User talk:Jebulon/Archives/2ème semestre 2014

Perche

Merci pour cette perche allègrement tendue. Elle mérite mieux que QI elle pourrait être VI aussi, au titre des Perca fluviatilis, stuffed specimen. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Allons-y, alors !--Jebulon (talk) 10:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Basilica Sancti Petri blue hour.jpg gl:wiki

Hi! Your image Basilica Sancti Petri blue hour.jpg has been chosen as the week's image at the gl:wikipedia for next week. Congratulations!--AMPERIO (talk) 09:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Stephen Curry

Bon Jour, I changed the balance/levels on the Stephen Curry image. Hopefully it is an improvement. I'm not particularly skilled at photo editing (I'm using iPhoto, not gimp or photoshop) so please feel free to give me direction if you are willing. Merci! Noah Salzman (talk) 21:53, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Kubitschek en FP

Bonjour Jebulon,

merci de m'avoir signalé la nomination du mémorial de Kubitschek sous FPC. Je viens d'y ajouter mon soutien. Et vive la Liberté de panorama au Brésil :-). --Cayambe (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

FP

Merci Jebulon pour ton soutien sur la page FPC, mais c'est peine perdue j'ai déjà essayer de demander la politesse, ce que j'ai eu en retour c'est en gros de la part de Colin : si t'es pas content va montrer les photos à ta mère.... pas étonnant de quelqu'un qui pense que j'essaie de gruger le système... T'en fais pas, finalement ça me rassure : que les abrutis ne m'aime pas et je ne m'en aime que plus. Crois moi dans les semaines, mois et année qui viennent ils vont en bouffer des paysages de l'Hérault! Et leur actions et réaction ne sont pour moi que jalousie envers mon talent et ma démarche (ou tout simplement de la connerie)... exuse-moi d'etre crus, à bientot. --Christian Ferrer 12:02, 15 April 2014 (UTC

FPC

Hi Jebulon,
I must admit that I was somewhat surprised by your reaction. Frankly, I saw the image and found it generally nice and sharp enough but somewhat lacking in detail and therefore looked up the exif to find the discussed exposure time. I was surprised and thought that it might have been shot from a tripod or sth similar. I just wanted to clear that up and imo that was a fair enough assessment with the information given by you in the first place. I must say that I found your "speechless" response slightly off (perhaps it's a slight cultural misunderstanding, but making somebody sprachlos suggests finding a statement very inappropriate). I certainly did not want to cause trouble or any bad mood!
Best regards, --DXR (talk) 22:23, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem! I can see your irritation from the other comments, personally I don't see why IPs are still allowed to comment anyway. And you are right, it is very good to have other subjects appear at FPC, certainly makes it more interesting! --DXR (talk) 07:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Rocher FP

Merci cher ami pour encore un de tes soutiens. Les maladresses de language engendrent souvent énervement et frustration surtout lorsque l'on est personnelement impliqué... Les attaques personelles et délibérées, ça c'est une autre histoire mais c'est souvent/parfois dur de faire la part des choses. Heureusement que tout n'est pas que confrontations et enguelades. Il y a aussi du bon dans tout ça. Joyeuses Pâques à toi aussi. --Christian Ferrer 15:44, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Pyrale du buis

Je te remercie pour la pyrale du buis, ta remarque est tout à fait juste : j’ai enlevé le morceau de feuille. Ce sont des animaux très attachant qui m’occupent, depuis peu, plusieurs heures par jour. Je peux t’en faire profiter si tu le souhaite, car j’en ai plusieurs milliers en trop dans mon jardin. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Parisien, je n'ai qu'un balcon...--Jebulon (talk) 15:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hellow and sorry

Sorry (lo siento).

No I have experience taking pictures at night. Please, You can criticize these images ([1], [2])? Could I propose in QI these images? They are taken with my second camera, and is not an excellent camera. Underexposed? Noise? Vigneting?... Thanks--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 20:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Truck FP comment

Bonsoir! Thank you very much for your comment on my FP candidate (the truck panning), I really appreciate it. Cheers! --Kadellar (talk) 14:18, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome !--Jebulon (talk) 16:30, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

liste noire FP

J'ai lu ton dernier commentaire à l'attention de C. (tu vois de qui je parle?) et avec mon très (et trop) long passif avec lui, je ne peux pas m'empecher de t'approuver.
Bienvenue dans la liste noire de C.!!, tu viens de te faire un ami...pour la vie!
Je te félicite et je te donne une grande accolade pour te remercier de ce grand moment de bonheur que tu viens de me proccurer. Ils sont un certain nombre à se cacher derrière this page has to purpose to find the finest..., faudrait d'abord qu'ils voient la qualité des éditions qu'ils proposent sur cette page! Je te soutiens à 200% mais je vais me garder d'intervenir pour ne pas déclencher une guerre (sa dernière intenvention sur de mes nominations a été éffacée à ma demande par un administrateur, tellement elle a été brillante), je viens de nomminer une nouvelle image et la sanction ne devrait pas se faire trop attendre... En ce moment, j'ai aussi mon petit Kikos habituel qui me refait des siennes (ajouts de notes sacarstiques sur l'image, sans meme prévenir ou intervenir sur la page de nomination...) enfin bref la routine FPC (the finest!!!). Le truc qu'ils ont pas compris c'est qu'ils font rires tellement ils sont bete, et en plus pour nous autres, gens de bonne compagnie, c'est plus facile d'avoir l'air intelligent lorsque l'on est entouré d'abrutis. Bon courage mon ami, merci encore et à bientot. --Christian Ferrer 19:48, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Request to review a fpc

Could you provide your opinion on [3]? Thanks!

Pour vous

Last night I stayed up late and generated this:

I am not completely certain I have all of the terms correct, and there are one or two that I was not able to determine at all, but I suspect you might be able to assist with those perhaps? And once it is completed, perhaps it could go on the French Wikipedia article on cannons (I looked at the article last night hoping to find some useful terms for my diagram, but alas, it was short on those). This version, of course, is not the one I have offered for consideration as a featured picture, since words are not what is being featured. But you get the idea. Enjoy! KDS444 (talk) 14:23, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

POTD

Une petite anecdote au sujet de cette photo, elle a été prise grace à Archaeodontosaurus (je lui est déjà raconté), qui avait refusé de me donner un label image de valeur pour une autre image de ce pont, quelque jours après mon échec je suis retourné sur le lieu, ai traversé une partie de la rivière avec l'appareil dans les mains et de l'eau jusqu'au cuisses, en essayant aussi de ne pas me faire écraser par un des cayak qui descendait la rivière, et de ne pas glisser sur un caillou glissant. Tout çà pour acceder à l'ilot central de la rivière et pour tenter ma chance... Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:22, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Et ça valais la peine!--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Guardi!

Guardi et toi étaient à l'honneur sur la page de garde de Wikipedia ce matin... On imagine pas tout ce que Guardi te doit. Bonne Soirée. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:04, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

St Hubert

Ah! Aujourd'hui c'est de St Hubert dont tu fait la promotion sur la page de de Wikipedia. A moins que se soit celle des émeraudes... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:35, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

FPC

Hi Jebulon, can you give a look at this neglected FPC candidate? I care for your opinion. Salue --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:11, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

@Moroder: :  Done. Thanks for calling. I hope you will appreciate my comment. It was necessary, I think ...--Jebulon (talk) 15:17, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your tecnical and moral support --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

{weak support} or {weak oppose} templates on the Quality images candidates/candidate list

Hello!

Those templates were problematic on the Featured candidates page, but since when does the bot countes votes on Quality images candidates? Are we not still putting Decline or Promotion templates manually? Best regards, --Ivar (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Maybe. Anyway,  Weak support,  Weak oppose,  Strong support or  Strong oppose are non sense and don't mean anything. A support is a support, an oppose is an oppose, the rest is just playing. Words are better. IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. I am hoping to use some of your wonderful images for a new Discovery Channel documentary on Ebola. Please email me on: Max.Sanderson@bkyb.com and we can discuss it further! Should be able to get you a credit!! Best, Max

Edit Alcalá

Bonjour Jebulon! How is it going? I want to ask you for a favour. I'd like the remove the cable of this image, could you do it like you did in this one? I would like to try to nominate it on FPC one day, but removing cables and stuff takes me ages! You don't have to do it if you don't want, but if you don't mind, it would be great. Thank you very much!! --Kadellar (talk) 10:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Salu2. I'll try.--Jebulon (talk) 20:04, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Bagadoù à Vannes

Bonjour,

je vois que tu as déjà uploadé quelques photos du championnat des bagadoù à Vannes, mais à tout hasard est-ce que tu aurais d'autres clichés à trainer ? Cela pourrait être intéressant pour l'article fr:Championnat national des bagadoù 2014 d'avoir des photos montrant plus l'aspect concours. Cdlt, --XIIIfromTOKYO (talk) 15:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour,

Oui, j'en ai une floppée, mais là c'était juste une manche de la 4ème catégorie (A). J'ai peu de photos de groupe, le ciel était dégueu alors j'ai préféré les détails. Mais je dois avoir un ou deux trucs genre "table du jury" pour illustrer l'aspect "concours".

Ceci dit, là, je suis à Grenade, Andalousie, jusqu'au 17 août, avec juste une tablette et sans mes fichiers. Faudra attendre... Mes photos folkloriques actuelles sont bien différentes... Cdlt, --Jebulon (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Rien de pressé, mais cela pourrait être utile pour illustrer les bagadig pour lesquels on a en général peu de chose (voir aussi certaines communes pour lesquels en dehors des MH...). Cdlt, --XIIIfromTOKYO (talk) 18:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Aux armes!

Bonjour, je crois que tu connais quelques membres de cette association. A mon sens elle mérite mieux que ça de notre part: Les Amis du Muséum Bonne journée. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Jebulon, could you take a look to this I'm trying to restore it and I like to know your opinion. Best Regards!!! Ezarateesteban 19:47, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

My idea is to do the restoration as well as possible and try to obtain a featured picture. Thanks for your comments --Ezarateesteban 00:59, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

Good evening Jebulon! Before uploading File:Dresden Germany Door-with-Coat-of-Arms-01.jpg I researched nearly one hour for the owner of the CoA. However, I failed. Moreover, the artist choosed a very non-heraldic depiction of the CoA, for example the amount of crown tips is not clear enough to say if it is the crown of a Count or a Baron. As there is no CoA-Taxonomy required for QIC, I finally gave up. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 16:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Uwe. One hour is too much ! I've identificated one at 100%, and the other at 90% in a few minutes, only using "Commons"... I continue, in order to be absolutely sure.--Jebulon (talk) 15:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Great job! I'm not good at that though I have some knowledge about heraldry. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

images

Bonjour hi I have a public domain image website that's in its very early stages and I need content. released under http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ http://www.imgparty.com is the site. It would be great if you would join and add a few images .Also don't forget your profile and a link to your website. I know the site isn't flickr yet but it's only a week old. (I only ask as i think you have given some work to the PD in the past.)

Hi dear Anonymous.

Congratulations for your new site. Please feel free to use all the pictures of mine you think deserving a presentation in your pages. Most of them are indeed in PD. I've no website, and I've no other profile than the one of my "Commons" user's page. Just credit me as asked in my galleries.

Good luck and best wishes.--Jebulon (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Louvre/Descartes

Hello! Thanks for all the edits of my image File:Paris, Louvre -- 2014 -- 1563.jpg. Sorry, I reverted two things. I need the LangSwitch-Template. I'm using an correction bot and this bot works with this template. I do not know if this is really the better way. The other thing I reverted is the "other_version". The image isn't another version, it another image - in the same category. I think that it is sufficient if the two images are in the same category. Please understand that I have corrected these two points. But I did not want to do it without informing you. (If you have a hint, whether the templates language "de", "fr", ... or "LangSwitch" make more sense, I would be grateful. I would teach my bot to change this template with all my pictures.) --XRay ^talk 16:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Gerade sehe ich, dass du relativ gut deutsch sprichst/verstehst. Da hätte ich mich mit dem Englischen nicht so abquälen müssen, denn da bin ich alles andere als perfekt.--XRay ^talk 16:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Ich ergänze einfach meinen Text noch einmal in Kurzfassung auf deutsch. Ich habe einen Bot, der auf "LangSwitch" reagiert. Ich bin mir allerdings selbst unschlüssig, welches der beste Weg ist. Mich störte an "de", ..., dass dort immer "Deutsch:" davor stand und habe daher "LangSwitch" gewählt. Aus der Dokumentation bei Wikimedia bin ich leider auch nicht zweifelsfrei schlau geworden.--XRay ^talk 16:28, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Valeur

Salut Jebulon, ma nomination actuelle je ne l'ai pas nominné pour sa valeur potentielle comme je l'ai écris, je croyais avoir été précis. Je vais etre donc plus précis : j'en ai rien a faire de la valeur que toi ou n'importe qui d'autres accorde à cette image. Et j'en ai aussi rien à faire de l'importance que tu accorde aux critères de valeurs lors de tes votes en FP. Des fois j'imagine que c'est le WOW qui prime, d'autres fois la valeur, ou encore d'autres fois un savant mélange des deux... Cela dépends de chaque images, de chaques votants. Tu es biensur libre d'appliquer les critères que tu veux à chaques images et meme de changer de critères...à chaques images...tu es libre. Mais moi pour celle-ci, non je n'ai pas tort. Je n'ai pas tort car je ne discuterai pas de sa valeur lors de cette nomination ni avec toi ni avec personne d'autres, c'est mon choix et j'ai bien fait de le préciser. Evidement si tu le désire tu es libre de discuter de sa valeur, mais ce ne sera pas avec moi. En tout cas pas avant que le la nommine en VIC, si je la fais. Donc décidement non je n'ai pas tort, c'est mon choix simplement, merci de le respecter. -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 20:28, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

• En me relisant je viens de me rendre compte que la première chose que tu vas me dire, c'est me demander pourquoi je la nomine si j'en ai rien à faire de la valeur que toi ou d'autres trouvent à cette image? tout simplement car pour moi elle a un fort impact visuel et qu'il y a quelque chose de plus (composition, lumière, choix de la profondeur...) qui es plutot réussit. C'est donc pour l'instant un choix esthetique, et peut etre qu'elle a de la valeur, surement meme. Mais je te l'ai dis : qu'elle aille de la valeur ou pas à ce stade j'en ai rien à faire! -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 20:47, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Salut Christian Ferrer, je ne comprends rien à ta diatribe, mais je vois que tu es en colère. De mon point de vue, il n'y a aucune raison, c'est insensé. Ira furor brevis. Je n'ai rien à répondre, ça te passera avant que ça me reprenne. Sauf que j'aimerais bien savoir ce qui est arrivé à ce malheureux officier en 1941, alors que les opérations de guerre étaient terminées depuis longtemps dans ce coin-là... Je vais chercher, et si je trouve, ça ajoutera à la ...valeur de cette image.--Jebulon (talk) 21:13, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Removing my photos

See here [4], you deleted my photos, can you restore them? --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok but you have removed 7 of my photos, and reverted only 2. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:45, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

CoA of Louis I of Poland and Hungary on the clasp in Aachen treasury

Hi Jebulon, the said clasp depicts not the CoA of Charles I but of Louis I of Hungary. Reference: treasury imperial cathedral --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Of course, that was only a clue ! As you know, CoA are not really individuals, but for the Elder of the family (left:Hungary ancien, and right:France ancien, here Anjou-Sicily). The references are really interesting. I spend one day just before last Xmas in Aachen, and I did not get the time to visit the Treasury. Your pictures are wonderful ! Maybe you could use the "artwork" template for such objects. I'm very happy to discover them in "Commons".--Jebulon (talk) 20:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Merci !

Merci à toi et à Archaeo : je m'attendais à ce que vous me disiez que ma photo était bidon ! -- Néanmoins je ne voudrais pas que ces distinctions (hautes en couleurs) donnent prétexte à une manifestation de chauvinisme outrancier de la part des Maritimes... et je sais de quoi je parle :) --JLPC (d) 19:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

ça y est ! Je viens de comprendre !!!--Jebulon (talk) 10:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing feedback

Hi Jebulon, would you give some feedback to the bell picture of Elche that you can find in September 5th QI's section? I also gave you feedback on the fisheye Silk Market shot, and actually uploaded a new version, but that one was swept by the bot. Thanks! Poco² 20:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

CoA

Bonjour, je ne sais pas ce que "CoA" et ce que vous entendez par "categorize properly", pouvez-vous préciser? Merci. P.S. excusez mon ignorance. --LivioAndronico talk 07:49, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

by Mosaïc in Brazil

Hi Jebulon

Ok I get the need for good information, did not really know if you had the information, I always treat seriously (not that I am, lol) but not to hurt sensibilities. I recognize that more attention should be given to information, but do not always have skill with all instruments (patience too), so inside I know and research, I help a bit. And yes (of course) I think you should continue to provoke to get a better description and categorization of media IMHO.

; ) ,ty -- Lauro Sirgado^contribs 01:00, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Façade cour d'honneur après incendie hôtel Lambert Paris.jpg

Hi Jebulon, I added two of your pics to en:Hôtel Lambert, and modified the object coordinates for this pic. If you have the time, could you please verify that the new coordinates (and perhaps also the captions I added in the article) are accurate? Thanks for help! --Robert.Allen (talk) 06:57, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Robert.Allen. Thanks for your interest regarding these two very rare pictures. Your correction is right for the object ( the pediment and the destroyed roofs). As for me, the photographer, I stand almost in the center of the courtyard, a little back, near the main entrance gate. For the other pic, the geocoordinates are fine, I stand in the opposite wing, at the same level (that's why those pics are rare, I was inside !😉)--Jebulon (talk) 09:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, we are very fortunate you were able to take them and added them to Commons! Nice work! --Robert.Allen (talk) 15:51, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Over-categorisation

Hello Jebulon, Thankyou for your support of my Sphagnum rubellum image and the note on over-categorisation. I'm a bit confused about the latter. It doesn't seem to be the case that images are automatically added to categories higher in the hierarchy? So if my image is categorised as Sphagnum rubellum and someone looks in the Sphagnum category they will not find the image, but it would clearly be helpful and appropriate for it to be in the Sphagnum category? Is my understanding correct? Thanks for any insights. Best regards, Des -- Des Callaghan (talk) 17:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Des Callaghan, congrats again for your wonderful macro pictures of nature. I'm not a scientist, neither a botanist, but I really love your job, very visually appealing. About categories and overcategorization, I cannot say more, nor better, than what you can read in COM:OVERCAT. Explanations there are very clear. Have a nice sunday, maybe working on nice future FPs ?--Jebulon (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Embalse

Bonjour Jebulon, il semble que tes photos d'Espagne soient dans une mauvaise catégorie. -- Christian Ferrer ^{Talk / Images} 07:22, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Parfaitement vrai ! Merci beaucoup ! Bien observé. J'ai corrigé.--Jebulon (talk) 15:02, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Chen Rong - Nine Dragons.jpg

Hey Jebulon, could you confirm that you made this digitalization? I just want to be sure, since I'm a person whose rather wary and scrupulous about those sort of things [5] (e.g. an user crediting another user). Cheers, Cold Season (talk) 13:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

The explanation is that an IP user falsely attributed you as the source. I've cleaned it all up at commons [6] and at en.wiki [7][8] (nothing to clean elsewhere). Cheers, Cold Season (talk) 22:59, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

File:1756 wayside cross, Alhama de Granada, Andalusia, Spain.jpg

I'm puzzled why we are seeing different things on that image. I assume that in Lightroom you are looking at the raw file. Is there a possibility that the version you exported/uploaded is different to the version you are now looking at? Have you tried downloading the JPG from Commons and importing it to either Lightroom or opening in Camera Raw (via Bridge). I also looked at the JPG in IrfanView -- which I know I haven't set up to do any colour management for my display (which might alter the image) -- and when I click on various parts of the image it shows (255,255,255). -- Colin (talk) 10:13, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Cueilleuse de safran, fresque, Akrotiri, Grèce.jpg

Salut Jebulon,

Merci pour ton évaluation, et ton commentaire. Comme il est indiqué sur la page de description, j'ai photographié cette image depuis le livre Le Musée abolu, Phaidon, paru en 2012. Cela ne me semble a priori pas un obstacle à ce que la photo soit de qualité. Donc, comment corriger cela ? Peut-on améliorer la netteté à partir du fichier RAW ? Sinon, peut-on améliorer la netteté en utilisant le focus stacking ? Avec quels paramètres ? Ou avec une autre solution ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 12:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour Yann,

Comme écrit sous une autre de tes photos de la série, le fait que l'image provienne d'un livre ne me pose pas de problème et n'interdit aucunement sa promotion, j'ai moi-même proposé des images issues d'ouvrages, quoiqu'en utilisant plutôt un scanner. Ta page de description est claire, et ne laisse planer aucune ambiguité, aucun souci de ce côté-là. En revanche, je pense que tes images ne sont pas nettes, pas assez "crisp", comme ils disent, et j'ignore si le fichier d'origine est ainsi, ou si c'est une dégradation due à la photographie. A vrai dire, je pense tout simplement que ton image "source" n'est pas d'assez bonne qualité, d'où ma remarque sur la "trame d'impression" (ce n'est sûrement pas le bon terme) qui est visible tant sur l'oeuvre elle-même, que sur les parties restaurées en plâtre. Le livre est peut-être de 2012, mais les images qu'il contient sont sûrement plus anciennes. Voilà l'explication de mon commentaire. Je regrette, parce que ce sont des documents émouvants et passionnants.

Quant à la façon de remédier au problème, je n'ai aucune idée de la façon de faire, et je crains même qu'il n'y ait pas grand-chose de possible, hélas. Je suis conscient de ne pas beaucoup faire avancer le schmilblick avec ces réponses...

Bien à toi,--Jebulon (talk) 12:45, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, merci pour ton commentaire. Pour info, 2 autres photos de ce même livre ont été jugées QI : File:Le Jardin de Nébamoun.jpg, File:Fresco of a fisherman, Akrotiri, Greece.jpg. Ce sont aussi des fresques anciennes. Je ne suis un spécialiste de la photo d'art, mais vu le type du livre, je pense que c'est plutôt ma faute que celle du livre. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 13:24, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Oui, j'ai vu. A travers mes deux (ou trois) contributions sur ta série, j'ai juste voulu émettre un point de vue et susciter la discussion, pas entamer une croisade contre tes images... De toutes façons, QI ou pas, ce sont des apports inestimables pour "Commons".--Jebulon (talk) 17:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Le pêcheur est bon, mais le jardin pas, à mon avis. Manque de netteté. Il faudra aller photographier l'original au British Museum ! Si j'avais le courage, je referais un joli "background" noir, tiens... Quelle beauté !--Jebulon (talk) 17:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Je ne suis pas fan des fonds noirs, mais vas-y si tu penses que c'est mieux, vas-y. Je vais refaire Le Jardin. J'ai bien l'intention d'exploiter ce livre au maximum. Cela permet de mettre à disposition des oeuvres rares et/ou difficilement accessibles. Mais j'aimerais avoir la bonne méthode dès le départ, pour ne pas avoir à refaire la même chose plusieurs fois. Encore merci, Yann (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Le scan !!--Jebulon (talk) 18:01, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Je n'ai pas de scanner. Je pense plutôt acheter un meilleur appareil photo. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Et maintenant : File:Le Jardin de Nébamoun.jpg ? Yann (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

J'aurais soutenu. Tu as certes perdu en "chaleur", mais tu as gagné sur tous les autres tableaux, à mon avis. Evidemment, le fond est bien meilleur. Attention toutefois, tu as retravaillé (et "overwrité" sur) une photo déjà primée, ce qui est un peu ennuyeux: la version qui apparait n'est pas celle que tu as soumise aux votes...--Jebulon (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: Necesita ayuda por favor

I think this coat of arms belongs to archbishop Felipe de los Tueros y Huerta. He was the archbishop of Granada between 1724 and 1751. In these years (1734-1751) was built the sacristy of the church, and the passage between them. You can see similar CoA in the page 119 of this. I hope to have been helpful. --LMLM (talk) 16:06, 21 October 2014 (UTC) PS. Sorry for my english

COM:QIC

A propos des descriptions d'images... Je ne comprends pas ce que vous voulez. Les personnes sur les images ne sont pas des sportifs de haut niveau, mais des amateurs. Quel est l’intérêt d'avoir leur nom ? Doit on refuser toutes les images en QI, parce qu'on a pas le nom de toutes les personnes sur une photo ? Imaginons une photo d'un enfant jouant au ballon dans un parc, avec comme description "Enfant jouant dans le parc XXX". Est-ce suffisant ? Si oui, quelle différence avec les photos du championnat de France de cyclisme handisport, si non, quelle description faudrait il ?

Pleclown (talk) 21:51, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Bonsoir. Si nous devons continuer à correspondre, je vous propose de nous tutoyer, ainsi qu'il est d'usage ici.

Mais je crains que nous n'allions pas très loin, si vous ne comprenez pas ma position.

Elle est pourtant simple : tout ce qui peut être identifié, personne ou objet, doit l'être, et être catégorisé en conséquence. Cela n'a rien d'extraordinaire, c'est juste l'application de nos règles, auxquelles je vous suggère de vous reporter (version anglaise récente, non encore traduite).

Mais, et c'est là que nous divergerons, il n'est pas interdit de faire preuve de discernement. En tant qu'usager de "Commons", j'ai le droit de connaitre le nom d'une personne, sujet de l'image, qui se produit en public, est l'objet du regard de spectateurs qui sont venus pour ça. Cette personne accomplit une performance, porte une tenue spéciale, bref, est remarquable, à tous les sens du terme. Elle doit donc être décrite et identifiée. Cela a un sens.

Vous comprendrez donc que votre contre exemple est, de ces points de vue, parfaitement irrecevable en tant que tel. La comparaison n'est pas raisonnable, et sans vous taxer de mauvaise foi, j'ai peur que vous ne le sachiez. Selon ce que vous proposez, "Enfant (fille? Garçon?) jouant dans le parc XXX" est évidemment suffisant, aller plus loin, cela n'a pas de sens.

Bonne nuit.--Jebulon (talk) 22:50, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Le "vous" s'appliquait à Steindy et toi, désolé pour la confusion.

Je comprends la position, mais je la considère comme intenable. Nous faisons de l'illustration de personnes, mais aussi de situations. Je pense que nous sommes dans ce cas. C'est une situation (Un coureur cycliste handicapé, participant à une compétation).

Pour prendre un autre exemple, je suis allé il y a deux semaines faire des photos de matchs de hockey sur gazon à Genève. Je ne les ai pas encoe toutes post-traitées, mais tu peux en voir des exemples ici. Ce sont des matchs de première ligue suisse (masculine et féminine), mais ce sont des amateurs. Il n'y a pas de feuille de match, pas de compte rendu sur internet, rien. Je n'ai aucun moyen d'identifier ces personnes. Ce sont des joueurs de hockey sur gazon, comme mes cyclistes sont des cyclistes. Ces photos sont elles inutiles ? Dois je ne pas les téléverser ? Si je les téléverse, ne pourrais je les proposer à des labels, indépendemment de leurs qualités, juste parce que les personnes ne sont pas nommées ?

J'espère avoir été plus clair.

Pleclown (talk) 09:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Photo du jour sur wikipédia France!

Félicitation. Elle est vraiment très réussie. Il ne lui manque que le Label VI ;) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Merci ! J'ai de la peine à la relier à un domaine ou à une catégorie. Je vais tâcher de régler ça.--Jebulon (talk) 13:46, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done--Jebulon (talk) 17:36, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Mes QIC

Salut,

Personne n'a donné son avis sur mes QIC de fresques et de mosaïques. Sont-elles si mauvaises que ca ? ;o) Qu'en penses-tu ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 19:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Si personne ne donne son opinion, c'est qu'il y a une raison... À mon avis, on voit trop que ce sont des images issues d'un livre, et les reproductions ne sont pas d'une suffisamment bonne qualité...--Jebulon (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

File:CoA Pope Pius XI.jpg

Heureux? Je espère bien. --LivioAndronico talk 17:07, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Window, Nasrid motto, Cuarto Dorado, Alhambra, Granada, Spain.jpg

An 18MP image from a 14MP camera? Is this some magic or are you using Hugin? Can you add the Panorama template or otherwise indicate what frames you took? I think this is helpful to those who wish to learn. -- Colin (talk) 12:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Excellent ! I've added the 'retouched' template. As the perspective is obviously corrected, I lost some parts of the image when processing. I restored them by cloning with GIMP. Every retouche is really heavy, if you save at 100%. The annotations are heavy too. Good eye !--Jebulon (talk) 20:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Mur de Slaunger

Hahaha, I just noticed this! -- Slaunger (talk) 21:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

😋--Jebulon (talk) 22:39, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

File:DC-TOWER_1_from_Danube_River_to_Northnorthwest_-_Vienna-4551.jpg

Bonjour Jebulon, concernant cette image en CR, je voulais la cloturer mais je ne suis pas sur de comprendre si tu as opposé ou pas, merci de clarifier si possible. -- Christian Ferrer ^{Talk / Im. / Fav.} 08:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done, tu peux clôturer et promouvoir, merci à toi.--Jebulon (talk) 12:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Catégorie

Bonjour, cela fait un moment que je ne refuse une photo, je pourrais m'y habituer Cependant, il est un moyen rapide de trouver la catégorie? parce que je dois quelques problèmes. Merci. --LivioAndronico talk 16:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour, ce serait une mauvaise habitude  ! Mais je ne comprends pas très bien ta question. As-tu un problème pour une photo particulière, ou bien ta question est-elle générale ?--Jebulon (talk) 16:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Générale , il est un moyen rapide de trouver la catégorie? Il existe un procédé dans lequel, par exemple, sont divisés en groupes? Tapez dans la catégorie: Rome et les sous-catégories? Merci. --LivioAndronico talk 17:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Compris. Moi, j'ouvre toujours plusieurs fenêtres sur mon écran quand je charge une photo, les recherches sont plus faciles. Ensuite, qu'est-ce qui est sur ma photo ? Prenons un exemple avec cette image. L'auteur de la photo a catégorisé le nom de la chapelle dans laquelle se trouve le vitrail, c'est bien. Il a aussi catégorisé "vitrail dans la région de...", c'est très bien. Il a juste oublié la personne qui est représentée !!! Alors j'ai rajouté "category: John Paul II", ça m'a renvoyé automatiquement sur "category: Johannes Paulus II", et là je me suis dit qu'il y avait forcément des sous-catégories, et oui bien sûr, il y en avait ! "Johannes Paulus II in art", et dedans, "Johannes Paulus II on stained glass windows". Donc j'ai corrigé comme tu vois. C'est comme un "zoom", tu vas du général au particulier, du plus loin au plus proche, du plus large au plus précis.

Mon image ici est intéressante. Il fallait que je donne une bonne description, j'ai même utilisé l'écriture arabe (pas difficile, il y a un article dans la Wikipédia française) , J'y étais, je connais l'endroit, l'Alhambra de Grenade. Mais c'est grand ! Il fallait trouver, comme dans un puzzle. On peut voir ce "stucco" dans une cour nommée "Cuarto Dorado", sur le mur d'un palais, le Palacio de Comares. Sous-catégories ? Oui, il y en avait, donc, chercher les bonnes. Pour moi, c'est comme un jeu.

Mais il n'existe pas assez de catégories pour cette image, je vais peut-être en créer d'autres. "Windows in Andalusia" n'est pas assez précis, je devrais créer une sous-catégorie "Windows in Andalusia by city", et dedans, une sous-sous-categorie "Windows in Granada". C'est valable, car il y a beaucoup de fenêtres de Grenade dans "Commons". Mais en général, les catégories géographiques ne sont pas suffisantes en Espagne...

Et puis il y a les personnes. Tu dois te poser les mêmes questions. "Qui est-ce ?" "Où ça se trouve ?" "de quand ça date ?" "Qui l'a fait ?" "Comment c'est fait?" Et même: "oh, c'est un portrait ovale !!"... Et là, pendant que je t'écris, je viens encore de rajouter une catégorie: "Allonge wigs in paintings", car l'homme a une perruque !! Regarde le nombre de catégories pour cette image, toi tu aurais mis "Hector Berlioz" et c'est tout ! et je t'aurais mis "insufficient categorization" !!!--Jebulon (talk) 17:58, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Bon, je vais essayer , merci --LivioAndronico talk 22:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

FP proposition : re

Oui, j'ai vu : Christian Ferrer a, une fois encore, proposé une de mes photos en FP. Merci de ton attention et de ton soutien. J'attends le dernier jour pour remercier tous les votants (tu es donc privilégié !)... J'ai d'ailleurs tellement attendu que je n'ai même pas voté pour le beau paysage de Christian, ce qui n'eût pas été un geste de remerciement, mais la reconnaissance d'une vraie réussite. J'avais seulement oublié qu'une photo sans vote négatif est promue plus rapidement que les autres. Je ne vais sans doute pas assez souvent sur cette page. Je vais essayer de réparer mon/mes oubli(s). Bien amicalement. --JLPC (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:L'Anneau de la Mémoire - PAIX.JPG

Salut,

Le but n'était pas de ridiculiser qui ni quoi que ce soit mais puisque mon propos a été compris ainsi, je vous présente donc mes excuses.

Cordialement, --Aga (d) 14:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Bien reçu, merci, gentleman. --Jebulon (talk) 16:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Madonna

Maintenant, pour cette photo [9], je l'ai trouvé que ces catégories

...Mais tu as trouvé des "smileys" ! J'ai précisé et rajouté quelques catégories.--Jebulon (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Et je trouve que ceux

..Mais où trouvez-vous ces catégories si bon? --LivioAndronico talk 21:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

C'est comme dans la fresque de Vasari de la Salle des Cinq-Cents du Palazzo Vecchio à Florence : "Cerca, Trova" !--Jebulon (talk) 21:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Patronizing...

Hi, I understand that you do not want to discuss and we can disagree about what should be in an oppose vote. I would just like to apologize for this sentence "I don't think it would be the best for commons to protect a friend's image from own competition by delaying the upload of an image (perhaps that wasn't the intention, but it might be a possible way of understanding the observation)". You are right that the tone was not appropriate and it was at least suggesting bad faith, which I should not have done.
Have a good week. --DXR (talk) 22:10, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

No (more) offense. You just wrote to quickly, IMO (see date and hours when both pictures were taken). Have a nice week too.--Jebulon (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

You are right. By the way, you should make this a square crop and then nominate it. It is a very impressive work. --DXR (talk) 22:25, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh no, instead, I'll nominate this, just because of that !!! 😆 ha ha ha ha ha !!!--Jebulon (talk) 22:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I saw the image before and I must admit that I actually thought of this, hahaha. But that's a 45° twist, so I don't mind ;-) --DXR (talk) 22:46, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Haters gonna hate

Take a cup of coffe, from Viborg

So I go on the FPC list for the first time in days and the first thing I see is people shooting down your lovely Nevada observatory for what I think are literally like the dumbest reasons everr... like seriously there are six featured images of the Moon (seven with the ascession of my own moon picture), four of which are virtually identical. There’s three golden eagles, seven bald eagles (’murica tho!) and four puffins so I really don’t get it.. If I didn’t have two active nominations I’d be inclined to renominate the observatory for you, seeing as you withdrew it. Better luck next time ? :/ —Love, Kelvinsong talk 22:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for interest and kind words.--Jebulon (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

npp!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I saw this by accident, but quoting from the official Commons Image Guidelines: "Normally there should never be two featured pictures that are just different versions of the same image". Jebulon and I disagree about the interpretation of that rule and he might have a point, but I wouldn't call it the dumbest reason ever :D --DXR (talk) 22:50, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Lol you’re reading too literally (no pun intended). Of course I have seen far dumber opposes, we all have. It’s a part of Commons. At least you’re standing on what’s technically official policy (though I could have sworn that’s for valued images, not featured pictures. idk I haven’t read the rulebook in a while). Also “dumb” was probably the wrong word to use but uk. I just think all this drama is unwarranted because, as Jebulon and I have pointed out, we routinely and regularily promote duplicate renditions of the same thing and it’s like weird to all of a sudden pick on that particular observatory in order to revive some defunct rule that’s kinda understood to be inoperant. Also don’t take this the wrong way but part of the reason that this is so annoying to me is you and Ram-Man did not need to stir up half a page of drama in the space of two hours when there are so many other pictures lacking critique? It has very little to do with the actual image itself and the block of text dissuades people from voting after you guys (if Jebulon didn’t withdraw the nomination). You might have a valid point to raise but a better place to bring it up would be somewhere like Commons talk:Featured picture candidates or somethingg—Love, Kelvinsong talk 23:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Ha, you are actually making some very good points here (not visiting FPC seems to be a good thing haha). I never liked that the first oppose can kill a nomination, and therefore I am probably quite guilty on that account... I just found it to be too similar too soon, but yeah we do also have many other examples where it was accepted (but I guess many voters are just lazy and do never check what has been featured before). You are also right about the drama (but you can see whole different dimensions of drama when somebody brings up even more controversial points...) --DXR (talk) 23:30, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Tru, tru, I can’t tell you how many times that’s happened to me!.. Though I still oppose the idea of disallowing multiple renditions of the same subject bc of some nasty side effects that might cause. I’d rather actually take that out of the rules but whatevss—Love, Kelvinsong talk 23:46, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

DXR, Ram-Man and Jebulon: Oh, my I only noticed this discussion now, and that Jebulon had nominated the same observatory, taken from nearly the same place with nearly the same light at nearly the same time, but with a different crop. But the two photos are surely not "two versions of the same image" as it says in the guideline. They come from different cameras and different photographers. In this case what I find especially unfair independent of how to interprete if both should be allowed or not, is that just because I nominated my creation first, the second one is declined. A delist-and-replace nom is unfair too as the 'newcomer' would require 2/3 majority for delist-and-replace. Even more unfair because Jebulon showed me the place. I had never taken my photo if it had not been for Jebulon. As a curiosity we have two FPs taken from almost the same time of day at the same time of year, and almost the same light (but four different years apart) of the same subject with Jebulon and I as creators (I even borrowed Jebulons tripod), and also different crops. Regarding the timing of the nomination, I do not think it has anything to do with the fact that we are personal friends (and thus do not vote on each others nominations). I would have welcomed and found it funny if it was concurrent with mine. Afterwards fine too. If concurrency had resulted in my nom not getting promoted, I would have been absolutely fine with that too. The seventh support vote only came in the last minute anyway, so it is not the most convincing FP ever on Commons, but a borderline one.

I do not see the oppose votes as dumb or hate votes in any way, but IMO the oppose reasons do not have legitimacy the way I read our current guidelines. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:42, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Slaunger, I admit that I overreacted and my accusation was not fair. I still uphold my point that the way the file was uploaded just after the end of you nomination was not very fortunate and did not appear to be random and could easily have been interpreted as a collusion. It in fact did not give voters on the first nomination the chance to compare your image to the other one, even though it obviously was in the pipeline. It was wrong to voice that interpretation since it did not assume good faith, but I still disapprove of the way things were handled. I also found it absurd to see a very similar image nominated minutes after the other one was promoted. If it was a joke (I was after all called humorless), jokes are not meant for FPC, alone because there are enough yeasayers to get any decent image promoted quite easily. That is also why we have a responsibility to only nominate images with proper wow and many (not necessarily you or Jebulon) do just nominate QIs and play along and get their stars. For me, an image that has no chance of reaching the POTY finals should not be FP. Perhaps that is too strict or plain stupid. I think that some unassuming visitor of the FP galleries would think WTF when seeing both promoted next to each other. Also this same person will think: "Oh so this is the best of commons? They have so few images that they need to feature the same view twice?" So I think promoting both would have been a disservice to those who only visit and are not in the business of collecting stars. I think that we should remove inferior images if we have a better replacement and decide in favor of the incumbent if both images are equal. For me, these images basically show very similar things (camera/photographer are not relevant). If these points are absurd and "illicit", they may be. I do not find them illogical.

Overall this episode has shown me that I get far too emotionally invested in this discussion stuff which is largely completely irrelevant for most. I will therefore stop taking part in FPC, QIC or any other discussion beyond the simple uploading of files for at least a month. So I wish you guys a nice Christmas time :-) --DXR (talk) 10:56, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't going to comment on this issue, which appeared in my watchlist, but am sad that DXR is upset/frustrated enough to feel the need to take a break. Well breaks can be good so I won't disagree that when one is unhappy it is good to breathe some fresh air. I won't defend his accusation of bad faith for which he has apologised. But I hope Jebulon and Slaunger don't mind me disagreeing with them. I thought Jebulon's nomination was exceedingly odd and if it reached FP would regard that as an anomaly. The discussion above talks of fairness and gaming and rules and even hate (please, no place for that). FP is about promoting our "finest" works, not about the creator/nominator. If Slaunger had taken and nominated both images, we'd question what game he was playing. The only reason I see being advanced in favour of Jebulon's nomination was that the photographer and camera were different, something that our end-users don't care one jot about. Our forum does generate similar FPs over time and we don't have a strong consensus on how to handle that (other than when the old one is clearly way below today's standards). Once you start introducing who the photographer is into the FP process, or getting upset that one photographer loses out while another wins due to timing of nominations, then it gets too personal. Cheers, Colin (talk) 13:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Colin I do not mind you disagreeing with me, and I agree with your overall objective of promoting our "finest" works. Our guidelines should support that. My main point is actually that the way it works now does not, because the first nomination of a subject gets a clear advantage over a following 'similar' nomination. Assume for instance, that both nominations are actually FP worthy (I am not claiming they are in this case, but for the sake of the argument) and the second nomination is actually a bit better than the first. There are two process options: 1. We can allow both, and they will both be promoted. That would support the objective of promoting our finest work, but the diversity is questionable, and I agree that if they are too similar there is not a point is both of them being promoted - in the end. So, wherever that threshold of similarity is to be placed (and I think this could be stated more unambiguously in the Image guideline), we have the second option of one competing with the other to be among our very finest. We have one process for that: delist-and-replace, although the way it is described it is really supposed to be for replacing an existing image with a better edit of the same, the way it is described currently (the gravel pit is a fine example). Say, that in a delist-and-replace the slightly better second nomination gets 60% support in a replace-and-delist nomination. The end result is that the original stays promoted, but the slightly better "sufficiently similar" does not get promoted. We end up with not promoting the finest work, right? So my point is really that the 2/3 majority needed in a replace-and-delist does not support the mission statement. A simple majority vote would better support that mission. You get my point? And the situation where we have concurrent, almost similar nominations open are only handled in the same nomination as "an alternative", but I have never seen that being used where the different versions are of very different crops of different images. So that is my point about fairness. Because Jebulon is last in nomination a picture of the observatory, we do not get to answer the question if it was also FR-worthy and if so, better than my version. We may have ended up not promoting the finest, but whatever nomination came first. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

And also just to clarify, there have been no kind of coordinating activity amongst us. I did not know Jebulon had taken an unobstructed view of the same observatory while we were there together, as we photographed by independently at the location. Nor did I know about his FPC nom until I noticed this discussion by coincidence. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Just a clarification (didn't want to let a possible misinterpretation stand): I'm not taking the break because of the disagreement or even because of specific people, but rather because I feel like most of my actions on talk pages etc. are just pretty much a waste of time that I cannot afford right now (exams etc coming up), and there are too many fundamental disagreements that only take a billion words without much moving). I am aware that I stirred the escalation of the nomination topic discussed here and I know that I cannot keep quiet if I think that odd things are happening. That is why I will avoid these pages for now. See you. --DXR (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

DXR: As I have also written on your talk page, I am glad it is nothing personal. I wish you best of luck with your near-term endevours and I hope to see you back, when you feel for it and have the time again. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

😳😳😳--Jebulon (talk) 20:05, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Are those 'emojicons'? Sorry, they just render as boxes with questions marks on my browser and operating system. Better to use the Commons templates, I think, or text, if you want to express emotions. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

😂😂😂—Love, Kelvinsong talk 21:46, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

--Jebulon (talk) 21:05, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

That helped ;-) -- Slaunger (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Jeb, hope you noticed we got two saints today. Kuriakose Kathanar was also a social reformer, started school with every church known as pallikudam (palli = church) whereas Euphrasia was a Praying Mother. Jee 14:19, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

No, I did not notice. Good new, good to know, thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 15:56, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Nouveau modèle utilisateur

Salut.

J'ai créé un nouveau modèle utilisateur : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:User_info2

Je l'ai utilisé sur ma page utilisateur.

Cordialement. --ComputerHotline (talk) 08:04, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Closing consensual review on QIC page

Hi!

After You have added QIC voting results, please change "Discuss" to Promotion or Decline or Nomination (if it's inconclusive result), so the bot can remove candidates automatically. Good luck! --LivioAndronico talk 21:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Prater Turm Riesenrad Wien Vienna.jpg

Bonjour Jebulon,

votre image a été utilisée sur cette page de la satire. Cordialement, --P e z i (talk) 12:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Vielen Dank P e z i ! Ich bin sehr stolz ! Als pariser Polizist, ich schwöre dass ich den Rad nicht mitgenommen habe ! Und Steffl is noch beim Stefansdom.--Jebulon (talk) 17:05, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

La Pléiade

Salut, Les livres sont des objets utiles, aussi une reliure comme cela ne peut avoir un droit d'auteur. Un brevet, par contre, c'est possible. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 12:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

non, je ne crois pas. Cordialement.--Jebulon (talk) 20:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#Alternative_version

Hi Jebulon,
something went wrong with the alternative version of the Ben-Gurion room. Tried to repair but I don't see where the reason for the missing new line is. Cheers, --P e z i (talk) 17:46, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I surely did something wrong, but I don't know how to correct...--Jebulon (talk) 20:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Masque!

Merci pour mon masque Tapirapé. La Muséum de Toulouse date de 1796 mais il n’y a que 150 ans qu’il est ouvert au public. A cette occasion, 150 objets ont été choisi pour une exposition l’an prochain. Je suis chargé des photos. Il y a beaucoup d’ethnologie, et je n’étais que très médiocrement enthousiasmé. Mais je dois dire que je me suis laissé avoir par ces spécimens, et surtout se qu’il représente. J’y ai rencontré Gallieni qui nous à laissé ces collections et j’ai été très étonné du soin qu’il avait mis dans ses choix et les notes qui en découlent. Les objets sont visibles au fur et à mesure ici. Bonne soirée.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2015!

		* * * Happy Holidays 2015 ! * * *
		* Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! * Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! * Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! * Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:48, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Question

This picture has wow as a FP? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:17, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Not for me, but it is a matter of taste.--Jebulon (talk) 20:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Xmas and happy new year

Merry Xmas and happy new year --LivioAndronico talk 11:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Why

have you deleted my edit? --Hubertl (talk) 23:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)