User talk:Vaccinationist

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

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 07:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there[edit]

Just a quick thank you for the great work you've been doing from a fellow structure fanatic. Keep it up! Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much! :D Vaccinationist (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Margin[edit]

Example

Hi Vaccinationist. Thank you for uploading so many structural formulas. I'd suggest you to add a small margin. The reason may be seen in the example structure on the right: It sticks too much to the frame. --Leyo 23:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I’ll keep that in mind. Vaccinationist (talk) 10:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Travoprost structure.svg[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it. If you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 16:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement[edit]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open![edit]

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement[edit]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results[edit]

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Vaccinationist,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Loprazolam.svg[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. Could you please upload your version under a new file name? It's good to have a choice. --Leyo 20:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Terminal groups[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. Please do not overwrite structures containing explicit terminal –CH3 (or =CH2 or ≡CH) by a new version without. In de.wikipedia, the former version is the preferred one. --Leyo 22:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Which files are affected? I can undo my structures at any time. --Vaccinationist (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Just consider this request for your future (valuable) work. If you find more low quality structures containing explicit terminal groups, either upload your version under a new name or upload a better version under the existing name, but with the same style concerning the terminal groups. --Leyo 23:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Clorotepine.svg[edit]

I noticed that you uploaded a new version of this image in which it was flipped vertically. It's not a big deal, but in general I think it is a good idea to upload different representations of the same chemical as different files. I assume you are doing this to make images of related drugs appear similarly across related articles on English Wikipedia, but since the images may be used on other language Wikipedias, you may be making other uses become inconsistent. Two separate representations as two separate files leaves options for everyone. In any case, thanks for all the work you are doing improving drug articles. Regards, Ed (Edgar181) 17:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Fluphenazine[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. I noticed that during editing image of fluphenazine structure you have altered chemical structure of that drug (carbonyl bridge instead of methylene). 87.207.233.227 19:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for noticing! I'll correct it asap. :3 --Vaccinationist (talk) 14:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:File renaming non-reasons[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. Please see number 2. As your request violated the guideline, I moved the file back to the original correct (German) name. Unfortunately, Wieralee blindly trusted you. --Leyo 20:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

  • @Leyo: I've trusted en.wikipedia: Fosfluconazole. Wieralee (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @Leyo: P.S. I beg your pardon, I had no idea, that in german it is all right. I've thought it a typical typo. I will be more careful in the future. Yours, Wieralee (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    (EC) English Wikipedia is not such a good reference for non-English names … --Leyo 20:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Query of two structures[edit]

I may be a chemist, but I'm not a sugar expert! However, someone altered en:L-Glucose caption from alpha to beta. I did revert it as it does not agree with your image File:Haworth projection of α-L-Glucopyranose.svg. However since then I've been trying to check - and I found at http://www.edinformatics.com/interactive_molecules/a_b_glucose_differences.htm the folloing

“When a glucopyranose molecule is drawn in the Haworth projection, the designation 'a-' means that the hydroxyl group attached to C-1 and the -CH2OH group at C-5 lies on opposite sides of the ring's plane (a trans arrangement), while 'ß-' means that they are on the same side of the plane (a cis arrangement)”

. In would appear that in your drawing that the CH2OH on 5 and the OH on 1 are both down, thus suggesting beta. Note this also affects File:Haworth projection of α-D- and α-L-Glucopyranose.svg. I can rename them if they are incorrect. Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Clorotepine[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. I noticed that during editing image of clorotepine you have altered structure of that drug (chlorine atom in meta position instead of para, relative to sulfur). 193.242.142.131 22:18, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. I've uploaded a new, correct version. --Vaccinationist (talk) 22:55, 4 January 2017 (UTC)