank you for your suggestions. Let me answer to them point by point:
- I have given a little more time to a few frames. But it is hard for someone who never used a sextant to understand how it works just by looking at the animation. These are in fact two animations and one has to study each of them separately before trying to integrate the whole thing. I don’t believe that putting them closer would improve much the “learning curve”.
- The rotation of the sextant is the hardest thing to simulate. It should be done considering the changing perspective of the instrument during the wiggles (not only its height but also the width), but I’m still not sure how to do it in CorelDraw. It is tricky to use different colour grades because the migration to the gif format will ruin the scheme most of times.
- You are right about the last caption. It is fixed now.
- I’m not sure what type of transition frame should be put at the end. A fading picture?
- Do you think it is now ready for WP:FPC ? ;-) - Alvesgaspar 09:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, I did a quick version with what I had in mind. Those are of course 2nd generation images, so the quality is reduced and I'm not posting it as an alternative edit (This version is still based on your original from yesterday):
The major fixes are to move the two animations closer together, to change the brightness of the sextant when it is wiggled, and to addd an "empty" final slide before the animation starts over. Alternatively you could move the lever backwards to its starting position. Hope that explains my suggestions. ~ trialsanderrors 19:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Joaquim, someone at de:Wikipedia:Grafikwerkstatt asked us for a translated version of it. Can you maybe supply the raw files or a version without text just numbers? Thank you very much for this awesome thing, --Flominator 09:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Here is the sextant animation without captions. Thank you for your compliment. Alvesgaspar 10:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- That was fast! Thank you very much. --Flominator 10:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the QI review :-) (That's my finger you're calling ugly! ;-) I took 27 shots of that butterfly, camera balanced on end of my little finger to avoid movement between camera and butterfly - camera in macro mode. Body slightly blurred as it vibrates those fine hairs (1/15th sec exposure). I am thinking that because of the good contrast between butterfly and background, that it would be easy to cut it out to give it a transparent background. :-) --Tony Wills 23:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
How to correct geometrical distortion? The photo wasn't manipulated and it is real. Thank you. --Orlovic 09:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:Prunus spec-1.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
Picture of the day
Joaquim, stunning picture of an oleander bud, with marvelous use of just the right depth of field. KP Botany 05:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your message. But be carefull, the leaves are toxic! ;-) Alvesgaspar 13:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's interesting the things in nature that attract one to them, yet are so dangerous. KP Botany 18:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Interesting that you no-where note that this is a composite image, the silhouette has been over-layed on top of an image of the tunnel :-). Perhaps reading between the lines in the FP description one might have gathered this, but it is not stated explicitly. But very well done :-). My vote is that he is walking towards us. It's also a nice touch that if he is walking away his head is tilted up slightly so he is looking out into the light, if viewed as coming towards us, his head is looking down slightly as he enters the gloom :-) :-). --Tony Wills 11:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a composite image (check the shadows). Final word from the author of course. Lycaon 12:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- That is not a composite image at all (please note the shadows on the ground)! You might be intereste in reading the discussion about that possibilty in here. The solution to the puzzle is in the image discussion page in the English Wikipedia (well, it was, because I can't find it any more..). Alvesgaspar 12:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, not a composit, but a double exposure :-). I am not at all convinced by the discussion there. Playing with the "levels tool" in gimp clearly shows detail through the legs, not scanning artefacts, the cane also varies in colour with what's behind it. I have not seen any other explanation - what was the nature of the now-missing 'solution to the puzzle' :-). By the way, is that a tunnel or just an archway, and what are the objects on the ground on either side? --Tony Wills 14:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:Fly on flower.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
The image Image:Using sextant swing.gif, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Using sextant swing.gif has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.
--Simonizer 06:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:Prunus spec 2.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
Quality Image Promotion
Congratulations! File:Trevo-2007-1.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
Image:Soviet pocket watch.JPG
Does the quality of the subject matter (Watch needs cleaning), and what did you mean by "file is heavily compressed"? I haven't changed anything to the photo so I don't understand. Thank you, Orlovic --22.214.171.124 09:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey Alves, I uploaded a new version of the Sparrenburg on QI. On my uncompressed original I have zero banding now (dithering) but even with super high jpeg compression some bands form. There simply aren't enough shades of blue for a pic this huge. The reason you usually don't see bands is the coarse noise in digital images. Anyway, check out the new version, it's as good as it gets. --Dschwen 13:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
QICbot for consensual review?
this was an odd edit. I'm pretty sure the only thing I did was moving the shasta pic to CR. I was quite confused when it disappeared from there a few minutes later :-). Must have been an uncaught edit conflict. --Dschwen 23:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the past critiques and for the quick QI promotion of the two robin images. I have 161 photos of robins, taken over the last 4 months and at last have two which are up to a presentable standard. The problem with these robins is they live in the forest and I usually need to use a flash. Finally today I met one on the edge of the forest in good light, and what is more he hung around posing for me for 10 minutes (ok, actually he was hunting insects, not posing). I was determined to get a sharp image and had the ISO set to minimum (50) and fstop at max (f8) used a tripod and fired off shots as quickly as I could focus (which is not very quick at all). Fortunately in a few instances it stayed still long enough for a good photo. The best one has an exposure time of 1/3rd sec. :-) I have just nominated it for FP ... we shall see if others like it as much as I do :-) --Tony Wills 13:16, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- But I think Mdf crops too close ;-) --Tony Wills 20:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)