User talk:Fluteflute

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Fluteflute!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}} For more information read the full deletion guidelines.
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

TUSC token a5c3c291c659840c33abacebca7a1209

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Vipera reverts

Hi Fluteflute, Since I just reverted all of your recent edits to the Vipera articles, I believe I owe you an explanation. During a recent effort to organize all of the snake images into categories here at WikiMedia, I also went about creating matching articles for them whenever they were missing (which was usually the case). When I started creating those articles, I noticed that, when they were present, they were either located within the category for the matching taxon, or together with the category for the matching taxon in the category for the parent taxon. I asked around to see if there was a guideline for this, but there was none. Instead, I was told that the decision was usually a matter of taste (sigh). Therefore, I had to make a decision, which was to place the articles in the categories for their parent taxa. In my view this has a number of advantages:

• It seems logical to treat an article and a category for a taxon the same way. The only difference is that the one can contain more articles and categories while the other cannot.
• Treating them the same has the advantage of making it slightly easier to create new counterparts for them because, except for the gallery tags in the articles, they are basically the same -- you just copy and paste.
• The greatest advantage by far, however, it that it makes maintenance much easier by providing better overviews. By that I mean that it becomes easier to check for new articles and categories that don't yet have matching counterparts. For example, take a look at Category:Natricinae. In it you can see that there are currently ten subcategories, but you don't have to drill any deeper to see that each one also has a matching article. However, due to the fact that everything is organized this way, you can also see that in those subcategories there are again just as many subcategories as articles, e.g. "(2 C, 2 P)" or " (5 C, 5 P)." This is probably because each of those subcategories also has a matching article; it's not a certainty, but it's usually the case. Again, you can see this without having to drill any deeper, which saves you an enormous amount of time when checking the entire collection. So, simply by checking these numbers, anyone can quickly locate newly created categories and articles, make any necessary corrections and then create matching counterparts for them.

This all seems wonderful, but for a while, there was one drawback to this scheme and it's the one I believe you are concerned with. Some people complained that, if they were viewing the contents of a category and the matching article was not located within it, they would not be able to find that article as easily. I solved this problem with the help of an administrator who was willing to add a new feature to the {{Taxonavigation}} template (see this discussion). This new feature makes it possible to navigate to a taxon's matching article or category simply by clicking on it's name in the taxonavigation template: if the name is not black, then it will taken you there. In other words, visitors no longer have to know where the matching article is located, because they can see that it exists from within the category overview and can always get there with a single click.
So what do you think? Does this sound reasonable? Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 23:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Changing username Confirmation

Just to confirm as requested that en:User:Flutefluteflute owns this account. --Fluteflute (talk) 11:18, 24 December 2008 (UTC)