User talk:Werewombat/Archive 1

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
English: Welcome to the Commons, Werewombat!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Bahasa Banjar | বাংলা | Català | Нохчийн | Čeština | Cymraeg | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Ирон | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Scots | සිංහල | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−
Crystal Clear app korganizer.png First steps tutorial

Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy.

Icon apps query.svg Getting help

More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.

Transmission icon.png Goodies, tips and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities.
  • All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~
  • Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!)
  • To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg
  • If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper
Nuvola filesystems trashcan full.png Made a mistake?
  • Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}}
  • For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

--SieBot 19:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Horsethief Butte crocuses.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Don't know how the tags were omitted in the first place. Thanks for the heads-up. Werewombat 17:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


Image:FtAstoria1813.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:FtAstoria1813.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

h-stt !? 06:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image:Watchman Lookout at Crater Lake National Park 2C 1932.jpg[edit]

Oops, you are right, somehow I wrote the wrong name (I was checking back and forth several images indicated in a thread at Media copyright questions at enwiki and somehow I wrote the wrong name here. The complain was that the script somehow transformed a comma into its hex code, 2C, and the idea was to rename it to Image:Watchman Lookout at Crater Lake National Park, 1932.jpg. Sorry for the confusion. -- ReyBrujo 19:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sculptures[edit]

Yes, it's infuriating when people upload images of sculptures without giving any information. Did you know about User:Mutter Erde/Please add the sculptor´s name? And there's tons more :-( Lupo 15:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Seminole Rest and Turtle Mound[edit]

Thanks for making Seminole Rest it's own category. It's true, there are enough photos for that. And Turtle Mound, you were there? What's it like? It's on my itinerary for the near future. Can one get a decent shot of the mound from the bottom or the top? Anyway, danke! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 15:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Image:Cascade Dam Thornapple River Fish StoryDSCN0090.JPG[edit]

Hi Werewombat! Per your notice. I've undone the speedy and nommed for regular deletion, here: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Cascade Dam Thornapple River Fish StoryDSCN0090.JPG... I'm not convinced this is a cut and dry FoP violation, there is more to the image than just the sculpture, I was careful to include enough in the pic when I took it. Let's discuss further there. PS - thanks for the recats on some of my other images. ++Lar: t/c 02:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Charles_F_Berg_Buidling_facade_detail_3_-_Portland_Oregon.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 may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Charles_F_Berg_Buidling_facade_detail_3_-_Portland_Oregon.jpg. This image 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).

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. -Nard the Bard 21:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Uploads from Poetas from en.wiki[edit]

Appear to all be copyvios, since the original license is cc-by-nc-sa. I won't bother copyring all the templates to your talk page, since that would probably be insulting to a regular contributor such as yourself. Nevertheless I have to mark them all for deletion. -Nard the Bard 00:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Well actually the user name on en.wiki appears to match the Picasa account name so I rescind this. But someone in the future may decide to ta them again. -Nard the Bard 00:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Categories Oregon[edit]

Hi, you were involved in the Category:National parks of Oregon. Can you please consolidate that with the preexisting categories: Category:Parks in Oregon, Category:National Monuments of Oregon, category:National parks of the United States by State. This branch of the category tree is inconsistent in itself and incompatible to other branches. TIA. --h-stt !? 08:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I answered at my page. Can we please keep this in one place now. greetings --h-stt !? 10:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:Charles_F_Berg_Buidling_facade_detail_3_-_Portland_Oregon.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:Charles_F_Berg_Buidling_facade_detail_3_-_Portland_Oregon.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:Charles_F_Berg_Buidling_facade_detail_3_-_Portland_Oregon.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

-Nard the Bard 22:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I initiated a deletion discussion on this image (see below), and tagged the image with {{FOP}}. —Werewombat (talk) 05:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Charles F Berg Buidling facade detail 3 - Portland Oregon.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Charles F Berg Buidling facade detail 3 - Portland Oregon.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 | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Werewombat (talk) 05:17, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Blobfish2.jpg[edit]

Hi, I happened to see your message on the page User talk:Polarlys about the deleted File:Blobfish2.jpg. If you look at the NOAA website, you can see that the NOAA itself credits this picture to an external source and specifies that the copyright on such pictures, which are not works of the the NOAA personel, is held by the external author. For more details about this particular picture, please see this page on the Australian museum website. Regards, -- Asclepias (talk) 22:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

(Re: Your question about the speedy deletion) Ah, that was something I forgot to mention. This same picture had already been deleted before. Being a clear case of copyvio, the speedy deletion was appropriate. However, exceptionally, there remains a short discussion page because a user started a deletion discussion, before he changed his mind and agreed to the speedy deletion. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Blobfish.jpg. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Durham–Jacobs House Portland.JPG[edit]

Hi, thanks for helping me out with the categories of my Portland NRHP pictures. You added the Category Houses on the National Register of Historic Places in Portland, Oregon to my picture Durham–Jacobs House Portland.JPG. I already had King's Hill Historic District as a category for it and this is actually a subcategory of Category:Houses on the National Register of Historic Places in Portland, Oregon. Do the pictures have to be in both categories? Moreover, shouldn't there be a subcategory for other historic districts like Alphabet Historic District? --Eaaumi (talk) 01:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess it doesn't have to be in both categories, and in fact the general rule on the Commons is that an image should not be in a category ("Category:Houses on the National Register of Historic Places in Portland, Oregon") if it's also in a subcategory of that category ("Category:King's Hill Historic District"). Personally, I make an exception to that general rule when a place is both (a) a contributing property within a NRHP-listed historic district, as well as (b) itself individually listed on the NRHP. In such a case, I recommend placing the image both in the category for the district and alongside the district in a higher-level category, like I did with Durham-Jacobs.
There is already a Category:Alphabet Historic District. While Alphabet does have a lot of residential properties in it, it also has large commercial areas and large numbers of apartment buildings, which is why I haven't been inclined to place it in the "Houses in..." subcategory in the past. The only other historic district in Portland that's almost exclusively residential in character is Ladd's Addition, which is already in the "Houses in..." subcategory.
It's late - let me know if I failed to make any coherent sense. —Werewombat (talk) 04:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply. I understand know now what "Houses in ..." means. That was a language problem. I didn't get that this only refers to residential properties. Thanks for helping me out all the time. I try to get better and understand everything I have to do to upload and categorize a picture properly! --Eaaumi (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, glad we connected. In English, especially American English, "house" as a standalone word refers to a residential dwelling, usually single-family and most commonly detached from other buildings. In many Commonwealth countries, but not usually the United States, "___ House" can also be used as the name of a large building (for example, Bush House and Portland House in London), but such buildings would not be referred to as "houses" as a generic group. But this second usage is becoming increasingly old-fashioned, in an example of the Americanization of global English. There are also many less-common usages of the word "house" to refer to different types of structures, but again such structures would not be referred to as "houses" as a generic group. And there are usages of "house" that don't have anything to do with buildings (legislative houses, royal houses, publishing houses, etc). I understand English is internationally known as a particularly difficult language. Is this an example of why? — Werewombat (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Misty Fjords[edit]

Please revert your edits in File:Mifj map.jpg and regarding Category:Misty Fiords National Monument as well as any you treated the same. The official name of the area is en:Misty Fjords National Monument since the 1980 en:Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act where in Sec 503 the name of the Monument is spelled Misty Fjords. The proclamation of 1978 became void by that. --h-stt !? 13:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC) PS: Please excuse the chaos in your page's history, it took me a while to get through the legislative history. --h-stt !? 13:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Damn. Somebody was watching. Now I have to explain how I made everything confused by not being adequately informed myself. (In other words, I've made my own share of chaos, so please don't worry about this talk page's history. It's fine.)
Let me also editorialize before I get into this that: I find the word "fiord" (with an "i") to be an ungainly, Anglo-Saxon bastardization of what is in fact a rather graceful Norwegian word. I don't like it and would do away with it if I could, in favor of "fjord" (with a "j") in all instances of English usage.
Now, what happened with my recent edits is that I began doing a bit of cleanup on the English Wikipedia article en:Misty Fiords National Monument. That article, which currently employs the "i" spelling, started out originally using the "j" spelling. It was converted to the "i" usage by another editor long before I ever looked at the article. I believed that spelling to be correct (if ugly) because the Forest Service consistently uses the "i" on its web sites and in all printed materials that I have seen. Since the Forest Service is the official custodian of the national monument and should darn well know (one would think), I just took that as the final word, and began standardizing links and cross-references in Wikipedia and Commons on the "i" spelling. Only after I'd gone a ways down that road did I actually look at the ANILCA statute and see that the legal usage is the "j". Ever since then, I've been kind of frozen with indecision over what to do with the article title on Wikipedia, and how to properly follow through and clarify what I've already done with linked articles/templates/categories/media on Wikipedia and the Commons. AGH! I'M SO CONFUSED!
You'll see at en:Talk:Misty Fiords National Monument#Name of the Monument is Misty Fjords since 1980 what I (as en:User:Ipoellet) painfully concluded about the Wikipedia article title. As for the Commons, the category name should probably follow whatever is concluded for the Wikipedia article. (Yes, the Commons is a different project and doesn't need to follow Wikipedia's lead. But in this case it seems reasonable to do so nevertheless.) If you end up renaming that article as you suggested, then I'll undo the half-change I've already done here. If the article doesn't get renamed, I'll finish carrying through the changes I've started. —Werewombat (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Of course Commons might decide to follow the lead of Wikipedia in the naming issue. But which Wikipedia? en? de? fa? I cant' even read the farsi version so it's not really helpful, but I am the main author of the German language article and certainly will not move that article to the obsolete name, no matter what the USFS does. Greetings --h-stt !? 15:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
You caught me out! Of course different Wikipedias could have different spellings, each according to its own style manual. I was wrong in thinking only in terms of the English Wikipedia: I probably was made careless by the fact that our subject is located in an English-speaking country, but that's not an excuse. I'm now thinking that between the statutory correctness of the "j" and the usage across all Wikipedias that the Commons should go with the "j". (Of course, we could also go with the Farsi since we now have full Unicode support....) —Werewombat (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Nice to see, that you did not take me too serious. Thanks for your quick reply and reaction, and your edit on en-WP. Have a nice week. --h-stt !? 13:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Image map[edit]

Not sure what's going on, but an image map you created at Category:National Register of Historic Places in Washington seems to be based on an image that (at least now) doesn't exist. Normally, I'd just delete a reference to a nonexistent image, but since you must have put a lot of work into this, I'm dropping you a note instead. - Jmabel ! talk 18:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Category:Lakers (ships)[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Lakers (ships) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Русский | +/−

-- Geo Swan (talk) 05:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Munson Valley image description[edit]

Hi. My edit to File:Drinking fountain in Munson Valley plaza.jpg was to improve categorization and accuracy of information, and to clean up some bot-generated garbage. I'm puzzled to have you allege my edit was not "serious" and "verged on vandalism". I welcome discussion, either here or on the image talk page if you prefer. Thanks. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 21:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)