User talk:JMK

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

File:Thysanoplusia orichalcea, h, Pretoria.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Thysanoplusia orichalcea, h, Pretoria.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Danrok (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Pine[edit]

Hi JMK - your pine photos File:Pinus sylvestris, loof, a.jpg, File:Pinus sylvestris, loof, b.jpg and File:Pinus sylvestris, keëls.jpg are not P. sylvestris; I'm not fully certain what they are (not helped by the cones being well past their 'Best before' date!), but possibly Pinus brutia. - MPF (talk) 09:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Will check that out, thank you! The tree is nearby so I could take more photos. JMK (talk) 09:38, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Curious - were you able to get more pics? - MPF (talk) 20:51, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I've submitted the pics to a South African forum for identification, but no comments yet, not many pine experts in this country. Will see what pictures I can get once I've recovered from influenza. Meanwhile you may like to try google streetview -25.746111,28.188056 to see a number of these trees. JMK (talk) 09:44, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Sorry to hear about the 'flu, hope you're well now. I couldn't see any pines at all at the Church Square indicated, but did find a Pinus brutia or P. halepensis (streetview camera resolution not quite good enough to tell which, but definitely one of those two) a short way west on the Church Road cemetery at -25.747128, 28.176714, and a row of the same on Prince's Park Avenue at -25.749536 28.178529. MPF (talk) 23:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
My apologies! Was indeed trying to point out the Prince's Park trees. Still recovering, but will soon set aside a weekend to do this. JMK (talk) 07:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
No problem! There's some other rather more interesting-looking pines deeper into that cemetery too (approx -25.746966 28.176129), worth getting pics of. Long-needled, perhaps P. montezumae or some other Mexican species. - MPF (talk) 11:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
At my last visit to the particular pine tree, it had some new cones, but just too high to reach or photograph. Will take a stroll on the golf course soon to search for another tree of this species. And at some point will visit the said cemetery too. JMK (talk) 17:56, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
OK thanks! I just took another virtual walk along the full length of Prince's Park Avenue on google street view, and managed to see enough detail to pin them down as P. halepensis, not P. brutia. I'll edit the three pics to reflect this. - MPF (talk) 21:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Burgher House incorrectly renamed[edit]

Hi JMK :) File:Bergskadus,_Paarl,_South_Africa_-_20041107.jpg should not have been renamed and is incorrectly used on Wikipedia under the Paarl building's listing. I took a photo of File:Burgher House, Stellenbosch.JPG on Saturday and it is the same building. There are a few black and white photos of the Paarl building online and the one obvious difference is that the Paarl building has stairs leading up to the stoep. HelenOnline 16:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. Very sharp. I made a mistake there due to the similar architecture and gable of the two buildings, and realised my mistake a while ago. I asked a certain paarliet to take me a photo of the real Bergskadus so that I can transfer the currently incorrect historical information, but he hasn't got to it yet. Anyway, if you want to proceed with any fixes, please do so. And if you can take a photo of Bergskadus at Paarl, just beside the N1, that would be great also. JMK (talk) 17:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks JMK, all fixed now and the file history is still there if you need it. I don't think I will get out to Paarl again this year. I was there on unrelated business a few weeks ago but my car had to be jumpstarted so I drove straight home without stopping. I am quite overwhelmed by the number of unphotographed monuments in Stellenbosch where I live, so I am focussing my energy on that now. HelenOnline 07:30, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
OK. A trick that you may find useful when uploading photos: When adding personal categories, you can create an abbreviation as a shortcut (redirect). When using the upload form you can then enter the abbreviation only, and the full category name will appear immediately. JMK (talk) 08:17, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
OK thanks will do, uploading takes forever! HelenOnline 08:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them.
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!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

Eleassar (t/p) 16:09, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Paleotrópico.png[edit]

Climate zones have not borders or walls among them. There are transition zones with mixed climate, fauna and flora. The map in Encyclopedia Britannica includes the whole transition range (mainly Sahara and Arab deserts) in the Paleotropic zone, while the map I did includes only the southern half of transition range in the Paleotropic region. None of them is wrong or right. It is just a cuestion of opinion from diferent sources. --Osado (talk) 12:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. If you want to draw a second map however, that follows the version of Encyclopedia Britannica, it would be just as useful as your first map. JMK (talk) 07:21, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Samora Machel Monument.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Samora Machel Monument.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Eleassar (t/p) 20:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Mandela-borsbeeld, Kirstenbosch.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Mandela-borsbeeld, Kirstenbosch.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Eleassar (t/p) 00:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

thanks for colour correction[edit]

thanks for colour correction at:

looks better like that rgds Tonton Tonton Bernardo (talk) 23:33, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Glad to see you're still active here where the job is never finished. Thanks for uploading the interesting moth. I thought a careful combination of contrast and midtone adjustments may sometimes improve an image without adding an unnatural element. JMK (talk) 07:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
I was led to the photo by the way, when I wrote about the plant E. zeyheri. JMK (talk) 07:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
That moth was badly placed for shootig pictures: it was sitting on the neon tube - and it did't like being taken on a picture:

3-4 pics and it was gone.... I did not spot it again, since, though as I got a special 175W trapping light on my terasse almost every night. I believe that it must be quite rare in our place. Rgds Tonton Tonton Bernardo (talk) 16:41, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Sketsplan, Voortrekkermonument.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Sketsplan, Voortrekkermonument.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Underlying lk (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out. Another user was the initial uploader, and I thought to improve it by removing the wide borders. Did not at the time anticipate a copy right problem. JMK (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Hi JMK. Many thanks for working through my photos of the Karoo National Park and identifying the animals in them! Given the way that Commons uses the latin names for animals, and my poor knowledge of the subspecies of different animals, it would have taken me forever to figure them out. Please keep up the good work. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Think most of the South African picture categories have been tended to now, as far as I am able to assist. I don't know what the blue Karoo daisies are. The following file, Unidentified plant, Hare Hill, Cheshire 2.jpg, may refer to Lilium martagon, but there are also hybrids which include that species. JMK (talk) 16:18, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
That's fantastic, thank you so much! Mike Peel (talk) 16:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Blou Bulle Rugby Unie (BBRU) vier 75 jaar, 1938-2013.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Blou Bulle Rugby Unie (BBRU) vier 75 jaar, 1938-2013.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Eleassar (t/p) 06:22, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Tsessebe[edit]

Thanks, yes I agree it's a tsessebe - they have quite a few at Tswalu in the Kalahari. Charles (talk) 20:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Bird id[edit]

Many thanks again for correcting the bird ids of my guides. Probably not all their fault anyway as you write things down then get them mixed up!. The Julia skimmer was photographed at Lake Sibaya, right at the northern end of iSimangaliso. Best wishes 15:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Charles

Copyright status: File:Rhoicissus revoilii, loof, Steenbokpan.jpg[edit]

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Rhoicissus revoilii, loof, Steenbokpan.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 15:39, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Bots[edit]


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Date format[edit]

Hello JMK, i have seen that the format you are using for dates in the {{Information}} is not the one that is required for the template. I suggest to use dates of the format "YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm", which would be e.g. "2015-08-02 12:02" instead of "2015-Aug-02, 12:02" as you were using it. This way the date is displayed in a correct way to other users in other languages and it is parsable by programms. Would really appricate your cooperation in future. About the already uploaded files i will take care of. Regards, --Arnd (talk) 12:46, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Will do so. There are a big number with the old date format. JMK (talk) 13:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
It may also be useful to specify somewhere in the template whether the date required is the day of upload or the day the photo was taken. What about some automatic way of doing this, where the upload program reads the photo's exif data? I know of some web sites where this in fact happens. You upload without a date and the date is extracted from the exif data. JMK (talk) 13:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, i will fix the old ones which a special script. The date in {{Information}} is always the creation date, which means for a photo it is the day when you made it. I am using the Special:UploadWizard which is exactly doing what you explain. It uses the date (and also GPS position if available) from the EXIF date and pre-filles the template. Ciao, --Arnd (talk) 13:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi again JMK, i am through with your photos. If you find some date pattern which i did not fix yet, please let me know. Have a nice evening, --Arnd (talk) 18:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! There are some instances where I have a comma between date and time, that breaks the format, like this one: File:Combretum kraussii, habitus, b, Louwsburg.jpg. Another bug is that my camera changes the orientation of some photos, when the camera is held at a certain angle. In this photo for instance: Achaea lienardi, Krantzkloof Natuurreservaat, b.jpg, the object appears in the preferred orientation after upload, but flash viewer tilts it +90 degrees. In case that could be rectified without damaging the photo or its resolution, and assuming it is just some parameter which requires a change, then that would be just as welcome. JMK (talk) 20:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Flora_of_Kruger_National_Park[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Flora_of_Kruger_National_Park has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Русский | +/−

Josve05a (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2015 (UTC)