User talk:Elli

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Map colors[edit]

Apologies for the late reply. Honestly, the map colors on Wikipedia articles for U.S. elections don't really make much sense. Tell me, is there really any reason why we use two different sets of colors for presidential and down-ballot elections besides tradition? That's kind of why I went with my own color scheme on the Vermont maps. I would be in favor of instituting a standard color for all maps, so maybe we could have an RfC on the matter. But in the meantime, my maps can be changed to have the more standard colors. --MisterElection2001 (talk) 20:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@MisterElection2001: Ah, thanks for your reply. I made a page on the Wikipedia elections and referendum WikiProject to discuss this and list known in-use colors because I agree that it's kinda absurd - frustrated me a lot when starting to make maps. Not sure if an RFC is necessary - but if it is, I'd be in support of doing that. Elliot321 (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Executive Council[edit]

Update the map please, Republican gain from District 5. AlSmith28 (talk) 21:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

@AlSmith28: big ouch for Dems in NH, lol. anyway updated Elliot321 (talk) 21:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

haha they suffered a crushing defeat. AlSmith28 (talk) 22:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Map color for Special Georgia senate race[edit]

Hey Elliot321! I was wondering if there was a way to change the colors for Loeffler and Collins since the light red and light pink can often be hard to differentiate especially for people who might have a hard time recognizing certain colors. Perhaps Loeffler can be a darker red (seeing she was the republican who advanced to the runoff) and Collins orange? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

@TDKR Chicago 101: sure. I think keeping the original red for Loeffler makes sense - that's what I've seen some other maps do - but I didn't know of another color scheme. I have the ones I know of listed at w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums/USA Legend Colors. If you could help me out by creating one that supports all support levels from 20-30% to >90% I would appreciate that incredibly (I'm somewhat bad at doing them). Elliot321 (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

File:Circuit of the Americas logo.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Circuit of the Americas logo.svg 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:55, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Patroller![edit]

Hi Elli,

You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.

As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.

We could use your help at the Counter Vandalism Unit. For example by patrolling an Anonymous-edits checklist and checking a day-part.

If you have any questions please leave a message on the CVU talkpage or ask for help on IRC in #wikimedia-commons.


English  español  മലയാളം  +/− AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Flags of EU[edit]

Hey, what is vandalizable about editing page with false information, which is not Wikipedia where only true information is neccessary? --ThecentreCZ (talk) 04:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@ThecentreCZ: adding intentionally false information to Commons is not allowed. Commons and Wikipedia do have different policies but attempting to mislead others is disallowed in either project. Elliot321 (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@Elliot321: Page was already intentionally false and contained joke about author is lazy to do it. I've added flag of Kekistan which wasn't attempt to mislead anyone in there, it was just another joke to do the double joke. That is allowed as you could realize. --ThecentreCZ (talk) 05:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@ThecentreCZ: in that case, the page should be deleted. Elliot321 (talk) 05:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

File tagging File:Picrew-Free-Interface-Screenshot.png[edit]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  català  magyar  čeština  norsk bokmål  română  lietuvių  español  português  English  hrvatski  Plattdüütsch  français  Nederlands  norsk  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  polski  galego  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  ಕನ್ನಡ  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  اردو  العربية  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Picrew-Free-Interface-Screenshot.png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:OP}} on file description page.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Picrew-Free-Interface-Screenshot.png]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Larryasou (talk) 12:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Larryasou: c'mon, did you actually check the site, or the previous deletion request this image went through? "feel free to use for whatever you may please! -credit is appreciated but not required". Elli (talk) 21:34, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
It's not a valid permission. The author imposed some restrictions on material in Japanese, which make the image unacceptable on Commons. See this talk page. --Larryasou (talk) 05:38, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
@Larryasou: I can't read Japanese, and a rough translation implies the restriction is "It can be used for commercial purposes such as websites and printed materials. However, it cannot be used mainly for images." I don't know what this is referring to. This seems kinda iffy to me but I don't understand what restrictions they're intending to imply. Would you mind translating? Elli (talk) 05:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Picrew-Free-Interface-Screenshot.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Picrew-Free-Interface-Screenshot.png 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Larryasou (talk) 11:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover![edit]

Commons File mover.svg

Hi Elli, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Deutsch  español  English  français  русский  українська  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(中国大陆)‎  中文(台灣)‎  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/− CptViraj (talk) 17:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Trump looking at Wikipe-tan.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Trump looking at Wikipe-tan.png 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mo Billings (talk) 17:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Waterfront of unknown city at night (2016).jpg[edit]

Hi Elli, I am afraid that I missed the description tags of File:Waterfront of unknown city at night (2016).jpg that appear to indicate that it is actually Stockholm. I have filed another move request to correct this. Apologies for the double request. --Kyle Wilson (talk) 19:31, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

@Kyle Wilson: no worries! The goal is to identify them eventually, of course. Elli (talk) 21:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Elections WikiProject[edit]

Hi Elli,

Though I am not sure, you seem to be the person to contact on this. I am concerned about your new Elections WikiProject.

Although I appreciate the attempts to standardize maps, data, and titles, I am concerned that your project includes only a handfull of editors when there are likely 100s of wikipedians interested in setting these standards. Unless I am missing something, I believe your project does not have enough members to set broad standards for all US elections.

In particular, I am concerned about wikipedians changing shapes and colors for elections and referenda. I would like to pump the breaks on these changes until a large number of stakeholders are involved in the process. There are thousands of election maps on the commons, and changing the standards for all of them would be a massive task. Some of these changes (like better colors for colorblind individuals) are good moves, but I believe some (like new map shapes) are unnecessary and create massive amounts of work for little benefit.

I'd love to hear from you about this. Best,

SpeedMcCool (talk) 15:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@SpeedMcCool: sure, it's an ambitious effort for sure and I recognize that it will be a lot of work.
I've been long-frustrated with the inconsistency around various election maps, colors, shapes, etc. The problem is that there isn't really an objective way to do things, only what we've done and established, and this is messy as this is a wiki without, until I started attempting to organize this, any centralized place for the information.
As for getting more editors involved - that is definitely a thing I'd like to do - though given the nature of Commons and how things tend to not really get done around here, I figured going ahead and doing some stuff would be a good idea.
More particularly, as for changing colors... with the exception of color-blind-friendly maps, the only colors I've been changing have been for niche parties that have only participated in a handful of elections. Minnesota was perhaps a bad state to pick due to the prominence of the Farmer-Labor party, but there's no plan or intent to change Dem/Rep/Ind colors (it's been discussed but that truly would be an absurd amount of work for little benefit).
Shapes? Updating shapes on existing maps isn't really necessary in most cases, tbh, and I was mainly doing that out of boredom and to get a feel for what they look like. But I do think going forward we should standardize on a new set of shapes - they're just more attractive, accurate, etc (the goal was to make Virginia independent cities distinguishable, as well as not having a practically-triangle Anoka).
As to your comment about standards, there don't really seem to be standards on a lot of this stuff? Like, there's no "use these shapes for elections" - there are just shapes that happen to have been used for a lot of elections. I, of course, think we should get as much input on these as possible, but at some point we do just need to set the standards, and I figured no one was doing that - or interested in doing that, since they hadn't.
Anyway, I hope this alleviates some of your concerns. I can talk about the objective reasons behind the new shapes if you'd like - but that didn't really seem to be what your comment was about, moreso the process. Sorry if my comment was a bit of a ramble, I'm not the best at communicating, but I hope you understand what I'm trying to say here - tl;dr, these standards didn't exist and weren't documented before, so we're trying to set them to something objective and reasonable. Feel free to ask if you have more questions/concerns. Elli (talk) 19:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, it helps understand where you are coming from.
The thing I am most concerned about is the shape updates. While I understand the desire for new shapes (especially in cases like Virginia) I feel that these decisions could be made on a state-by-state basis. For example, the maps used for Minnesota (with the exception of the one you attached) are all fine as is in my opinion.
Especially consider a situation like the 1860 presidential map in MN which predates many counties and their present boundaries. The maps suggested as the standards work well for the states today, but do not work as one goes back in time.
To be truly standardized, a project like this would also require updating all the national maps, which is another added undertaking.
(As an aside, if you are set on using the maps here, I would suggest thickening the borders on the counties, which would make them more visually appealing, I think.)
I am open to changing colors for third parties (especially prohibition, which I feel is too similar to republican red.) I have been calling for a central repository for political map colors for some time now, so I appreciate the work that has gone into this.
I hope we can come to a conclusion on this. I do not want to stop the good work of a WikiProject, but I do hope to engage more people in this endeavor and make this a state-by-state effort rather than a national one. SpeedMcCool (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, just remembered something I wanted to add: another question on standardization is keys. Some maps use keys in the image, other put their keys in the description or the infobox. I feel standardizing something like this would be a more valuable time investment than shapes, but that is my opinion. SpeedMcCool (talk) 15:25, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@SpeedMcCool: thanks for your comments and I totally understand your concerns.
As for updating the state shapes, the goal was to have a consistent national style. While we considered various border thicknesses, the relative thinness was as I mentioned above mainly to preserve the shape of Virginia's cities, though I do understand the argument that that might not be a worthwhile tradeoff.
Anyway, it will certainly be a lot of work to update historical maps - but it's something I and some others are willing to do. I'd love to engage more people here, of course, this wasn't meant to be exclusive or exclusionary in the slightest.
About your concerns about historical maps: I've considered this too. Fortunately the amount that exist is relatively minor compared to ones with recent borders, but I've found access to shapefiles for historical county borders, so standardized historical maps could also be created in the same style.
About the legends: I generally think they should be in the file description and article instead of being in the image itself - having the keys in the image itself is less accessible, harder to maintain, and often prevents multilingual use.
Anyway, thanks again for your comments and please let me know if you have anymore questions or concerns. I appreciate the significant effort you've put into making maps so far and I'd love to have you on-board here. Elli (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Wrong rename[edit]

File:(Works (IA workswhytemelvil22whyt).pdf was supposed to become Works of G. J. Whyte-Melville, volume 22, not Works of G. J; the volume number is required. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC).

@TE(æ)A,ea.: oops, no idea how that happened! Elli (talk) 19:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
@TE(æ)A,ea.: I've corrected the name. Elli (talk) 19:13, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussion[edit]

Since we were discussing it on Wikipedia, I wanted to let you know that I nominated File:IMG-20171115-WA0166.jpg for deletion. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:IMG-20171115-WA0166.jpg. Mo Billings (talk) 17:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mo Billings: thanks for the notice. After closer evaluation I've decided to support deletion of that particular photo. Elli (talk) 23:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

About your edit on File:2021 United States gubernatorial elections and recall.svg[edit]

Hello, I realised that the map has been edited to show that Newsom is eligible. Actually that is not true as mentioned here [1] at Question 4. Newsom is ineligible to run to replace himself should he be recalled. Therefore can you please revert your last edit. Thank you. Regards. CX Zoom (talk) 09:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@CX Zoom: should the recall option win, Newsom would be ineligible in that election. However, he is still running, as in he is running against that option, and therefore still eligible. Since Newsom could win the election and remain in office, coloring him with the "outgoing" color is nonsense. Elli (talk) 16:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Elli: Then I think we can use some other shade of blue with the caption "Incumbent Democrat facing a Recall". I think that would be the best way to do it. What do you say? Regards. CX Zoom (talk) 17:29, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
This is the best description for his race I've read on Wikipedia, maybe we can incorporate this into the map "Running against recall, Ineligible for replacement ballot". CX Zoom (talk) 17:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@CX Zoom: I think the light-blue and star are sufficient for that purpose - the star indicates a recall. Elli (talk) 18:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Elli: Alright, but I'm not really convinced, mostly because Recall Elections are rare and therefore people may not be much familiar with the star being used to denote Recall Election. Moreover the captions in the Wikipedia articles, where such map is used should be updated. Thank you. Regards. CX Zoom (talk) 19:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Trump at videoconference.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Trump at videoconference.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 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

(talk) 09:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Jon Ossoff (US Senator from Georgia) 2021 (cropped).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Jon Ossoff (US Senator from Georgia) 2021 (cropped).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 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Stalin990 (talk) 22:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)