User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2007/May

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the [talk page].

Chelus fimbriatus category

Hi, Jeff. Your attempt of elimination of a species category of commons is out of place. The categories are essential in Commons and other Wikiprojects, like Wikipedias and Wikispecies. It is the only automatic system to group all the information about a species or a concrete topic: subcategories, articles, images, audio, etc. Is the reference to another wikipedias! If you want to do an article, congratulations. If you want to do a gallery that already does automatically the software, in agreement, is your lost work. But remember, please: the categories are necessary according to the needs of the wikiprojects, we would ask you to stop interfering. If you like doing articles, devote to them, but do not erase the work of the community.

The article is a manual (and excellent) method to specific topics like subspecies, local varieties of a species, dimorphism, putting, nests, reproduction, pathologies, differentiation between species, and other specific topics that only a person can prepare. We need to do specific categories, and the articles for specific difficult topics of categorice. We dont need to do the work of the software... Please, we would be grateful to you for all that you stop interfering with the categories, because also, you affect the wikipedias in other languages, Wikispecies, etc., which connect with this category of Commons, that is the reference to all the specific material. If you erase the this information they will get lost.

Please, understand it. And excuse my poor english.... And regards, --Pristigaster 15:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

This discussion has moved to Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Chelus fimbriatus.   — Jeff G. ツ 19:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Could you remove the Deletion request on Category:Chelus fimbriatus, discution is over since a long time, isn't it? --Salix 23:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I wish I could, but an administrator has to do it, please see this edit.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Adult Movies.jpg

Pay attention to copyright Image:Adult Movies.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Jusjih 14:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see the explanations on the image description page and the talk page. Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 17:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with the action taken on the other image. There was only one "keep" vote, another by the closing admin and a useless statement for keep because they wanted to use it. There wasn't enough discussion. The problem was that the image(s) contain copyrighted information, for which the purpose of the image is to display that information. It's not like you're taking a picture of someone who happens to be wearing a "Pepsi" logo'ed t-shirt, you took the image specifically to show the logo of the t-shirt (to continue with my analogy). I don't quite feel right deleting the other image, since it had been through deletion, but I would delete it on the spot for the same grounds otherwise. I'll discuss with a few other folks later today and if they disagree, I will restore the image. Otherwise, I hope you can understand my point. Please don't expect action for a minimum of 8 hours, I'm quite busy today. I might not even get to it until tomorrow. I will let you know when I have discussed it and the result. If it's Friday and you haven't heard from me, please bug me. Thank you for your understanding. MECUtalk 17:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Michael, Friday is gone and I haven't heard from you.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I could swear I replied to you, but apparently I didn't (I wonder who I sent that message to?). Anyways, I restored the image because I'm not sure if panorama applies and although there are visible copyrighted works which is the primary purpose of the image, is doesn't seem clear to me still. I left the derivative tag because maybe someone else can figure it out better. Sorry for the hassle (and delay). MECUtalk 02:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
That restoration is appreciated, but could you please also restore the talk page? Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 11:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the restoration!   — Jeff G. ツ 11:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thorpe

I meant removing the hand from the shoulder but it looks fine, thanks! Quadzilla99 13:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

deletion discussion?

Hi Jeff, are you serious about me wanting to discuss the deletion of category:Canton du Guilvinec after having requested its deletion because of my very own typo? I'm slightly confused now... --Ibn Battuta 14:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you vote Symbol delete vote.svg Delete - I was just following instructions in {{delete}}, and didn't want to be accused of failing to give you notice. Happy editing!   — Jeff G. ツ 18:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I see. Well, it seems pretty odd to me that a category that nobody but the person creating it has ever used and that this very user is requesting to delete and that is obviously a typo... that this category should not simply be deleted. Maybe it would make sense to insert a "rule" for that in the deletion guidelines, but well, probably that case just doesn't occur as often because other people don't make as many typos as I do... Anyways, I hope you can do without my vote (I find it rather silly to vote as I requested deletion in the first place), and thanks anyways for taking care of my typo! Cheers, Ibn Battuta 21:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC) PS: Is that sentence anywhere near understandable? It sounded horrible when I reread it, but I guess you get the gist anyways :o) --Ibn Battuta 21:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I get the gist. If you had not tried to {{delete}} it, but had expressed your deletion intent some other way, and I still found out about your deletion intent in some manner, I probably would have used {{badname}} instead, but that would have been my first use of {{badname}} (I am much more familiar with {{delete}}). However, given what you tried to do, I chose to preserve your written intent with the {{delete}} tag.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

About the picture of Sainte Germaine

You wont do delete this file, but, this statue is mine ! It's an old familial statue, from the end of the XIXe ... I have done a photo of it, with my engine, in my house ! What do you wont more ? Theoliane 12:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC) Sorry for my english....

Thank you for that information. Please see my changed opinion and my analysis.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Maksim (talk contribs)

Hi, Cat. Maksim (talk · contribs) continues to upload copyrighted images, despite your previous block of that user for that reason. Please take the appropriate measures. Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 16:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

From what I understand, he is now moving free images from local wikis. He is being careless and is also uploading non-free images (that are claimed to be free at the local wikis), I am aware of that. I am pondering the best course of action. Let me ask around. -- Cat chi? 17:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response!   — Jeff G. ツ 17:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
On a closer look user hasn't uploaded anything since April 1, 2006... I am not certain what you expect me to do. He seems inactive... -- Cat chi? 17:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
If I had the time, I'd review all of that user's image contributions that referenced local Wikipedias, and remove those that were fair use in the local Wikipedias. Sorry, I don't have the time.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
You can nominate entire contribs of the user for deletion via COM:DEL. -- Cat chi? 18:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Commons users by language

Hello Jeff, you have created this category, but it only contains one other category. Category:User is identical, so i ask you: are you working to move all categories from Category:User to Category:Commons users by language? I Think it should be a category redirect. --GeorgHH 13:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

That category was based on w:Category:Wikipedians by language - perhaps we don't need such a category here?   — Jeff G. ツ 16:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sig

The link in your signature is incorrect. It points to Special:Contributions/User:Jeff_G., which should be Special:Contributions/Jeff_G. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought I tested it. I've fixed it going forwards, but fixing my 695 previous edits here (and 1950 in en) would be a huge waste of time right now.   — Jeff G. ツ 20:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Files by User:Jeff G.

Please move that page to a page which name starts with User:Jeff G. (Like "User:Jeff G./images" or "User:Jeff G./gallery" or "User:Jeff G./files")
Thanks --D-Kuru 17:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks --D-Kuru 23:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome, thanks for helping me to clean up after my mistake.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Users

I noticed you created this a few days ago, but then I found the actual Category:User which is much larger. I'm guessing you didn't know of this one? I'll redirect it and move the categories to the other page, okay? Richard001 02:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I was copying the Wikipedia nomenclature "Wikipedians" plural (and relying on the concept of categories as plurals, collections of pages), and figured all of the "Users x" and "Users y z" type categories could fit in the "Users" category, just as the "Wikipedians x" and "Wikipedians y z" type categories fit in the "Wikipedians" category on Wikipedia, but didn't have a bot or the time to actually do the deed. The "User" category still lists en:Category:Wikipedians by language as its English Wikipedia equivalent, and I think it would be more appropriate to put Category:Users and Category:User back the way you found them (perhaps considering a proposal rename of Category:User to Category:Users by language to match English Wikipedia), and considering another proposal to move everything not language-related from Category:User (or Category:Users by language) to Category:Users. Of course, Category:Users could also be: Category:Commons users (44 Google hits); Category:Commoners (4 Google hits); or even Category:Commonsians, Category:Users of Wikimedia Commons, Category:Users of Commons, Category:Commonites, or Category:Commonsites (all 0 Google hits), depending on consensus.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

DRBot

I left a reply on my talk, because probably more people are interested in this. -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 23:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia template

You copied Template:Wikipedia category here from English Wikipedia. Does that template have any use here? /90.229.135.239 18:27, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't, my mistake. I redirected it to Template:Commons category and threw {{badname|Template:Commons category}} on it.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
And now it's gone.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Coordinate templates

I noticed you deleted the last parameter from the {{Coor dm}} and {{Coor dms}} templates as useless cruft. The last parameter of the template is used for coordinate parameters such as heading, scale, type, etc. Most of them are somewhat useless on Commons, but I wouldn't call them cruft. The documentation on various pages does need to be improved though. Could you please revert your changes or make the last parameter optional? While you're at it, you should look at the discussion pages of the templates and fulfill the requests there, or discuss any other change you may wish to do to these widely used templates. Also, are you sure Commons needs any more templates related to Ordnance Survey GB grid references? --Para 18:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I had forgotten how to make the last parameter optional, I have now done that and read the discussion pages for those templates. However, I'm a bit lost - what "more templates related to Ordnance Survey GB grid references" were you referring to? Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 22:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. All those curlies are just too confusing for me to edit. With the w:OSGB mention I'm talking about Template:Gbmaprim and Template:Gbmappingsmall that you copied from enwp. Though they're not exactly introducing anything new here, I don't think we should support more than one notation for coordinates. --Para 12:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
OIC. I copied Template:Gbmaprim because it was a redlink on Template:Gbmappingsmall, which I copied (before I realized it was useless here) because it was a redlink on my preview of Catmore, which was deleted by D-Kuru. I marked both "{{speedy|Superseded by Commons-specific geocoding templates. ~~~~}}", and now both are gone.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)