User talk:Slaunger

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from User talk:SlaungerBot)
Jump to: navigation, search
I will reply to your comments here (unless you prefer otherwise).

alHambra[edit]

one of the best pictures I have ever seen. Sehr schön! (Orientalist in der de:WP)

Commons bot inactivity[edit]

Hello! Your bot User:SlaungerBot has been listed at Commons:Bots/Requests/de-flag_3 as being inactive for over two years. As a housekeeping measure we'd like to remove the bot flag from inactive bot accounts, unless you expect the bot will be operated again in the near future. If you consent to the removal of the bot flag (or do not reply on the deflag page) you can rerequest the bot flag at Commons:Bots/Requests should you need it again. --Dschwen (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


WLM 2014 in Spain[edit]

Hi Slaunger,

Did you notice this ?. We both have pictures in the top 100 !--Jebulon (talk) 10:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jebulon,
Yes, thanks to your nice tripod, and I did notice more that a week ago. You have several in the competition left. Not bad, considering there were more than 23000 nominated photos in Spain! Good luck getting in top 10 too! -- Slaunger (talk) 16:33, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, I hope they will change their choice for the good one (but I did as they did: I just noticed the thumbnail...)--Jebulon (talk) 18:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Slaunger, never mind the thumbnail size: both your panoramas look excellent filling my 2560x1440 display. Even the blurry one when reduced to 33% is over twice the width of my monitor and lovely and sharp. If printed at 240dpi, it would make an excellent poster of high quality. I wish the same could be said for many other WLM winners. I do wonder if, when the judging is over, you would consider downsizing the blurry one to a sharp size -- that way I think it would be much more likely to be reused, which is the point (and the original is retained in the history, should anyone need it). -- Colin (talk) 20:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Colin: I made a 10 Mpixel downsampled version long ago already, linked as "other version". Anyway, thanks for your appraisal. Appreciated! -- Slaunger (talk) 20:10, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Jebulon, which image(s) of yours made the top 100? -- Colin (talk) 20:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Jebulons works are easy to spot, if you know his style -- Slaunger (talk) 20:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Wow ! So biiig ? Anyway, happy to know I have my own "style" ! 🎨+📷=🏆. I'm an artist !--Jebulon (talk) 20:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Jebulon: I also cheated a bit, to be honest. The door was not so distict "Jebulon"ish, I think (I did not catch by-eye on the thumb that was yours at least). Instead, I used the slideshow gadget to rapidly sift through all 100 and find your contributions among them Clin. But yes, I think you have a distinct meticulous high quality style, which suits very well the type of photos which are most useful on Commons. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Jebulon: Game over. Insert coin! Better luck next year.. Poco a poco won. In our hearts, we knew he was both better and a more hard working than us, didn't weSmile? Congratz to him and the other WLM 2014 winners! -- Slaunger (talk) 20:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes. But now, thanks to you, I know that I have a style 💪!--Jebulon (talk) 23:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Powerplant[edit]

Excellent ! --Jebulon (talk) 22:22, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jebulon:: Glad you think so! I was concerned many would find it too black, but apparently not! -- Slaunger (talk) 22:12, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

WLM 2014 ES[edit]

Hi! Now that the national contest is over, I have changed your "average" Alhambra image for the featured one in Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2014 in Spain/Winners, just in case someone takes a look at the Top 100 so you must not feel embarrassed :P Sorry again about the mistake! --Kadellar (talk) 09:58, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kadellar, It was kind of you to keep this little detail in mind and update the photo. Thanks! -- Slaunger (talk) 22:10, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

template:PD-art-100[edit]

jeg synes at licensbeskrivelsen lyder mærkværdig se feks her : Rome,_From_Mount_Aventine "Dette er en troværdig, fotografisk gengivelse af et originalt todimensionelt kunstværk. Kunstværket er offentlig ejendom af følgende grund:" Det er formuleringen "Kunstværket er offentlig ejendom af følgende grund:" der er et problem, kunstværket er jo lige solgt for 280 millioner kr, så det er vel ikke offentlig ejendom? Mon ikke denne her formulering er bedre: "Kopier af kunstværket er offentlig ejendom af følgende grund"? Problemet findes sikkert også i andre templates af samme art.--Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Villy Fink Isaksen Jeg ser slet ikke den samme tekst, da mine preferences er sat til engelsk:-) Hvorom alting er, har du ret i, at den nuværende licenstekst ikke synes at give mening. Dit forslag virker mere meningsfyldt. Meeen, licenstekster er på ingen måde mit speciale, så jeg er bange for, at jeg ikke kan give mere kvalificeret mod- såvel som medspil på den sag end det. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, men jeg skrev til to andre udover dig User:EPO og User:MGA73. MGA73 har taget sagen op her: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:PD-Art#The_work_of_art_itself_is_in_the_public_domain_... --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2014 (UTC)