User talk:Mark Marathon

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

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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

Hello, Mark Marathon!
Tip: Add categories to your images

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

Here's how:

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


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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

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

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

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

CategorizationBot (talk) 15:20, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Please delete this image.jpg[edit]

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

McZusatz (talk) 14:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

You can rename this file by using the {{rename}} template --McZusatz (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Request to use an image[edit]

Hi can you contact me via my wiki email reqgarding the use of your image Erythroxylum australe bush.jpg


rgds Ringpicker (talk) 04:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Erythroxylum australe bush[edit]

Hi Mark

The authour would like to use it in the series Medicinal Plants in Australia, by Cheryll Williams

Please contact me via the email link on my user page Ringpicker (talk) 02:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

i can;t find any email link on your user pageMark Marathon (talk) 04:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

It is under tool box (E mail this user) in the left column Ringpicker (talk) 08:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Acacia bidwillii[edit]

Hi Mark

I would like to know where the picture was taken. We would like to use it to illustrate a book chapter. Thanks a lot! Vincent User talk:Imac.vincent

Acacia bidwillii (2)[edit]

Hi Mark Thanks a lot for you kind and fast reply. If we use your photo for the book chapter, we would like to send this chapter to you, since you would be credited. We'll use "Mark Marathon" as the author name, but could you please give us an email address?

We have another request if you don't mind. Do you happen to have pictures of Acacia farnesiana and Acacia pachyphloia growing in their habitat? And do you have a picture of Acacia bidwillii among gum trees?

Thanks a lot again for your help!

Vincent - Imac.vincent (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

PS: I've added the location information directly in the info template of your picture.

EDIT: Thanks a lot again for your reply Mark! Here is my colleague's email address: Please just send him an email and he will get back to you. He doesn't have a Wiki account. Many thanks!

Vincent - Imac.vincent (talk) 09:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Epipremnum pinnatum / aureum[edit]

As I said on File talk:Rhaphidophora pinnata.jpg, there's some cause to doubt whether E. pinnatum and E. aureum are synonyms. Do you know anything about whether they're the same species or different species, and which species (or variety, if they're different varieties of the same species) your picture is? (Btw, I'm no expert at all. I just got given a so-called "philodendron" houseplant, and tried to read about what it actually is.) Thanks. --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 14:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, the file talk link isn't working. This one [[1]] seems to. --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 14:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrol given[edit]

Commons Autopatrolled.svg

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. INeverCry (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)


Category Barnstar.png The Category Barnstar
For all your work categorizing Category:Photographic material from the Queensland State Archives 99of9 (talk) 03:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
P.S. are you aware of Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot? It might make life easier. --99of9 (talk) 03:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Landscape categories[edit]

The user Davoodseify made a mess with Landscape categories (2014 February 20) - see here). I do not know much about these categories. Maybe you can advise/help the user. Thank you. --JotaCartas (talk) 12:36, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I think I fixed the problem, but please verify. --JotaCartas (talk) 12:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Hibiscus brachysiphonius[edit]

Hello Mark. You uploaded an excellent picture of Hibiscus brachysiphonius earlier this year. I have been looking for this plant for some time but nobody seems to know where it is available for purchase. I don't suppose you have any tips on where seeds of this plant might be available? Thanks in advance. --Urg writer (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Identification issue[edit]

Hello Mark,
As you noticed, I saw pictures from you for which the species name is not clear:

I think that those issues should be solved.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 06:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not really seeing the issue.
    • Scaevola basedowii is recognised by the ANBG, NT herbarium and WA herbarium. In fact this specimen was IDed by staff at the NT herbarium.
    • Scaevola spinescens is recognised by the ANBG, NT herbarium and WA herbarium. While not the specimen in those photos, staff at the herbarium have IDed other specimens as that in the past 12 months.
    • Scaevola depauperata is recognised by the ANBG, NT herbarium and WA herbarium. While not the specimen in those photos, staff at the herbarium have IDed other speciemens as that in the past 2 months.
I don't think these are issues that can be solved by Wikimedia. While Kew ranks very highly as an authority on plant names, it's not the authority. Indeed, there is no single authority. While eminently qualified botanists at Australian herbaria and Univeristies continue to use and publish these names there is no problem with those names. They are certainly not "unidentified" when they have been IDed by this bloke (
Certainly, if you feel that they properly belong in some other taxon because of recent taxonomic revisions, then please move them there. I'm very much a field botanist/ecologist, not a taxonomist, so while I know what I see, I don't always know what it's currently called. Moving images to other taxa is no problem because anybody who wants to find them can do so. But to categorise them as unknown when they have been IDed by some of the most knowledgeable botanists in the field is misleading and unhelpful. We know exactly what they are, the only doubt is what they should be properly called this week, and I am more than happy to leave you to work out what that might be.Mark Marathon (talk) 08:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
You are totally right that moving these pictures to Category:Unidentified Scaevola was laziness from my side.
You are also totally right when you say that wikimedia cannot solve those kind of issues. But still, we need to provide some sources accepting the species
I will create the 3 categories and try to provide Australian sources.
Could you help me with sources ?
en:List of Scaevola species uses en:Australian_Plant_Name_Index as source (what you called ANBG, right?). And APNI/ANBG lists Scaevola basedowii, Scaevola spinescens (maybee as a synonym?) and Scaevola depauperata (maybee as a synonym?)
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 09:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Could you find links for NT herbarium and WA herbarium ? Regards Liné1 (talk) 09:35, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
I created {{APNI family}}, {{APNI genus}} and {{APNI species}} to provide links to APNI.
I also created {{Unresolved}} to allow to tag species Categories for which you could not find enough valid sources. Like for Scaevola basedowii before you told me to look at APNI.
If you are interested, Category:Unresolved taxon contains a good number of taxon for which there is a need for an investigation ;-)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

re: Landscapes[edit]

fixed it. thx --shizhao (talk) 07:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

category removal/brackets[edit]

Hello, thank you for helping with category cleanup. today i found 2 examples [2] [3] where you accidentally "broke" a category relevant for the running WLE 2015 contest, in this case Hesse, Germany. So please be more careful (i only checked these images,so don't know if there are more). An other point is that by [4] you removed all "content categories" (why? Landscapes: ok, but Kinzig and Langenselbold seem correct), and you only left maintenance categories, which made the image appearing uncategorized. Please try to add at least one basic new category when you remove all others.

Maybe you can use Gadget-Cat-a-lot or alike for category changes? Especially when you edit larger amounts it makes life a bit easier, and doesn't allow some unwanted changes (like with the brackets). Holger1959 (talk) 04:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

about categories[edit]

Hello Mark Marathon, can you please clean up Category:Emergency services by country? i found that all (or nearly all), currently 286 images in this category were sorted into it by you. "By country" categories are only for subcategories, but not for images of a specific or unknown country. So either put the images directly in Category:Emergency services or put them into a correct country subcategory Emergency services in [country name] (if not exiting yet, create it).

Also i think that this is wrong. You sorted many images (obviously part of a series) into "…in North Korea", but Seoul (see description) is the capital of South Korea; or do the non-english parts of the description state something else?

Then you put an other bunch of images from "Media needing categories as of…" into Category:Category redirects (example). What the heck? Sorry, Mark, but this sort of changes is not helpful at all!

More problematic changes? Yes. Here you put an image of a vehicle/bus (together with more than 100 other images) into Category:Cities in Korea, which is no valid category, but a redirect to Category:Cities in Asia.

And botanical categories: Here you put an image obviously not (!) showing a grass species into a non-existing (!) category "unidentified grass" (before your change it was correct in Category:Unidentified plants which is used by our botany experts for further identification. I could point to many other "bad examples" from the last days, but think this is enough to repeat: please be more careful. Holger1959 (talk) 13:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Heads up on Tracks and Paths[edit]

Just to let you know that Category:Paths is intended for footpaths and the like; you copied a number of files of Tracks (which are somewhat informal vehicle ways) into this category. For all council areas in Scotland, there should be, e.g. Category:Tracks in the Scottish Borders, which would have been a more useful and correct category to use. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

please stop moving images to "by country" meta categories[edit]

Hello, i don't know if you not read your talk page (see above) … Can you please stop moving images to "by country" meta categories. Example from today where you moved an image (together with 20 others) to Category:Floor plans of buildings by country.

There are still more than 200 images in Category:Emergency services by country (see above), which you moved there.

Please clean this up before you go on moving further images from A to B. I hope all these issues were only mistakes. In case you do this deliberatly, please explain. Holger1959 (talk) 19:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Please use more specific categories[edit]

I noticed that you've moved hundreds of files from Category:All media needing categories as of 2015 to Category:Buildings. While I understand that the intent is probably to be helpful, I'm afraid the result is anything but. The purpose of the maintenance categories for files without categories is not to assign any random category no matter how broad it is, but to assign meaningful categories so that people can find related media files. Dumping hundreds of files in top-level categories as broad as "Buildings" or "People" won't help anyone find anything. The maintenance categories exist to facilitate improvement of the topic categories, so please don't make a mess of the topic categories just to keep the maintenance categories neat. You obviously have a lot of energy and initiative. Please use it to assign meaningful categories, even if it means processing fewer files. Thanks, LX (talk, contribs) 11:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, try to use more specific categories when categorising media. Shoving uncategorised media into very broad categories such as Category:People of Asia (even when there are no people featured on the images) is not very productive at all. - Takeaway (talk) 21:07, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Minsk is the capital of Belarus[edit]

oops!--Хомелка (talk) 13:32, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


Hi Mark, why do you have reverted the change i made in moving files "gully erosion" to the Category:Gullies (landform)? --Ciaurlec (talk) 10:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


Hi, as an active colleague on upload projects, I thought I'd drop you a personal heads-up for my request for adminship, today being the last day for views. RFA's tend to only have a small proportion of the community taking part, so it can be difficult to judge if this is representative. :-) -- (talk) 13:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Fig from inland of Yeppoon....[edit]

This plant File:Ficus coronata foliage and fruit.jpg - I doubted was coronata as coronata has furry fruit. I have several coronata growing about the place. I asked a knowledgeable person who said it was F. opposita. All the images (under cat. coronata) are of the same plant, right? Casliber (talk) 12:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

moving from unidentified plants to unidentified angiosperms[edit]

Hi Mark I am not sure if that makes sense since most plants are angiosperms and its just creating two places with unidentified plants. cheers, Amada44  talk to me 21:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

On the contrary, it is very useful: Unidentified Angiosperms‎ is much more precise than Unidentified plants.
And most plants are not angiosperms. Simply look at Unidentified plants content.
Regards Liné1 (talk) 18:27, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Angiosperms have about 330'000 species. Gymnosperms about 1000. The rest is mosses, ferns, algae etc. So I would say, that angiosperms are by far the most common species in unidentified plants (we don't even have Unidentified Gymnosperms‎ as a cat. ) Amada44  talk to me 21:48, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

removing redirect from Unidentified flowers.[edit]

Hi Mark. I have rolled back your edits on Category:Unidentified flowers. Please see the consensus on the talk page for creating that redirect. Amada44  talk to me 07:51, 9 May 2016 (UTC)


Sorry about this. There is something weird about this file. The thumbnail shows a statue of the god Moloch, not the lizard. — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:23, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Unidentified palms[edit]

Concerning these two reversions of my own reversions of your uncategorization of these two photos as showing Unidentified Araceae: I did explain my reasons to do so in the edit summaries, while you did not. I may now do one of three things:

  1. Give up and leave these two photos not only incompletely categorized but even wrongly categorized (as they clearly show both specimens of Ch. humilis and of other palm species).
  2. Revert your edits a third time and incurr in a block for edit warring.
  3. Avoid the unwanted outcomes listed above and report you for unconstructive, uncollegial editing.

Or I can do none of the above if you take the initiative of fixing the matter yourself. -- Tuválkin 23:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Block for Removing Categories[edit]

Taivo (talk) 08:03, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I looked your last contributions about what to revert. I found, that not much must be reverted and even removing of Landscapes category was often justified. Therefore I decided to unblock you. Please be more careful in the future. Taivo (talk) 08:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Mark, please seek consensus before doing things like that. Also you still have not replied to my question above about the Unidentified Angiosperms. You just keep moving images. I would like to see a reply from you! Regards, Amada44  talk to me 16:41, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Moved from User Page[edit]


Greetings from Integra!

I am Srikanth, working in Rights and Permissions department of Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd and I am contacting you on behalf of Hodder Education, UK. We want to use the images of the below mentioned description in the forthcoming publication by Hodder Education;

Image description - Boerhavia (desert plant)

Please let me know if you could provide us with the hi-res image with full permission (without any extra clearance). We believe that you hold the copyright for this image. Else I would be so thankful if you could direct us to the person who holds the copyright for this image.

This image will be used inside a publication “AS/A-level Geography Teaching and Learning Resources 9781471861321”. If required I can share the context with you for your reference.

Do let me know if you if you have any questions. I will be glad to provide you with the required details


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Srikanth 123456 (talk • contribs)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

How is this "low quality"?[edit] Jmabel ! talk 14:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

  • It has been roughly three days, with no response from you. I am reverting. - Jmabel ! talk 23:15, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Categorization thanks[edit]

Thanks for your helpful categorization of images like this one. Narrowing from "flower" to the family level is very helpful for when I finally get around to doing some searching. — Rhododendrites talk |  04:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Renaming File:Eremophila macdonnellii.jpg[edit]

Hi, I have declined your request to rename the File:Eremophila macdonnellii.jpg as there is no proper assurity of your rename. In order to avoid rename war I request you to kindly discuss the subject on the file talk page of at Village pump. Feel free to request the rename once all is clear. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 01:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Unidentified flowers[edit]

In this edit, you removed File:Apoyo internacional. Paco Arango niños adolescentes cáncer infantil.jpg from Category:Unidentified plants. Can you at least identify the flowers the girl is holding in that photograph? Thank you in advance. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 08:41, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Moving from Category:Unidentified plants to Category:plants[edit]

Hi Mark could you explain this please? Some time ago you moved form Unidentified plants to Unidentified Angiosperms‎ and now you moved all those unidentified plants to Plants??? Why?

If you don't answer to this as you haven't answerd to anything on your talkpage I am going to revert it. cheers, Amada44  talk to me 14:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Senecio gregorii[edit]

Este taxón fue cambiado a Kleinia gregorii por haber sido revisado en Noviembre 2017 por Catalogue ofLife aquí, le agradecería que lo comprobase y rectificase una vez hecho. Saludos--MILEPRI (talk) 08:21, 9 March 2018 (UTC)


Kersti (talk) 09:07, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry as youn don't have arguments to defend this category it is absolutely not correct to revert edits which identify the plants somewhat more correct than they dit before and put the animals back to this useless category! --Kersti (talk) 23:01, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

To me this category is not simply a useless category - useless categories are simply ignored by me. It is a real big problem ---Kersti (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2018 (UTC)