User talk:Davefoc

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Davefoc!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | تۆرکجه | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | भोजपुरी | Bahasa Banjar | বাংলা | català | нохчийн | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | euskara | estremeñu | فارسی | suomi | français | Frysk | galego | עברית | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk | occitan | Ирон | polski | português | português do Brasil | rumantsch | română | русский | sicilianu | Scots | سنڌي | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | українська | اردو | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 粵語 | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Sterkebaktalk 20:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


Image deletion warning Image:CaliforniaGroundSquirrelGoldenGatePark.JPG 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 image, 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)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Davefoc (talk) 07:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dave, please use {{bad name}} next time. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hello, Davefoc!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:


2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT (talk) 05:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


Dear Davefoc, late, but heartly thanks for your notes on my discussion page. I see you work in the birds articles busy. I'll do my best especially in orchids and hope, that we in Commons obtain in future a perfect and scientific collection of plant and animal pictures. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 22:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

talk page[edit]

Hello Dave, i think the comment posted on my talk page was meant for another user named Sarefo . i just wanted to let you know so you could contact him if you need to.. This was in regards to the tarantula categories.. Sarefo didn't want genus categories created for this page Category:Theraphosidae , however i went ahead and created them because i was told that was the proper way the categories should be broken down and i did so before i read his comment about doing it... and images should not be present in the main category if they are in a subcategory already from what i have been told... thanks --Ltshears (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

--Davefoc (talk) 05:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

line1's recent edits[edit]

Liné1 has made several edits recently that seem to be at odds with current consensus standards about the appearance of TOL galleries.

In particular he has moved the taxobox above the vernacular name box. There was a lot of discussion on this issue and I tried to pick what seemed to be the consensus that was arrived at in those conversations that I read through when I made this gallery. I don't think that consensus has changed. I don't see where the put the taxobox first people have won over the majority that disagreed with them. Right now, all I see, is a kind of guerrilla editing effort to implement their minority views.

location of links
Wikimedia is principally a place to display images. Images are what galleries are about. They are not about links. Putting links at the top of the gallery stands this idea on its head and makes it seem like Wikimedia is a collection of links with some pictures. However, if there has been a discussion of this issue and a consensus has been established then I might see some justification for link1's approach. I am not aware of any such discussion or consensus right now on that.

Use of WikispeciesComapact instead of Wikispecies for the link to Wikispecies.
This is just my personal taste but I find the big, wikispecies link to be unattractive and I think it distracts from the look of the gallery to use it. This gallery has used the WikispeciesCompact approach to linking to Wikispecies fo a long time and I saw no advantage to changing that. Once again if there is some sort of a consensus about this that was derived from some discussion I might understand better why link1 made this change.

In general, I spent significant effort on this gallery, searching out the images and working on different arrangements with the goal of displaying the information in an aesthetically pleasing format consistent with the TOL consensus about what TOL galleries should look like. For the most part, IMO, Liné1's recent edits have reduced the quality of this gallery. --Davefoc (talk) 06:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello my friend (good contributors are friends ;-))
  • About the taxonavigation at the top: I am not aware of any consensus about this. I just need the Taxonavigation temporarily at the top, so that when I look at a species, I can rapidly see that the 2 Taxonavigation matches (the above family part of course). This is only possible by having the Taxonavigation at the top. But really if there is a consensus, you can move it back to your desired place. Personaly I think that such position problem, should/could be solved globally by the templates...
  • About WikispeciesCompact: The only difference between both templates is that {{Wikispecies}} is at the right and doesn't take any place (wikispecies is rarely interesting and you never know what classification they follow). I have often asked for a resolution of this problem: One template should be deprecated and a bot should be launched. Until that is done, there will be flip-flap (sorry I don't see any other word).
    By the way there is the same flip-flap problem with {{Translation table}} and {{VN}}.
    Also you add {{WikispeciesCompact}} after the gallery (for exemple here), when I have always seen it before (in case the category becomes big).
  • About "Liné1's recent edits have reduced the quality": that is not very nice. When I first saw Category:Sciuridae, it contained: 200 unsorted pictures + subfamily cat + genus cat + species articles. In the contained genus categories there was also a thousand unsorted pictures. It was a mess.
    • I have created more than 40 species categories that where not created because those pictures where unsorted.
    • now all pictures are under their species category or under a "Unidentified" cat.
    • I have corrected all {{Taxonavigation}}, added a {{Translation table}}, added interwiki, added {{IUCN}} and {{MSW}} links of all sub-categories and sub-articles
    • Now there are only 5 subfamily categories under Category:Sciuridae.
At the end, don't worry, I am for consensus and I have changed a lot of thing in my editing after other's requests. I also practice Wikipedia:WikiLove, which means I don't like fights.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
By the way, you do a great job a putting pictures in galleries. Cheers (I always cheer contributor, it avoid fights ;-)) Liné1 (talk) 09:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

North American mammals[edit]

Hello Dave,
I just discovered that you added links to here).
This seems a fine web site.
What about a template like {{MSW}} to allow uniform display of this links.
The problem is only the name. Should it be {{NAM}} for North American Mammals ?
Smithsonian seems to be the containing web site that contains multiple websites like NAM &
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 11:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Or {{NAM species}} because it only works for species.
There are already {{FishBase species}} & {{TIGRReptiles species}}.
We will be able to create {{NAM family}} (like {{FishBase family}} & {{TIGRReptiles family}})
Look at Category:External link templates for existing names.
Liné1 (talk) 12:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
What do you think of {{NAM species}} ? Cheers Liné1 (talk) 18:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

File:AythyaCollaris 4951.JPG[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 19:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


You now have the Autopatrolled user right. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:44, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Impressed by your pictures[edit]

Dear Davefoc, I happened to see one of your recent picture in the new files and went to have a look at all your pictures. I really very much liked them. I am especially interested in pictures from plants, flowers, insects and animals and you made some really wonderful ones. IMHO your picture CalypteAnna 2642.JPG from 10 December 2010 should win a prize! It is such an achievement. I admire and am in awe. Best regards Dinkum (talk) 15:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

What a pleasant surprise to find your kind note. I just reviewed your pictures and you certainly have many very nice images. You must really have an interesting life I saw pictures from Australia, Vietnam, Thailand, France and Luxembourg at least. I see that you speak French. My daughter studied one year at the University in Grenoble, France. Thanks again. Dave --Davefoc (talk) 05:26, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Gallery pages (Anatidae)[edit]

I think, that 165 Pictures - one for each species - are really not too much for a gallery page. And I think, a gallery page is not really good if you have to have really good look if you want to find a species or of you want to compare the look of different species. Yes - when my gallery page will be ready tomorrow or the day after tomorrow ist IS an improvement. This page, I think has not enough pictures to give a good overview. What is the use of a gallery page, if it doesn't contain more pictures than the typical Wikipedia-Article concerning a bird family? --Kersti (talk) 19:59, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I think this discussion should be on the talk page of anatidae or better on a tree of life discussion page. However, I disagree with you to the point that I would not want to participate in this project if what you are doing was determined to be acceptable. The purpose of the gallery for a family with a large number of members is to provide a good overview of the family that has some aesthetic appeal. A large collection of images that are difficult to compare or find order in is functionally useless in my mind. This is of course an opinion and perhaps you will find more that agree with you. --Davefoc (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand, why you find it difficult to compare the picures or to find order in. And in looking on my gallery pages and comparing to yours I don't have an overview in looking on yours and I get a good overview in looking on mine. Seems that our heads work a bit different concerning this overview.

Concerning the aesthetic appeal I think it is much more relevant for you than it is for me. In looking on a page, which has the scienticic name of a bird family, I want to have the posibility to see all species without clicking through a lot of pages.

Thinking a bit deeper in this question I think that there are a lot of people like me - who in a short time whant to look up how each species looks like and that there are a lot of people who are like you and want to see nice gallery pages with less detailed overview.

But I have no quick idea how to find a good solution for this. --Kersti (talk) 20:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Attribution for image[edit]

Dear Sir,

I would like to use your images of the common wasp, Polistes exclamans, available at, in an extension-outreach publication related to pests in community environments. This publication is purely for educational purposes and has no commercial interests whatsoever.

However, the suggested attribution format, e.g., "By Davefoc (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 ( or GFDL (], via Wikimedia Commons", is very different from the style I will be following for other pictures in my publication, which will most likely be much shorter and in the format: "Photo by Abc Defghijk", or "Photo by Abc Defghijk,".

Therefore for the sake of consistency, kindly let me know whether I may cite the images in the above formats, and if so, what name/affiliation should I use.

Thank you! Sincerely, Shaku

Shaku Nair, Ph.D. Assistant in Extension, Community IPM University of Arizona - Maricopa Ag. Center 37860 W. Smith-Enke Road Maricopa, AZ 85138-3010 Cell: (520) 840-9429 Office: (520) 374-6299

FP Promotion[edit]

LibellulaCroceipennis 6561PMax.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:LibellulaCroceipennis 6561PMax.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:LibellulaCroceipennis 6561PMax.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.


/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)