User talk:Slaunger

I'm mellow! Are you?

I will reply to your comments here (unless you prefer otherwise).

Archives 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012 Featured picture promotions Quality image promotions Valued image promotions Valued image set promotions

New problem : I need some help again

Hi, Slaunger

I need somme help again. I tried a few minutes ago to promote two Archaeo's pictures and I don't know what happened : the page now seems upside down. Could you have a look at it ? I'm very sorry. Regards. --JLPC (talk) 18:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Hall of Fame table

Hi Slaunger:

I just added a "|" before the class wikitable and it seems OK now. -- JKadavoor Jee 04:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Of course! Thanks, Jee! --Slaunger (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

File:Tofieldia pusilla flower upernavik 2007-07-11.jpg

Hi Slaunger - I was looking at this photo and saw that it had a deleted sister photo, which was deleted because the identification was disputed (sv:Diskussion:Björnbrodd). Two points arising; first, is the existing photo the same plant as the deleted photo? (I am fairly sure, yes); and second, photos are not normally deleted just for misidentification, they are just added to a subcategory of Category:Unidentified plants, to await identification by others. I concur with the doubts over its identity, as the leaves are too long and slender for Tofieldia pusilla, it looks to me to be something in the family Cyperaceae. So therefore, my proposal is (a) to recategorise File:Tofieldia pusilla flower upernavik 2007-07-11.jpg into Category:Unidentified Cyperaceae or perhaps Category:Unidentified Liliopsida, and (b) to restore the deleted photo (I can do this as an admin), and similarly categorise it. Do you have any opinion? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 14:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi MPF, This is the kind of message I really like to get. A proficient editor knowing what he/she is talking about! Yes I concur with the disputed categorization and I agree to categorize it to one of the Unidentified... categories you suggest. Pick whatever you find is broad enough to cover it for sure. Secondly, I agree it would be a good idea to undelete the sister photo (yes, it was the same specimen as you suggest) and categorize it similarly. I recall it was particularly difficult to get a shapr photo of the flower. It was veeery small, it was windy and I had focus problems (and the camera was low on battery). If you pick a suitable unidentified category and undelete the other, I will update the image page descriptions accordingly and WMF usages. Deal? --Slaunger (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Done! I'm pretty sure on Cyperaceae, as there's no ligules where the leaves join the stems, so it isn't Poaceae. I haven't renamed the images (so as not to break links from here), but can do - MPF (talk) 23:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, MPF! I updated file usage and moved the files to Unidentified Cyperaceae....jpg. Now that we are at it with the identifications, could you maybe have a look at my contested identification of Erigeron compositus, which is being discussed here: User talk:Slaunger/Greenland/Plants? I would appreciate to hear your opinion. --Slaunger (talk) 19:08, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Unfortunately, I'm not so well-up on Asteraceae, so don't feel able to comment on the ident of these. Sorry for the delay in replying! - MPF (talk) 22:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries MPF. Thanks for replying. --Slaunger (talk) 20:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)