User talk:Slaunger/Archives/2009/7

QI

The QUICbot put this message on my discussion page:

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Viborg kraftvarmeværk 2009-05-25 1-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I prefer this version --Mbdortmund 14:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

As it is your photo, and I don't want to adorn myself with borrowed plumes, I move it to this place. -- smial (talk) 12:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi smial, thank you for your message and also thank you for doing a better perspective correction that I did. It is something I find a little hard to do just right, unless when I have stiched two or more images in which case Hugin is a great help. I really think you should have kept the message in your talk page as I doubt it would have been promoted to QI without your help. --Slaunger (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

It's yours and it's very good. I did only minor changes :-) I've listed it here. Gut Licht! -- smial (talk) 10:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Vielen dank, smial. --Slaunger (talk) 22:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Middelgrunden wind farm 2009-07-01 edit filtered.jpg

Kim. I did some further tinkering (few more spots, slight CCW tilt, bit of noise). What do you think? Lycaon (talk) 15:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, thanks for doing the effort I should have done. I had non-ideal working conditions when I tried to edit the image myself (at the bridge of a ship, with sunlight impinging on the screen) so I could not see all the spots and not even see that it was tilted! Anyway, concerning noise reduction I think it is a little excessive now, as I think details in the ripple in the sea and the tips of some wings are not a tad more smeared out than what is needed and my first noise reduction also generated this rim around the turbines, which looks like a mask (although I just applied a global noise reduction my my noise removal tool). But then again it is non-optimal to try and improve noise, where another noise remover has already been applied. The original is somewhat underexposed as I feared the white wings would be blown. I think the best strategy would be to start from scratch once again with the original (which I do not have available where I am now) under better working conditions (monitor, light). That will have to be postponed though by some two weeks, as I just got home and I am (or should be) packing for vacation (leaving this afternoon). But it is quite an amazing view with the glossy water and the haze in the background. It is a little unusual at a wind farm site - if I manage to reprocess it decently, I might try to nominate it at FPC? --Slaunger (talk) 06:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Have a nice trip, and yes, when reprocessed from the original, it may have FP potential. It certainly has the wow. Lycaon (talk) 07:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Transcluded user templates with embedded license templates

Hey, sorry it's taken me so long to respond; I've been away from wiki for months. I do need to make a set of new templates soon anyway so I will keep this in mind when I do (I did just update my main one). Ideally I would prefer to continue using my templates in the same way (especially if a bot might be able to subst:ed for me) unless some equally quick and simple procedure is possible. Even more Ideal would be a change in policy; if "all of these templates are on administrator watch lists" then it does seem unneeded. Benjamint 12:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you know?

This file File:Daniel Chan 9933.jpg that you tagged with "no permission" was moved with the text "move approved by: User:Slaunger". No need to move bad files so if you nominate files for deletion you might want to remove any "rename-templates". Otherwise you will get the credit for moveing ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 12:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out to me, MGA73. I was not concoisly aware of that. Of course, if I had given the process a little more thought i would have realized that I should have removed the rename request. --Slaunger (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

FPC

Hi Slaunger, I'am a bit disapointed that the script isn't changed since the proposal gained gigantic support. Can you change the script, please ? Best regards   • Richard • [®] • 18:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Richard; Slaunger is off-line until July 20 (see top of page). Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I hope you are not dissapointed at me for not making it, as I clearly indicated back then that I did not have the time... Anyway, Rocket000 made a very sensible suggestion for a technically simple solution involving the creation of a helper template {{FPC-size}} to aid the nominator in selecting a correct preview size. Since that template was quite simple to create, I have implemented and tested that part of it. See also Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#Discussion/suggestions/comments :. Cheers, --Slaunger (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Danish translations needed

Hi! I contact you as you speak English and Danish.

Jastrow and I are working on autotranslating {{Meta information museum}}, the meta-template we use for many museums, like {{Information Louvre}}. Could you please help us find Danish translations for every tag name:

   * artist/maker             kunstner/skaber
   * description              betegnelse
   * dimensions               dimensioner
   * credit line              samling og anskaffelsesmetode
   * accession number         museumsnummer
   * location                 sted
   * source/photographer      kilde/fotograf
   * references               referencer
   * other versions           andre versioner

"Credit line" is mainly about the mode of acquisition: what collection does it come from? Did it join the collections by gift, purchase, on loan, etc.?

Thanks for any help. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 13:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

OK. This is not really something I am good at. My translations from English to Danish are considered as being "Danglish" by many due to an excessive use of anglicisms. However, my best shot is added to the table above. A more proficient translator could probably add some more precision, but I think my suggested Danish terms are fairly OK. --Slaunger (talk) 19:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I just created the template, so all should appears in Danish for Danish-speaking people now. Thanks a lot! Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 13:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Only glad I could help. Your fine work on the i18n is also much appreciated. --Slaunger (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

User licence

Hi Slaugner,

Thank you for your help. I am very satisfied. You can make your test.

Cheers.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

You can proceed.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Subst'ing of user license templates by bot

Re Commons_talk:Licensing#How to dual license with one free and one cc-by-nc-sa license? when you are subst'ing templates to transclude the appropriate license template on the image pages, can your bot substitute the license template that was in effect when the image was originally licensed?. eg images licensed prior to this edit [1] need to have {{gfdl}} instead of {{gfdl-1.2}}. This is of course the reason we need the actual licenses put on the page, and applies to more than one user. I suspect it might be a bit tricky, but once the initial run has been done, it will be easier to correct the licenses anyway. --Tony Wills (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

It is not something my bot code supports at the moment, but I think that will be doable if that is what is requested. However, as you may know I initiated some time a discussion with Fir0002 about that particular license change, the discussion continued on MichaelMaggs talk page as well in great extend and elsewhere. I am not sure that the end result was for this controversial license change. Fir0002 did the license change because he disagrees that the GFDL 1.3 has the same "spirit" as GFDL 1.2, which is the term used in that clause in the GFDL license when discussin or later. I would rather not touch this aspect of it right now, but let a possible revert of the license from gfdl-1.2 back to gfdl for images uploaded prior to his license change in the template be done as a seperate process. Or..I could start out by omitting files uploaded prior to that license change. My main question in that thread is how to add a cc-by-nc-sa as a secondary license to a free license. --Slaunger (talk) 10:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I realise there had been discussions, but I hadn't followed them, I didn't know Fir's rationale. I think that is an issue he has with the GFDL folks, not us - there are some licenses on my earlier uploads that I would like to change, but that's just too bad as well ;-). But yes, fight one battle at a time :-). Yes, I made this comment over here as it wasn't quite relevant to your query, I have added suggestions over there :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Erigeron compositus

Hi Slaunger;

I took more pictures in Deer Park of my putative Erigeron compositus last week.[2] Unfortunately, they were not yet in fruit despite being later in the season. Earlier this year, I added some pictures to the gallery taken on a spur ridge east of the Cascade Range and north of Ellensburg, WA. I hope you had a pleasant wikibreak and welcome back. Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:23, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Walter, I love that plant, and the intriguing regional variances we have discussed earlier. Somewhat surprising to me that the plant you observed now are still not flowering despite that we are aboput 14 days later in the season as compared to the earlier flowring examples you have uploaded. Were the plants you saw this time located at a higher altitude, oriented differently towards the sun or has the wheather in the area been significantly colder this year?

I had a nice wikibreak. First one week at Kandersteg International Scout Center, Switzerland, together with a bunch of kids (I am not a scout, but I participated as a parent). It was a very muddy week with rain 6 out of 7 days, but with several memorable moments, such as hikes to Oeschinen Lake, Blausee with lots of petrified trees in the lake and the Gällihorn hike where we brought a group of 30 kids aged 11-16 y to the summit at 2284 m. It was raining heavily for 4 hours while climbing up with lots of mud, but after getting over the clouds it was great and the wheather cleared up and we had a spectacular view from the summit. I did not have much time to focus on the flora there (the kids were the focus). The only species from Greenland I recognized was Silene acaulis, which was abundant above 1800 m.

Second week was just a (much needed) week of leisure and relaxation by Lago di Lugano near Porlezza with mostly excellent wheather except for our last day, with torrent and the largest hails I've ever seen (the size of hazelnuts). Drove the 1450 km/22 h back home in torrents and heavy rain over the Swizz alps with lots of holiday traffic jams in Germany. When we reached Denmark the highways were jammed, and we took some minor roads the last 200 km home.

--Slaunger (talk) 07:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

The Erigeron compositus individuals were flowering but not yet in fruit. Consequently, I didn't get any pictures of the achenes. The plants were at the same location as the ones I photographed last year. Geocoding is useful! We might try again in August. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Kaiseki

No content

A tag has been placed on Kaiseki, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Commons. This has been done because it is a very short gallery page providing no content to the reader. Please see COM:GALLERY for more info about gallery pages and their purpose. If you disagree with its speedy deletion, please explain why on its talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. English | español | +/−

Killiondude (talk) 21:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

User licence

Hi Slaunger

Thank you for your nice job.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Kim,

I have seen your great job

Many thanks

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Geolocating

Hi, after reading your comment on one of my images about geolocating, I have tried but couldnt get it right. The photograph File:Squirrelmonkfamily1.jpg was taken at Apenheul primate centre in Apeldoorn, Netherlands. I can get the location coordinates no problem, but I am new to wiki and finding the coding language a little tough to grasp while I find my feet on here.

Thanks for letting me know though, and I will keep trying to do it.

Julielangford (talk) 13:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries!

It's easy enough to miss, but it is the second-most-common arrangement, so =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Geolocating update

Hi, and thanks again for your help on my talk page. I have now added the zoo name and the co-ordinates on the image file. Hope I did it right :)

Hi again, and thanks again :) I will double check the location again. I know where abouts in the park where I was standing, but its kind of hard to locate on the map. Will keep trying though. Julielangford (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I have the right spot now, editing the file straight after I send this. Thanks for keeping me in the loop, I like to get things right, and always welcome advice :) Julielangford (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Numbers in Brackets in Watchlist page

Hi, it's me again. the nag. Can you tell me please, what teh numbers in brackets are on items on my watchlist page? Some are positive, some are negative, all are different and I can't seem to fathom what they are about, or what information they should be giving me.

thanks in advance

Julielangford (talk) 10:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Lincensing

Hi, and thanks for your help Re: The numbers in brackets on the watchlist page. Here is another one for you. Am I right in thinking that evey image posted on here must have a license of some sort attached to it? They can't be posted without any licensing information can they? I ask because I found one earlier, and am not sure what to do about it. Julielangford (talk) 15:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on your image promo above :) Julielangford (talk) 16:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)