User talk:Notyourbroom/Archive1

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Discussion Page Navigator for
Notyourbroom


Your thoughts[edit]

Took the words right out of my mouth. This level of commons warfare is getting beyond a joke. It's as if those involved can't see the forest for the trees. Too many grudges, and to much pride. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

TUSC token 396d6d58485b4c87357357af5e04d071[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

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 bokmål | 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, Notyourbroom!

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:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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]]
[[Category:Comets]]

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"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

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

BotMultichillT 06:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:1971_Hangovers_in_Bermuda.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:1971_Hangovers_in_Bermuda.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

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

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:1971_Hangovers_in_Bermuda.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Multichill (talk) 19:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. I have contacted the original uploader. --Notyourbroom (talk) 20:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


Re:Credit template[edit]

Just wanted to drop you a note to say that I used your Credit template as the basis to make one for myself, visible here. :) --Notyourbroom (talk) 01:25, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. You really pimped the credit template :) Looks very nice. --AngMoKio (talk) 11:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The experimental part on your page...[edit]

...was actually something I introduced last year..you don't have to quote me for that though Face-smile.svg, you user page just sort of hinted to wanting to know where it came from... I see you are trying out COM:QIC. Maybe you should also try out COM:VIC at some stage? Anyway, I hope you are having a good time here on Commons.

Cheers, --Slaunger (talk) 16:17, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done I gave you a mention. Thanks for your note! :) --Notyourbroom (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Its kind of you, but you do not have to credit me;-) I am only pleased to see that other users are using a concept I introduced. --Slaunger (talk) 16:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Declined Valued Image: Cornell_AD_White_house_2.jpg[edit]

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Scope OK for me. You geolocation does not match the apparent camera position EWE of the house with a heading WSW. Did you know you could add your camera heading to the as a heading parameter? I can recommend, that as it makes this cool pointer when seen on Google Maps/Earth. I am not too happy about the trees partially obstructing the view and the partially cropped building, so I'd say it does not illustrate the scope well. When I look at the map it seems like it is in fact quite hard to get a good place to photograph the entire facade in one photo. If it was me photographing the building, I would probably take several images while positioned closer to the building (with no obstructing trees), and then stitch them in, e.g., Hugin. See, e.g., here, where I used that technique. --Slaunger (talk) 21:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC) (Comment moved here by Notyourbroom (talk) 22:39, 29 March 2009 (UTC))

Thank you for that information! I have heard Hugin mentioned, but I have not yet tried it out. You were absolutely right that I had geotagged the image incorrectly. (I was WNW, heading ESE.) I think I have fixed it, and I tried adding the heading parameter as well, but it does not seem to make a difference when I view the image on Google Maps, so perhaps I made a mistake. Does it work alright for you now? Thanks again, --Notyourbroom (talk) 22:39, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
It works allright for me now. There is usually quite a delay when changing the position, due to a replication lag, I think. After a day or so, changed locations are usually in place. --Slaunger (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

--Karel (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

May I please ask you for a favor?[edit]

I uploaded a video. It does not work properly on my computer. Could you please take a look on you computer? If it does not work at your computer either, I will reload it. File:Courtship Dance of Laysan Albatrosses Phoebastria immutabilis at Midway Atoll.OGG. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:19, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done It works mostly fine for me. (Running Firefox 3 in Mac OS X.) However, the brightness constantly flickers higher and lower for some reason—it is not a large effect, but it is noticeable. --Notyourbroom (talk) 01:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your help!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:37, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Your vote on Tuskagee Airman featured photo[edit]

I've spotted, despeckled and filtered for dust and noise; would appreciate if you can have a second look at the photo and reconsider your featured photo vote for Toni Frissell's Tuskagee Airmen photo. Thanks. --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

US Schools guide[edit]

Dear Notyourbroom,

I would like to use a few of your Cornell University pictures in the universities section of our upcoming publication the 'Best of American Education' Schools Guide. This publication is the first of its kind to be released in China, written in Chinese. This is a great opportunity for you to show prospective students and Chinese families not only your skills with the camera but also what Cornell University offers. Please check out our website: www.behk.org/schoolsguide.html or our publishers website: http://www.hurun.net/educationen.aspx. For the background of our project and what we are trying to achieve in China. Please contact me by email if you have any questions or concerns. Our publishing deadline is fast approaching so please get back to me as soon as possible.

Thanks,

Sam

E: so@behk.org

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Responded via e-mail to the address provided. --Notyourbroom (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Important proposal[edit]

I wrote a proposal for equalizing the different picture formats on FPC Please have a look. Best regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

New proposal for the FP candidates voting process[edit]

Hello! I've written a proposal to bring more impartiality in the voting process of FP candidates. Could you please give your comment on that here? Regards -- Tiago Fioreze (talk) 20:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Category:American Sociological Association Conference 2008[edit]

Thanks, I guess I didn't go far enough - I've just created the Category:American Sociological Association. IINM, ASA calls their conferences Annual Meetings, not Conferences, so we may need to rename the categories at some point... but no hurry :) Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 06:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Finis Terrae[edit]

  • Hi Notyourbroom. Thanks for your information on the FP page. I feel a bit ashamed, but honestly I didnt understand the following sentence: Any support vote given at this point would cancel the FPX, so long as the supporter were to remember to mark the FPX as contested afterward. Could you probably explain it again in other words (Im actually Swiss and my English unfortunately isnt perfect at all)? --Rectilinium (talk) 23:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
    • See these two things:
      • "Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If no contrary views are expressed within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed."
      • "Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator."
    • In other words, if someone other than the nominator has supported a given image, then the FPX does not lead to automatic delisting within 24 hours; and also, anyone who gives a vote of support after an FPX may mark it as "contested," which changes the FPX to an "oppose" vote. Sorry, the system itself is confusing, and I am sure I am not speaking as clearly as I should be :) —Notyourbroom (talk) 00:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Ahh... ok. I think now I understood. Then I hope, that at least one person supports the picture within the next 20 hours, so that there is at least a discussion about the picture before it is deleted (especially because Daniel was wrong - concerning the filters/effects). Thanks again for the explaination. Ok then, time for me to go to bed... ;) --Rectilinium (talk) 00:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Advertising[edit]

Please dont restore messages advertising and recruiting for third party sites that have been removed, doing so may see your account block. Gnangarra 05:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted an administrator's opinion—no harm meant, no harm done. The item in question had been on that high-traffic talk page for just under 24 hours without being challenged by anyone until a regular user removed it. Deleting others' talk page postings is generally considered bad form, I understand, so I was just applying the brakes on that unilateral decision until an administrator could review it, which I see you have done. Thank you for your time. —Notyourbroom (talk) 06:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok but I think you misinterpreted the purpose of that, from COM:TALK Talk pages are not for general chatter; please keep discussions on talk pages on the topic of how to improve the associated article. advertsinging a third party doesnt fit this basic requirement. Gnangarra 06:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC)



English | Español | Magyar | +/−

Discussion Page Navigator for
Notyourbroom


Commonist errors[edit]

I saw where you got some errors uploading with Commonist. I got the same errors. Did you figure out how to resolve that?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Xpda (talk • contribs) 00:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't know what you're referring to. Is there some page you're looking at that you can link me to? —Notyourbroom (talk) 14:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

CoL[edit]

Hey your photo stitch of File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg is excellent. Great work. I think you should put it up for the valued image for the Category:Cathedral of Learning. The current image, which I didn't even realize there was such a thing as valued image, is obviously out of date (pre-2007 cleaning), and quite drab to boot. Plus it has the Stephen Foster Memorial in front of it which could be confused as part of the CoL. Crazypaco (talk) 06:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much—it's actually up right now for review, but no one is voting on any of the candidates. (Also, I'm sad to say that "stitch 1" was rejected for QI status because the top of the building wasn't sharp enough, possibly due to the bit of noise removal I did... Of course, if that's the only issue, then the image would have been a shoo-in if I'd downsampled it to 50% or so, but I don't believe in doing that.) —Notyourbroom (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
It certainly is the best of the bunch I think, as far as framing, having a great sky in the background, a very high resolution to examine it in detail if desired, as well as capturing the angle, that historically, seems to be considered to be the best angle. This angle has been suggested by architectural historian Franklin Toker his book Pittsburgh: An Urban Portrait (p. 85) that when seen obliquely on Fifth or Forbes avenues, that its Gothic setbacks, corner pinnacles and tracery are best observed and I'd have to agree with his assessment. The angle also looks good from the opposite direction across the Sailors and Soldiers lawn, and during the "Golden Hour" it absolutely sparkles from that view, but view can often be cluttered by the surrounding city scape. Stitch 2 is also good, but at the size it is displayed in the typical wikipedia articles, the lack of shadows hides the depth of the detailing and the Cathedral seems flatter and more monolithic, plus it is also is complicated by the fact that the Stephen Foster is in the shot which I think many may confuse as part of it, or its entrance. Crazypaco (talk) 05:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Family George V of Hanover.jpg[edit]

Thank you, Notyourbroom, for your remark "The caption in the bottom margin (see annotation) is faded and illegible. I think it should either be removed or restored" on this place. I removed the illegible inscription. I hope, the image is now ok. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

ShiftN 3.5 - Freeware[edit]

Hallo, Notyourbroom. You like to take architecturally images. Please have a look to the ShiftN 3.5 - Freeware. It makes the automatic correction of converging lines in architecturally images. Try it, I think, it's helpfull. Many greetings! --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate this guidance. Thucydides34 (talk) 05:33, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Images[edit]

Hello! According to you which of these images could stand for election for the FP? :)

Thanks --Zitumassin (talk) 16:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

These ones are probably the best out of the five you posted: File:Val di Sangro da Sant'Onofrio.JPG File:Monteferrante chieti.JPG but to be honest, I do not think they would be voted as featured pictures. One issue is that you appear to be using a compact point-and-shoot camera. Many (but not all) photographs which become featured pictures are taken with DSLR cameras, which are more expensive but which take much higher quality photographs than compact point-and-shoot cameras. What this means is that your images will need to be extraordinary (perfect time of day, wonderful subject, excellent composition, etc) in order to make up for their lower size, sharpness, and vibrancy compared to DSLR photos. I would suggest that you check out Valued Image Candidates, because even a camera phone image may be eligible for Valued Image status if it illustrates its subject better than any other image on Commons. —Notyourbroom (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Photo Usage Request[edit]

Hi there - I'd like to use your photo of The Commons at RWU in a project i'm doing for the supplier of the metal used on that building. Is it ok to use, and what photo credit would you like listed?— Preceding unsigned comment added by JulsOTED (talk • contribs) 19:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

That is fine, so long as you credit me with "Bill Price III" as I request on the image description pages. Thank you. —Notyourbroom (talk) 20:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Your RWU Engineering School Photo[edit]

Hi there, Mr. Price...

I found your photo of the RWU School of Engineering building in RI. I'd like to use it as a small thumbnail shot within a website I'm pulling together for the New England Shoreline Section of the Society of Women Engineers.

Our current website can be found here http://sweness.org/ . I'm working on a replacement that would include more photos and a bit more personality. I would like to use your photo on the new page which describes our Collegiate Sections, perhaps with a link to the school's SWE student group page if they have one. I would include your name on the photo as you have specified.

Please contact me at mpgoter@verizon.net if you have any concerns or objections to my use of your photo.

Thanks, Peg Goter

(— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.11.122 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC))

Sure, Peg—I grant permission for that. Good luck! —Notyourbroom (talk) 22:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Photo Use Request[edit]

Hello

My name is Kathy Murphy and I'm one of the administrative assistants for the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association. AAEA is celebrating it's 100th anniversary in 2010 and is in the process of publishing a book, DVD, and exhibit outlining AAEA's history. The author has requested that we find a photo of Cornell's Warren Hall, which I was able to find a photo of on your page. We'd be interested in using your photo on our centennial projects. Below is my contact information:

Kathy Murphy Agricultural & Applied Economics Association 555 E. Wells Street, Suite 1100 Milwaukee, WI 53202 kathleen@aaea.org www.aaea.org

I look forward to hearing from you!

Thank you! Kathy Murphy

(— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.250.11.254 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC))

That sounds fine, Kathy—I grant permission. Just to be clear, I would like to be credited by name (Bill Price III). Good luck!—Notyourbroom (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Notyourbroom. You have new messages at Eustress's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Bill Price III Wild Horse Photo[edit]

Thanks for allowing use of your wild horse photos. We posted one on http://www.bestldsplaces.com/?page_id=866. Michael Call.

Beebe lake / Triphammer falls[edit]

Thanks for noting. It didn't occur to me to find the name of those falls and I agree with renaming. — Yerpo Eh? 06:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

use of your feral horse photo[edit]

Dear Mr. Price,

We will be using your photo of feral horses at Assateague Island on the cover of our journal, The George Wright Forum, published by the George Wright Society. If you email me I would be happy to give you more details. Thank you.

David Harmon dharmon@georgewright.org