User talk:Andrew massyn

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

User talk:Andrew massyn/Archive

Tritoniopsis unguicularis[edit]

Hello, Andrew massyn, with the help of users in the german WP it was possible to identify the plant of your pictures. User: Muscari found out the family Category:Iridaceae and User: Geaster classified the species. So you can create a new plant article in our commons. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 12:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I have now uploaded the correctly named ones, and have referred the "unknown orchid" pics for deletion. Andrew massyn (talk) 11:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:IUCN Endangered species[edit]

Hello my friend,
You should avoid to add IUCN categories like Category:IUCN Endangered species to articles and categories of commons (as you did here).
Instead you should use template {{IUCN}} like on this page.
Of course, it provides more information like the url of icn web page + the authors name.
But it also provides the "id" of the taxon which is very useful: With this id we can run a bot to update the IUCN status when it changes (which is very often).
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

To help you retrieve these IUCN commands you can use WikiBioReferences which generates syntax for wikicommons out of a taxon name.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks I will try
For me

Request for comment[edit]

Discussion regarding the Categories "Fossil xxx" is occurring on Wp:ToL (here). As a member of the project you input is requested in to gain a larger view of the communities opinion on how to handle the points raised. Thanks --Kevmin (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Andrew massyn!

Tip: Add categories to your images

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:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

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 06:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

ICUN[edit]

Hi Line1. I tried to use the ICUN categorisation that you gave, but sadly, the ICUN list is not quite up to date. I have downloaded a list of South African plants, but they have not all been verified etc. and so don't link as easily as wolves do. e.g. For Moraeas there are about 100 species but only 4 are on the ICUN list to link. So If I can, I will use your system, but if not, I will just do it my way until the ICUN catches up. Rgds Andrew massyn (talk) 08:01, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello my friend.
If a species is not described in http://www.iucnredlist.org, then this species is NOT described as endengered by IUCN.
So you can't put images, articles or categories for this species in Category:IUCN Endangered species nor in Category:Species by IUCN Red List category and its subcategories.
This because the category name contains IUCN meaning "IUCN says that the species is endangered".
But it does not mean that the species is not endangered (just it is not said so by IUCN).
So you have to ask yourself: who said this species was endangered ? There are other web sites like CITES...
At the end, you can put the category Category:Endangered species. But we aware that this situation can only be temporary.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 08:38, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
For example, I just found Chelonia mydas that was in Category:Endangered species which is [now?] described by IUCN => I am moving it to the correct IUCN cat.
But I also found Category:Baptisia arachnifera which is not [yet?] described bu IUCN => I leave it there.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 08:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I downloaded a page at http://www.sanbi.org/biodiversity/reddata.htm which says "This Red List represents a complete assessment of all South Africa's indigenous plant taxa. All South African plant taxa have been given a status and should be accounted on this list. If you note any indigenous plant species not included in this list, please inform the Red List Officer (redlist@sanbi.org). The IUCN Categories and Criteria version 3.1 (2001), with additional categories developed specifically for the South African context were used in this Red List. The status given to taxa in this Red List applies only to the section of the global population occurring within South Africa in the case of taxa that are not endemic to South Africa. Status followed by a * indicates non-endemic taxa where the South African national status have been down- or upgraded by one category according to IUCN regional assessment procedures." So where do we go from there? Unless I hear to the contrary, I will put them in Category: Endangered species and give them the listing according to the reddata link which is from the SA Biodiversity Institute. Rgds Andrew massyn (talk). P.S. Is it worth putting this conversation on the tree of life talk page? Andrew massyn (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I have found Erica scabriuscula that is described in http://www.sanbi.org/biodiversity/Red%20List%2003-02-2009.xls but not described in http://www.iucnredlist.org.
But I found it on the website ecoport.org (with few information)
Truth is, I don't know what this document is worth.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

NATIONAL RED LIST OF SOUTH AFRICAN PLANTS http://www.sanbi.org/biodiversity/reddata.htm[edit]

PLEASE NOTE This Red List represents a complete assessment of all South Africa's indigenous plant taxa. All South African plant taxa have been given a status and should be accounted on this list. If you note any indigenous plant species not included in this list, please inform the Red List Officer (redlist@sanbi.org). The IUCN Categories and Criteria version 3.1 (2001), with additional categories developed specifically for the South African context were used in this Red List. The status given to taxa in this Red List applies only to the section of the global population occurring within South Africa in the case of taxa that are not endemic to South Africa. Status followed by a * indicates non-endemic taxa where the South African national status have been down- or upgraded by one category according to IUCN regional assessment procedures. --- The Red List is placed on the website with the intention to allow free and easy access to conservation officials and EIA consultants. Should you wish to use this data in any formal publication, or require more information, please contact the Red List Officer (redlist@sanbi.org). Link to IUCN Categories and Criteria version 3.1 (2001) Link to Guidelines to the IUCN Regional Assessment procedures

I have obtained permission Andrew massyn (talk) 16:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

DEFINITIONS OF THE CATEGORIES

EX (Extinct) A taxon is Extinct when there is no reasonable doubt that the last individual has died. Taxa should be listed as extinct only once exhaustive surveys throughout the historic range have failed to record an individual.
EW (Extinct in the Wild) A taxon is Extinct in the Wild when it is known to only survive in cultivation or as a naturalised population (or populations) well outside the past range.
CR PE (Critically Endangered, Possibly Extinct) Critically Endangered (possibly extinct) taxa are those that are, on the balance of evidence, likely to be extinct, but for which there is a small chance that they may be extant. Hence they should not be listed as Extinct until adequate surveys have failed to record the species.
CR (Critically Endangered) A taxon is Critically Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the five IUCN criteria for Critically Endangered, and is therefore facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild.
EN (Endangered) A taxon is Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the five IUCN criteria for Endangered, and is therefore facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild.
VU (Vulnerable) A taxon is Vulnerable when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the five IUCN criteria for Vulnerable, and is therefore facing a high risk of extinction in the wild.
NT (Near Threatened) A taxon is Near Threatened when available evidence indicates that it nearly meets any of the five IUCN criteria for Vulnerable, and is therefore likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future.
Critically Rare A taxon is Critically Rare when it is known to only occur at a single site, but is not exposed to any direct or plausible potential threat and do not qualify for a category of threat according to the five IUCN criteria.
Rare A taxon is Rare when it meets any of the four South African criteria for rarity, but is not exposed to any direct or plausible potential threat and do not qualify for a category of threat according to the five IUCN criteria.
Declining A taxon is Declining when it does not meet any of the five IUCN criteria and does not qualify for the categories Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened, but there are threatening processes causing a continuing decline in the population.
LC (Least Concern) A taxon is Least Concern when it has been evaluated against the five IUCN criteria and does not qualify for the categories Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable and Near Threatened, or the South African categories Critically Rare, Rare or Declining. Widespread and abundant taxa are typically listed in this category.
DDD (Data Deficient - Insufficient Information) A taxon is DDD when there is inadequate information to make an assessment of its risk of extinction. Data Deficient is not a category of threat, however, listing of taxa in this category indicates that more information is required and that future research could show that a threatened classification is appropriate
DDT (Data Deficient - Taxonomically Problematic) A taxon is DDT when taxonomical problems hinder its distribution range and habitat from being well defined, so that an assessment of risk of extinction is not possible.
Thr* Taxa that have been identified as likely to be threatened during the final stages of the compilation of this Red List. Their status has however not yet been finalized.

File:Moraea collina.JPG[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 14:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


File:Moraea collina flower.JPG[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 15:00, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


File:Mimetes fimbriifolius (2).jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 15:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorted.Andrew massyn (talk) 16:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Romulea flava.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 19:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


File:Wachendorfia multiflora.JPG[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 18:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

You're now a filemover[edit]

Hi Andrew massyn, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{speedy}}. Other projects, like InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • For guideline when to rename a file, please see here.

[ Tanvir | Talk ] 04:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Namechange[edit]

Hi I have changed my username to Moraea123 (talk) because I need my name back. I will still keep this profile as I may need it for some things. Moraea123 (talk) 15:51, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Location?[edit]

Hi Andrew - could you add a location to File:ASPHODELACEAE Kniphofia pauciflora.JPG and File:Kniphofia pauciflora flower.JPG please? It would make the pics more valuable. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 14:26, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Done Andrew massyn (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


Don't over-categorize![edit]

Hi Andrew massyn, please don't over-categorize your images. For instance in your File:Gladiolus priorii Back Table (2).jpg

I urgently suggest to read Commons:Categories to avoid more categorizing mistake! -- Ies (talk) 14:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Will fix. Andrew massyn (talk)