User talk:Rocket000

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Jump to: navigation, search
I will reply to your comments here (unless you prefer otherwise).
Archive Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3
Archive 4
Archive 5
Archive 6

Contents

[edit] {{Taxonavigation}}

Hello my friend,
I saw your fight to kill some cariageReturn between {{Taxonavigation}} and {{VN}}.
I am willing to investigate the problem.
What about creating a {{TaxonavigationTest}} (that we would keep) to do my checks?
I would reference {{TaxonavigationTest}} in {{Taxonavigation/doc}}.
Of course, as master of ceremony, you would have to do the reports to {{Taxonavigation}}.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 16:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, you're welcome to try. The main problem is that browsers don't handle it consistently. See my tests here. The empty div thing works the best it seems, however the other problem is that when two non-floating boxes are next to each other only half the margin is respected. See Category:Annona. The space between all the templates should be the same, but {{VN}} and {{synonyms}} are closer together than the others. But they all have the same margin! It has something to do with the float; I can't figure it out. Rocket000 (talk) 18:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
OK, there is a problem with {{Translation table}} => I am moving to {{VN}}.
I changed {{VN/title}} to use links, so now {{VN}} really looks like {{synonyms}}.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 12:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] possible spam filter workaround

I saw your ANI post from 19 August, and out of curiousity tried to get around the CSS filter by swapping the order of the div attributes, but I'm unsure if it works the way you want: User:84user/Sandbox. -84user (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Heh, that's exactly what I ended up doing. :) I was just shocked that there was such a terrible filter at that level. Someone really didn't know what they were doing.. It's not really a big deal since there's so many ways around it, but that being true, what's the point? Rocket000 (talk) 06:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{Taxonavigation}} and {{VN}}

Hello my friend,
Do you have an idea if {{Translation table}} and {{VN}} should contain plural names or singular names ?
For exemple Category:Macaca contains english plural (Macaques) but french singular (Macaque).
I would like to specify it in both {{Translation table/doc}} and {{VN/doc}}.

Another thing: I don't think the "common" parameter of {{Taxonavigation}} is a good idea.
Most usage I saw where english common names that should be in {{VN}} (It also is not very politicaly correct to have the english name as "common" ;-), reason why it was decided that the scientific name was commons).
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 08:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I use singular for species and plural (usually) for higher ranks. For example, for Macaca mulatta I would put "Rhesus Macaque", but for Macaca I would put "Macaques". The reasoning being that the genus refers to a group, thus plural. I agree completely with doing away with the common parameter. I added a tracking category to see if it was even used. There's was about 30 or so uses. Most of them were on primate galleries/categories. I can readd the category for you if you would like. Rocket000 (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I like your rule. What about a consensus about this ?
Yes, that would be cool if you could re-add the category. I am currently visiting all the Primates Taxonavigation. So I should suppress these common= anyway ;-)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 11:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Category:Taxonavigation templates using common parameter (don't need to create if we're just going to empty it soon anyway). Will take a little while to fill up. I think that singular/plural rule has consensus for the most part~. It's usually what I seen done, but there hasn't been any discussion I'm aware of. Rocket000 (talk)

[edit] Please undelete File:Ambox style.png ASAP

All AMBOX images on WIkipedia and other projects stopped working because you deleted this image. Please note that image redirects do not work cross-project; the file has to exist on this image pagename on Commons. Thank you. — Edokter • Talk • 13:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Redirects do work for other projects. It's just that I had to delete it first and heavily used images take too long to update (or some cache issue). Sorry. Rocket000 (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
(ec) That was quick... Thank you. — Edokter • Talk • 13:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Thinking further, I don't think a redirect is desirable, in the event that Ambox and Imbox might differ in the future. The upload of seperate image sets was intentional at the time. — Edokter • Talk • 13:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I know it was intentional (otherwise I would have sent out CommonsDelinker to replace one with other instead of redirecting. You're right though. No harm in having a duplicate once in awhile. Rocket000 (talk) 13:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] John Robert Colombo wiki image problem

I added an info box with an image of john robert colombo, but for some reason there is a left over code still visible on the final page. Can u rectify this please? the page is John Robert Colombo on wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Studmuffin78 (talk • contribs) 05:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, that wasn't a problem with the image. You were using the infobox template wrong.[1] Rocket000 (talk) 06:00, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. Studmuffin78 (talk • 

You're welcome. (Your signature looks a little broken.) Rocket000 (talk) 06:07, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template "Convert to SVG"

Hi Rocket000,

I think it is a good idea to clean the thing up, just one point:

  • I don't know if you are aware, that you cancelled the possibility to add the template to entire categories. Or more precise: you can still add it, but the categories don't show up in the main cat anymore. This is actually not such a bad thing.

Do you know, why no picutures show up in the "chemistry" (not "chemical")? I added the parameter "chemistry" to some picutres which should work via the "text=" in the template if the category exists.

Cheers --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 13:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I forgot it is used on whole categories. "chemistry" was missing before I got to it. I didn't notice, but now it should work. Rocket000 (talk) 13:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
P.S. The "text" param. is for text images. It just like any of the others. It's not an option to name your own category. I plan on improving this some more. Right now is just a transitional phase to get rid of some of the redundancy. Rocket000 (talk) 13:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ping

Hi. Would you mind creating the administrators' how-to guide? I would do it myself, but I think you'd do this better. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 20:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

What kind of how-to? Do you mean for technical stuff or procedural stuff? Both? Maybe the best way to do this would be for you to make an outline (e.g. a page with some sections/headings) and I'll fill it in. Works for you? Rocket000 (talk) 23:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I was first thinking just technical stuff. Both sounds better, but maybe too much? Sure. I could give that a try, but I'd like to get your opinion on the technical/procedural, or both bit clarified first. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 13:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I would say just technical and leave the procedural stuff to the policy/guideline pages (at least most of it). Rocket000 (talk) 21:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you, and

Hi, I'd like to thank you for your answering my request to unblock my old IP. I believe that because the IP does not belong to me anymore IP's talk and user pages have to be deleted 69.181.3.156. Sometime ago I copied the record about blocks from IP talk page to my own talk page here. If you believe I should archive all IP record (not only blocks) to my talk page archive, please let me know, and I will. I am not sure, if it possible to do, but ideally it would have been great, if IP blocklog is added to user:Mbz1 blocklog and in the same time cleared up from IP blocklog. I know I am creating too much of the troubles, but I would not like a now absolutely innocent IP to have some block history because of me. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not technically possible to merge block logs (or delete them, for the matter). I wouldn't worry about it. There's a ton of IPs that have records like that. It's pretty normal actually. I did delete the userpage (User:69.181.3.156) when I unblocked the address, but I left the talk page because it helps people to know why the IP has that block record. Maybe we can delete that too after a little while, especially if new edits start coming from the IP. Either way, I don't think anyone will automatically assume the IP has anything to do with what the past user did. Rocket000 (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining it to me!--Mbz1 (talk) 16:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome. And I did blank the talk page for now. :) Rocket000 (talk) 16:36, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you! As I said earlier I did copy the messages concerning the blocks to my block archive, which is linked to on my talk page. So it is and it will be availabale for everybody, who is interested in it to see. I am sorry I bothered you with this. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I just blanked it instead deleting it for the benefit of the future IP user (so non-admins have equal access to it). Don't worry about bothering me (not that you are!), I'm always happy to help. Cheers, Rocket000 (talk) 17:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I18n headers

Hello, People do a lot of work to make Commons a better place for people not fluent in English, so it is better if this work is not removed by others. Yann (talk) 15:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Huh, what does it have to do with English? I just think headers are completely unnecessary and clutter the page. It doesn't matter what language they are in. And I can say the opposite about the work it takes to remove them. Rocket000 (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I18n headers make the description page more friendly to non English speaking people. Please see Commons:Village pump#Internationalization or i18n. Yann (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
But no header is even more language neutral. And more friendly, IMO. Rocket000 (talk) 09:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please link images

Afrikaans | العربية | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬ | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Svenska | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−

Hello Rocket000!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Commons images are used by editors on many projects in many languages. Each image is put into categories. This helps other editors find them. Please add categories to each image you upload.

To add an image to a category, add the following code to the end of the page.

[[Category:Category Name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbit of comets, add the following to the image description page:

[[Category:Astronomy diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories: Astronomy diagrams, Comets.

For further information on categories read Commons:Categories.

The CommonSense Tool often helps you find the best category for your image.

Here is a gallery of your images. Please check that each image has a category. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the help desk. Thank you.

BotMultichillT 00:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, those aren't even my images. Go categorize yourself, bot! Rocket000 (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to change votes

Hi Rocket,

I made a proposal to change the 4 votes into 10 votes and made a other proposal to try and get more people to vote in a rfa, could you please take a look on it so we could change it before proposing it in the village pump

I placed the proposal here

Best regards, Huib talk 19:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{VN}}

Hello my friend,
I just had a good idea that will earn both of us the wikinobel price of templates:
Why should {{VN}} and {{Translation table}} display all the languages when we know the user prefered language.
I am not sure everyone would agree to hide non prefered languages, but at least we could display the user prefered language bigger ?
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

There's a couple ways we can do this. I'm thinking the best way would be with CSS. That way users can make their language look anyway they want. They could also hide the others (or some of the others) if they want too. I believe this is already possible with {{translation table}} since it adds a <span> to each language (by using templates like {{en}}). We could also do something like autotranslation, but instead of showing different text, we show different formatting of that text. Let me think about this. CSS is not my specialty but sometimes it provides a much better solution than mere template-based designs. Maybe Slomox would have a good idea. He's the one behind the CSS in signatures that change the "talk" part based on the user's interface language. Rocket000 (talk) 11:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
You are really racing for the wikinobel with those ideas ;-) Liné1 (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{On Wikipedia}}

Hi, Rocket000, could you add "fy" to {{On Wikipedia}}? Erik Warmelink (talk) 14:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done Rocket000 (talk) 16:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Erik Warmelink (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] If

I made a mistake here please do fix it for me. It will not have been the first but I'm guessing it will have been an empty gallery than an image. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting it & apologies for troubling you. Regards --Herby talk thyme 15:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{Taxonavigation}} parameter common=

Hello my friend,
As I am currently cleaning all subcategories and subarticles of Category:Mammalia, I suppressed the use of the common= parameter of {{Taxonavigation}} when I could.
So now Category:Taxonavigation templates using common parameter is empty.
Could you suppress the parameter from the template ? Thanks in advance, cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done Almost forgot about that. Rocket000 (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Good team work! Liné1 (talk) 15:30, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Licence query (again)

Hi Rocket000, again. Can you look at this image on www.freebase.com. I have big doubts as to whether it can be used on Commons...I suspect, no, but please let me know....thanks. Seth Whales (talk) 20:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't mention the license so we have to assume it's fully copyrighted. Rocket000 (talk) 13:32, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New task for my favorite admin

Hello my friend,
IUCN red list web site domain name has been renamed.
Could you modify {{IUCN}} and {{IUCN list}} to replace www.redlist.org by www.iucnredlist.org?
Thanks in advance. Liné1 (talk) 08:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done :) Rocket000 (talk) 13:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rocket000. While we are at it, would you do this Commons talk:Categories for discussion/editintro. Otherwise it stops working. -- User:Docu at 17:55, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I just realized that it's also once in Commons:Categories for discussion/preload. Would you edit this too. It works in the meantime. -- User:Docu at 19:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Not the only misuse

Hi Rocket000, I noticed your note. I took a look at his deletion log and it's a mess. He deleted a lot of images as dupes which are not dupes. I'm getting so tired of these admins superseding files..... Multichill (talk) 07:26, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I hate when people don't link the replacement file in the deletion summary.. it's so long to check. Most of the ones I checked were ok, but I am definitely familiar with how Shizhao works... Rocket000 (talk) 07:36, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Morphinae

I have just uploaded pics of Morpho adonis and Morpho anaxibia bot failed to categorise them properly. Can you help? I'd be most grateful Robert aka Notafly (talk) 17:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure! I love categorizing your images. :) Rocket000 (talk) 17:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
That category Species of Morphinae is just for other categories (otherwise, there'd be way too many images to find anything). It's automatically filled by {{Lepidoptera}}. Rocket000 (talk) 17:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thats very kind of you.A lot more to come mostly Papilionidae but only one more tonight Morpho zephyris.So labeled.These Morphos are a bit confusing.Nice though. Thans again Robert akaNotafly (talk)

Looking forward to them. And yes, these Morphos' taxonomy is quite confusing (but figuring it out is kinda fun too :-) Rocket000 (talk) 18:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Assessments fun

I had a look at the code, and then read all the talk page, and now agree with you and recent comments by Multichill. The whole thing tries to do to much and I am now thinking what it tries to do is totally unnecessary anyway :-). This is Commons, we have a few assessment processes and tag images to show those assessed as somehow outstanding on this project. And like any other info on the image page, that should be translated.

But in a similar way that en:wp isn't going to highlight articles that have been assessed as featured articles on mi:wp, I don't think we really need to "feature" every image that is featured on another project. Yes that information is useful and might be used to shortlist images when you are trying to find a good illustration for something, but that information isn't exactly Commons core business. To start with, as has been noted elsewhere, the standards an purposes of the different FP processes are different. And it seems very strange that if we delist an image here on Commons (eg because we now have a better version), that it should still be displayed as a featured image just because some other project is a bit behind and still features it.

I think -Slaunger was right with the suggestion "Should we make some kind of requirements specification for it before we get started?", I think if we had done that we would have seen that the whole thing, the number of different combinations it was trying to cover, was huge, even without including QI, VI and POTD/POTY stuff. Also the philosophy that we should make the code complicated rather than the complicating usability is admirable, but also wrong. If anyone has done a computer programing course they should understand that the most important aspect of any code is its maintainability (not even whether it works! but how easily it can be understood and therefore fixed when things change). The commons community seems to have a very high turnover and very little institutional memory (mainly because newcomers don't bother to look at archives but make assumptions instead), and a brilliant bit of code is sooner or later going to have to be fixed by someone else. The main affect of complicated code is to embed whatever it embodies into the project because it is simply too difficult to change.

So the upshot of all that is that the assessments template is completely wrong headed. Our prime motivation is not to make image pages look simple and clean and all look the same. Our motivation should be to make images as easy to find as possible and the info contained there-on be as useful as possible (complete, multilingual). We should have a Category:Featured pictures structure that includes all featured pictures on all projects. At the moment we have a number of sub categories for different languages (which aren't properly populated), and I see the assessments template assumes that there could be FP processes for each language subproject eg Wikisource, Wikipedia, Wikinews, Wikiversity, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, and Wikibooks. To my knowledge this isn't true, and is unlikely to ever happen - I would expect that one category would be adequate per language (I maybe wrong, so maybe the structure can allow for it in the future).

Anyway, having dabbled with creating the new, all singing, all dancing, assessments template, are you interested in developing an assessments (or Awards etc) template which does a simpler but multilingual job? I envisage that it would:

  1. ) accept parameters to indicate FP status on different language wikis and on Commons.
  2. ) Display an FP or broken FP icon as appropriate for its status on Commons.
  3. ) Display some additional icon when it has FP (or former FP) status on other projects, and link to the image page on that project (not to assessments or anything else, but simply to the image's page on their project which in turn may link to assessment pages or however they do things on their wiki, we have no place in prescribing how they do their stuff).
  4. ) The other wiki icon would be significantly different from an FP icon so that a quick glance would not confuse the two - ie it is immediately clear which images are FPs here, and which have an award somewhere else (eg if it is not featured here, the template would not look like our FP template).
  5. ) There can be multiple other wiki FP links on one line.

Too radical for you ?

--Tony Wills (talk) 01:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Not too radical at all. In fact, some of those points I brought up in this comment. I assume that QI and VI aren't even considered for this new template since you didn't mention them. I think that's definitely the best way to go. But what about POTY? POTD/MOTD? Non-FP assessments on other projects (there are some like POTY on en.wikinews)? I think we need to make it very clear what is and is not supported by this template. Of course, any decent template would be written in a way that allows for easy expansion, but we need solid and discrete goals to start with. This is not just for the templates makers but for the users of the template.
I'm willing to give this another try, but I'm not doing it on my own this time. I got overwhelmed last time and simply stopped and generally avoided the whole thing since then. If you're interested, please do start work on the new version, and I'll join in. A couple things: Start from scratch. Don't let getting it to look perfect slow you down (my problem usually). Don't let "esoteric" template syntax slow you down (pseudo-code your ideas if you get stuck). Don't implement auto-translation until the end but design it so that all text elements can easily be switched in and out when we get there. There's some other templates that implement a couple of the ideas I had for this template, such as {{MWheader}}. I really like the idea of having parameters that can be either named parameters or values for unnamed ones (e.g. |x or |x=). This makes it more intuitive and less to remember. It's slightly more complicated code wise, but once you understand the simple expression evaluated by the #ifexpr, it's not that bad. It just looks that way because MediaWiki lacks more elegant syntax. I also prefer the more direct autotranslation method as used there. IMO, changing the whole template based on the interface language (like with {{autotranslate}}) was a huge design flaw from the beginning. Anyway, these are just ideas, or maybe ideas to inspire other ideas. Whatever works. Too much input/instruction from others takes the fun out of it if you're no longer creating and designing your own methods. Rocket000 (talk) 22:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Having written programs in everything from machine language and assembly language through Cobol, and Ada, I am a bit tired of learning new languages (not that I actually ever did much programming :-). So I haven't put much time into learning mediawiki syntax and just tend to cut and paste other peoples code or tweak existing code. I certainly do not want to include QI or VI, and hadn't really thought about POTD/POTY or awards to sound or other media. As I understand the autotranslate feature relies on a bug, I agree we should take care to add translation in a way that doesn't rely on the current implimentation of this feature. I think that the comxyz parameters were a mistake and like the named/unnamed parameter method you suggest. I will have a play and see how I get on :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 00:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, every template-based autotranslation method relies on the same bug: the incorrect behavior of {{int:}}. The simple fact of the matter is that doing autotranslation like we do and maintaining database integrity is impossible. How can you have a accurate WhatLinksHere page if every page is different depending on some variable you set in your preferences? How can you link to a section if the name of that section is different for everyone? How can you categorize a page for English users only? How can you check usage of an image if it only appears when using a specific interface—the one you happen not to be using? Etc. The laws of nature don't allow it. Simple text is one thing (e.g. the interface labels), whole pages (templates) that may or may not be transcluded is another. In other words, the bug (I put no quotes around bug because the behavior is not the way it's supposed to work, even if desirable to some people) is something to be conscious of when exploiting it. If used in a responsible way, the problems it causes are negligible. Rocket000 (talk) 01:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I find the technique of translating just individual pieces of text makes for very unreadable templates, but I won't worry about that just yet. I get the impression that the assumption (and perhaps the whole point) is that this template is copied to other wikis too (or somehow interwikified) so that it displays on their image pages too, which wasn't quite what I was thinking, and is another twist (do cross project templates work?). Adding our categories wouldn't be of any use to them, but should it then have a mechamism for adding their categories? And it would want to emphasise local awards on each (ie highlight only Commons FPs with an FP star on Commons). Perhaps a shared code base, with a custom front end for each wiki ... hmmm, more thought needed :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
It's always good practice to avoid hard-coding when you can. Not just for portability but for numerous other (local) reasons. I don't think any other project would ever have a need for a template like this. Another thing to keep in mind is that some projects, like en.wp, don't care what we do, they tag and categorize their own files, even when the image doesn't exist locally. I don't see this stopping any time soon. In fact, it's getting worse. Now WikiProjects are adding their project templates to image talk pages. :/ Rocket000 (talk) 01:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{Taxonavigation}} |note= really rocks

{{Taxonavigation}} |note= really really was a good idea. Thanks.
But could you add it to {{Taxa}}, {{Taxa/doc}}, {{Species}}, {{Species/doc}} ?  ;-)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 18:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done and I also did {{subspecies}}. Rocket000 (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Moth picture extraction

Helle there Rocket! I noticed you are quite busy with creating a great taxonomic tree for Leps. I was wondering, would you be interested in helping me extract pictures from the plates I uploaded to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Catalogue_Of_The_Noctuidae_In_The_Collection_Of_The_British_Museum If not, no problem, but there are so much (173 plates and supposedly some 5000 species) that it's a bit much to do for me alone. If you're not interested, maybe you would know some other users who might be? I was looking for something like a project page on commons, but couldn't find it. Cheers and thanks for all the great work! Ruigeroeland (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, image extraction is not one of my favorite tasks, but I did notice how much work you got ahead of you and am planning to do some pages (I got to be in the right mood first). Have you tried Cropbot or Commonist? Those may speed things up for you. As for human help, you can try maybe Commons:Graphic Lab School/Images to improve? Rocket000 (talk) 11:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Cheers, and thanks for the tip regarding the Lab, I placed a request. I will check out the tools, but the extraction itself is rather fast just using oldschool Windows Paint. If you're in the right mood and extract one, would you be so kind to let me know which plate you did? That way I can put the files on my "make an article" list..! Thanks again

[edit] Amazing really

We get "autoconfirmed" without anyone asking, being consulted or (afaik) needing it. But autopatrolled which would help the few who actually do anything here seems to threaten the very existence of Commons. --Herby talk thyme 13:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] license/copyright question

Hi Rocket000, If you have a time could you please take a look at this deletion request: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Navigational map of the way of our icebreaker in Ross Sea.jpg, and tell me what do you think about this particular situation. There's some reading involved, so, if you have no time that's OK. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{Taxoconflict}}

Hello,
Someone (very clever and good looking ;-)) created the wonderful {{Taxoconflict}} template. Do you want to look at it ?
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Nice. I'll remember to use it next time I need something like that. Rocket000 (talk) 22:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Where are these pics now?

Hi, where are the pics from Category:GDR-unknown now? Mutter Erde 92.227.159.200 13:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea. I just deleted it because it was empty. Feel free to recreate it. Rocket000 (talk) 22:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible foryou to look at an elder version, let's say from July? I can't believe that someone has identified them all (about 15 pics). Looks like vandalism. Mutter Erde 92.227.159.200 22:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean? The contents of the category would be the same. Rocket000 (talk) 23:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
But the pics are lost, because I can't remember the file names 92.227.159.200 23:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I have found the vandal. He has identified not a single person.http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20090803192539&limit=500&target=TFCforever all on July 31. And now? 92.227.159.200 23:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but why is he a vandal. It looks like was just categorizing them. The ones where he removed the unknown category had other categories. Based on the name I would think this was just a temporary category like a "unidentified" or "uncategorized" category. Rocket000 (talk) 23:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Sure, it was a contemporary Cat - until the moment somebody would identify the person. But what he has done with this file? [2] He replaced "GDR-unknown" with "Men of Germany". That's ridiculous. Who is Dr. Nathan? What is his surname?
Or here: In [3], "GDR-unknown" and the guy's red cat was deleted!. I had put Jähne in GDR-unknown because I had no idea, how native English speakers would translate and categorize "Der stellvertretende Leiter der SV Dynamo, Rudi Jähne" (means in my words: "Vice president of the main sport club"). So, how you would categorize him?
In administrator's noteboard they are currently talking about what to do with an uploader, who refuses to add cats. The guy above is a similiar case. Mutter Erde Regards 92.225.217.191 09:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I created Category:Unidentified people of the German Democratic Republic for you. It follows the naming convention of the other unidentified categories. Multichill (talk) 09:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. But it's a bit long and complicated. Anyway, I have put the first pic in that cat. There is also a gallery for these people: Commons:Unidentified people of Germany. Regards Mutter Erde 92.225.217.191 10:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] scroll=yes

Hello Rocket000, unfortunately I had a little problem to understand your notices on my page. (My bad english!) Now I saw differences as follows:

I use the Browser "Opera 10". Yesterday I used the "Firefox" and saw, that there is a very different skin according to the "template:SN" in "Internet Explorer" and "Opera" and then in "Firefox". In "Opera" and "Internet Explorer" all synonyms are written among one another and in "Firefox" three times side by side. ( I hope I have found the right words to explain the problem.) Do you know that? Greetings. Orchi (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File names

Is there anything of interest in this ? I wonder if there wouldn't be a better place to put it (File renaming?) or if it's mostly software driven anyways. -- User:Docu at 01:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW It's linked from the (?) on the upload form through First steps. -- User:Docu at 01:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Forget my question. I just noticed that various versions of the first are translated in 10 different languages. -- User:Docu at 02:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of language

I went ahead and archived the discussion at Commons talk:Galleries#Naming conventions, only because I would like to centralize the discussion at Commons talk:Language policy. Also, I would like to come to agreement on the page as it currently stands because there is enough common ground that we can elevate what we have as policy and come to consensus on the rest. Evrik (talk) 14:56, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, in an effort to move the Commons:Language policy closer to completion, I have been editing it and cleaning it up for the last few days. I have tried to make the page as neutral and consistent as possible with the relevant policy and guidleine pages that it cross references.

I would appreciate it, as someone who has discussed some of these policies in the past, if you could look at Commons talk:Language policy and contribute your thoughts. This is the version that exists as I am writing it and I am encouraging everyone to consider the "static" page until everything gets sorted out.

Many thanks. Evrik (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{Published}}

Hello, I was just wondering about your opinion. The template {{published}}, which is an acceptable template IMO, is used on several file talk pages. However, I think that the template is kinda useless on the file talk page. This seems to be a practise from en.wikipedia. Whereas I can understand that it's done like this for their articles (not wanting the readers to be confronted with their WikiProjects and this stuff), I think that here on file pages it's much more useful to put it on the file description page. I mean, it's only producing a redundant talk page that most people don't even look at. I think that's it's more useful on the file description page. Also, the category would then show thumbnails, which is better for browsing the cat. Furthermore, assessments like FP, VP or QI are also on the file description page and not on the talk page like on en.wikipedia. What do you think of this? Should we move it to the file description page? --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:02, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it makes more sense to put it on the file page itself. Unlike encyclopedia articles, the info we put on the image's page is about the image itself, not the subject that's portrayed in the image. Also, by doing it this way, the template will be shown on other wikis. Rocket000 (talk) 01:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright question

Hello Rocket000, I have a few Soviet stamps with the reproductions of paintings by w:Ivan Aivazovsky. Could you please tell me, if it is OK to upload images of those stamps to Commons? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they should be fine. Since the paintings themselves are {{PD-Art}}, I would assume stamps of them are too (as long as they are faithful reproductions and not derivatives). Rocket000 (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Request for comment

Hi. Can you take a look at this if you get a chance? I see that you've commented on similar issues in the past. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] License question

Hi Rocket000, Some time ago I uploaded this image File:Chinese stamp in 1950.jpg with self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0|author=I, Mbz1. I've noticed that the license has been changed to public domain. I understand that the stamp is in public domain, but does it mean that my image of that stamp have to be in public domain too? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, yes. Why do you want to claim copyright on something that's already in the public domain? That's a faithful recreation of a 2D work so no new copyright was created. Rocket000 (talk) 11:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Well, the stamp is in public domain, but my work is not. I took that image. Do I have any copyrights for it? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Do you think you added any originality? That's what you get copyright for. Not labor or skill. This is the same as if a museum posted a faithful reproduction of the Mona Lisa. Do they now own the copyright of the Mona Lisa? Rocket000 (talk) 13:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay, let's say I took an image of Golden Gate Bridge. Do I own copyright for Golden Gate Bridge? Of course I do not, but I do own copyright for the image of Golden Gate Bridge that I took, don't I?--Mbz1 (talk) 13:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
That's a 3D object. The angle, the lighting, etc. is all original. Thus, copyrightable. See {{PD-Art}} as that's basically what this is. Although it looks like a scan to me. Rocket000 (talk) 13:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
OK, I see what you mean now. Thank you. My image is not a scan, it is an image I took. I've no scanner.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
(EC)Thats like saying an apple is an orange. (In brief) It's seen that no creativity was done (Even though you photographed it and may have had to get the lighting right ect) though it is always debated when say taking a photo of a stamp like the one in question however taking a photo of a pile of stamps (PD stamps of course) the photographer may license the image how they want as it's seen as creative (Same applies to the Golden Gate Bridge [though buildings, bridges, public art ect must be in the FOP of course]). Bidgee (talk) 13:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, Bidgee. I've learned something new today :)--Mbz1 (talk) 14:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Crown copyright

Hello. Back in July 2008 you redirected Template:Crown copyright to Template:Nonderivative. What was the logic behind that? I was kind of expecting to find it redirect to Template:PD-UKGov. -Arb. (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I've figured it out. -Arb. (talk) 19:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
As you've no doubt figured out, that license referred to the fact that Crown works are monetarily free, but they do not allow for unrestricted commercial use or the right to make derivatives. (Limited commercial use, such as printing and selling copies is allowed, but they would frown upon using a Crown work in an advertisement, for example). -Nard the Bard 19:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:CATALOGUE-BM-PLATE CCXXXVI.jpg

Thanks! I will have a look which ones I can insert in wikipedia right away. The rest will go on my very long "to-do" list. :) Ruigeroeland (talk) 10:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

You're a machine! Thanks. I already used some on wikipedia, looking into the rest! Ruigeroeland (talk) 13:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Xyloryctidae / Scythrididae

Whats up to date? I found this. Do you have any other references? --Olei (talk) 19:56, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. I'll look into it when I have more time. Rocket000 (talk) 18:36, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Colias alfacariensis/Colias sareptensis

Hi Rocket000, what is your source of the current name? I never heard of Colias sareptensis before. Just curious, --Hsuepfle (talk) 21:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

[4], but I think I changed it because of [5]. Rocket000 (talk) 18:36, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
We should treat C. sareptensis as Nomen dubium and C. australis as synonym[6]. This is in accordance with Fauna Europaea[7] and Encyclopedia of Life[8]. --Olei (talk) 08:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thumbnails of non-animated GIF images

Hi, The bug 16451 GIF scaling limit should be applied to animated GIFs only is marked as "fixed" since August, but non animated GIF's on commons are still not being scaled. When I asked about it on bugzilla, I was told that "somebody needs to activate it on Wikimedia". Do you know how to do that? Or know who might know? My attempts to ask for help at COM:AN did not pan out. See also here. --Jarekt (talk) 18:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, it's not clear what he was referring to. An extension? If that's the case, I guess we need to open another bug, asking "someone" to activate it on Wikimedia projects. It sounds more like he was referring to a newer version of MediaWiki (which we would just have to wait for to go live), but we're currently past those revisions they called fixes so we should already have them... this is one reason why every time I post on bugzilla, it feels like I'm wasting my time. "FIXED" over there means there's a solution, it doesn't mean we have that solution, even though that's usually the reason for the bug report. Rocket000 (talk) 18:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Morning Dew

User talk:Rocket000, SMcCandlish, and User talk:69.242.140.172: Hi folks, just to let you know I removed the sentence "The song is most popularly known today as a cover by the Grateful Dead" reference." from the Morning Dew article. My reasons are explained in the talk page.206.130.173.55 18:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lost earthquake

Hi, some time ago you deleted Commons:Featured pictures candidates/Sanfranciscoearthquake1906.jpg as a broken or orphaned redirect. Previously that page had been moved from Template:Featured pictures candidates/Sanfranciscoearthquake1906.jpg, but I see nothing in the logs showing Commons:Featured pictures candidates/Sanfranciscoearthquake1906.jpg was ever moved to anywhere else. I was wondering whether you could undelete it and just check its page history to see whether it had been manually edited into a redirect rather than as a result of a move? (Somewhere out there in the wiki ether there must still be an FP candidate page for it!). :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 21:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks like I made a mistake. It wasn't a redirect, broken or not. At the time, I was deleting hundreds of these orphaned redirects (Commons:Featured pictures candidates/... → Commons:Featured picture candidates/...). My method for finding them was first checking the incoming links. The ones with 0 links (like this one), were most likely redirects. I still went to each page before deleting them to verify it was a redirect, but I guess I hit a wrong button or something on this one. I wonder why it's not linked from the FPC archives though. Rocket000 (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I went through the remaining broken FPC links, and found another one in a similar situation. The things they had in common were: they were from 2005 (things weren't as organized back then), their FPC pages were missing the "Image:" part (making the template unable to automatically link to them), and they had 0 incoming links/transclusions (meaning they aren't recorded in the FPC logs at all). I'll have to investigate the reason for this last part. Back when I was working on these, I ran across some that were not logged. I put them in this category. One of the main causes was that when nominators withdrew, they sometimes removed the FPC page from the log and no one caught it, but that can't be the reason for the two above since they obviously weren't withdrawn. Rocket000 (talk) 21:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, you have solved the two problems pointed out in Commons_talk:Featured_picture_candidates/Archive_8#Broken FPC links :-). I think the 2005 FPC log pages were a manual reconstruction a long time after the actual nominations, and probably those entries were missed because of their non standard page names. I have been meaning to go through all the FPC page histories and check all the promotions etc, to see whether everything matches up, but I haven't quite got there yet :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 09:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{IUCN}}

Hello my friend,
{{IUCN}} url has changed, again
Could you do this modification (I did on {{IUCN list}}) on {{IUCN}} ? Thanks in advance. Liné1 (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done Rocket000 (talk) 20:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


[edit] Template:PD-US-flag

File deletion warning Template:PD-US-flag 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 file, 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца) | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | ‪Norsk (nynorsk)‬ | ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬ | Occitan | Polski | Português | Русский | Српски / Srpski | Tiếng Việt | ‪中文(简体)‬ | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−

--User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but all I did was [9]. ;) Rocket000 (talk) 23:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I contacted everyone who touched the template, including myself. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Vectors

If you have a moment, would you attempt to close this discussion? -- User:Docu at 13:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I would if I knew what to do with it. No one commented after my last comment there. I would be bold and simply go with what I think it should be but I'm not sure what that is.. I guess if I had to choose it would be "SVG <topic>" because that would involve the least amount of renaming (e.g. SVG coats of arms), but it's still a lot. I would really like more input before issuing tons of category moves to the bot. Rocket000 (talk) 14:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Lots of interesting things were said in that thread and as such it's nice having it around. Anyways, as the SVG categories aren't ideal, I think more harmonization is still welcome. As SieBot is stable, the number of renames isn't really an issue.
I doubt mediawiki gets new features soon. (If it helps, I could assist setting up a solution that categorizes all .svg into a single svg category. This would simplify category intersections.)
A pragmatic approach could be to close the old discussion and formulate a new proposal in a new thread (still cross-referencing the old one). -- User:Docu at 15:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rocket000"