User talk:Wsiegmund/Archive/2009/11

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


You are quite right that I am not willing to waste time putting together diffs. I am confident that what I wrote in that edit represents the truth, and supplied that information for the benefit of Docu (who may not understand what he is up against), and not for the benefit of you, Lar, MGA73, or Túrelio.

Truthfully I was disgusted to find Lar present as an administrator on Commons, and will (as a result) call off my work on Knots in traditional art, the image gallery I have been working on. Since the image gallery has not yet arrived at being even close to a half-finished sketch of what I intended, I think it would be best to delete it. How would I get that done? Nothing would be lost by deleting it, and what is not now included in Category:Knots in art and decoration [1], could be moved there. Thanks. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 16:14, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

You will find information on deleting galleries at Commons:Deletion policy. I don't work on knots, but it appears to be good work and I'd be surprised at a successful deletion nomination. You may wish to wait for a few days and see how you feel before initiating what may be a pointless deletion request. If you do leave Commons, another editor may continue your work some day hence. The result may not be what you intended, but will benefit from your efforts. Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
I do not see anything there about galleries, only about images. It is the gallery Knots in traditional art that I would like to have deleted, not any of the images in it. Perhaps it would be called more a redirect, or merge with Category:Knots in art and decoration [2]. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
The second line of Commons:Deletion policy says, "For simplicity, all images, sound files, videos, source files and other files are referred to as "files", and all article pages, categories, templates, talk and other pages are referred to as "pages"." It may be ambiguous, but article pages is the same as gallery pages, I think. Anyhow, this is the process that is used for gallery pages. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Thornton Lakes 25929.JPG
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.


File:Variation_in_body_fat_12577.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)‎ | +/−

Killiondude (talk) 06:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

File:La Conner 32298.JPG

In the description of File:La Conner 32298.JPG, I'm pretty certain that you are wrong about the building you identify as the United Methodist Church, unless that is a former function of the building (which was certainly at some time a church of some sort). As you can see in File:La Conner, WA - La Conner Civic Garden Club 02.jpg, the building is now the La Conner Civic Garden Club. - Jmabel ! talk 06:14, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Here's what the United Methodist Church looks like. It's on the other side of Second Street, and is not visible in your photo. - Jmabel ! talk 06:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you.[3] I enjoyed looking at your pictures of these buildings. Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I think in a way my favorite is File:La Conner, WA - Methodist church perspective corrected.jpg. I've been playing with what Hugin can do, besides the obvious. - Jmabel ! talk 03:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Very cool. Thank you. I've been wondering about high dynamic range; have you tried that feature, e.g., on snow or glaciers? Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
No. Of course, it's not going to give you anything better than what's in the input photos, but it is probably a very useful feature for (for example) a 360° pano where part of it shoots straight into the sun. I should probably play with that sometime. Of course, being in the maritime Pacific Northwest, I probably won't see a high dynamic range until spring. - Jmabel ! talk 05:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Mount Rainier 5839.JPG
I was thinking of stacking images framed identically, taken with exposure bracketing. This image of Mount Rainier may have benefited such an approach in that the shadowed forest in the lower left contains little detail. It seems that Hugin may do this.[4] It is a 90 minute drive from Seattle to the sun and snow of Ellensburg, if you require some dynamic range before spring. Walter Siegmund (talk) 06:09, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Hmm. Never tried that with Hugin. I've done things like that with GIMP. The problem with Hugin for that is that it will scale down the input images, so you won't get the resolution you started with. - Jmabel ! talk 21:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Formica obscuripes

You're right. I was changing some galleries that had no other info other than one or two images, and I ended up changing that one without moving the content to the category. That said, if you look at the category you can see that there are now more images for that species. Now that there are plenty of images for many species of ants, several categories were created at the species level and thus make the corresponding galleries unnecessary, IMO (and harder to maintain). I know, however, that this categories vs. galleries issue has been thoroughly discussed, so I won't insist in changing this particular page (even though I believe it would be the best option in this case). Cheers, Waldir talk 09:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

As you say, there is nothing new to be said on this topic. Your points and and the counter arguments have been made before. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Shustov (again)

I'm a bit more used to the speed of admin responses on the noticeboards at enwiki, so I don't know what sort of pace or process to expect user conduct issues here on Commons. I'm also not always clear on where to go to get certain problems fixed. Since you seem to be the only Commons admin who's taken an interest in this situation (are you sorry you got involved yet?) I'm going to ask you for guidance here.

First off, what's the process for seeking file renaming? How should I go about having the dozen or so "UPSTREAM FITNESS" files renamed to something a bit less spammy?

Second, what's my best bet for getting Shustov to stop campaigning against me on Commons — or at least to confine himself to appropriate venues? It's a waste of my time, his time, and the time of innocent bystanders. He's even edit warring to restore his cross-posted "mouton" message on my statement in my userspace: [5]. I get that the boards on Commons have less traffic than their equivalents on enwiki, but I'm afraid that the relatively minimal outside response Shustov's complaints are drawing is encouraging him to post more often and more widely. TenOfAllTrades (talk) 20:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Commons tends to have only a handful of really active administrators, and they don't seem to be responding this week. This is not the sort of thing I normally deal with, so my response has been tentative, hampered by lack of time and slowed by the desire to give my colleagues time to comment. I'm sorry, but I am trying to help. To correct the name of a file, please use {{Rename}} (Commons:File renaming). That doesn't actually rename the file, but it speeds up the process. It appears that Commons:File_renaming#What_files_should_be_renamed.3F aim #2 is the most applicable. We don't seem to have a spam or promotional justification. A link to the AN/V discussion may suffice.
I reverted his edit to your userspace and asked him again to confine his posts on this matter to AN/V. We don't have a 3RR guideline here but we don't tolerate edit warring. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
As you, probably, noticed, I made an attempt to rename the File:UPSTREAM FITNESS.jpg but do not see any result as so far. Do you know why? Thanks, Shustov (talk) 07:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Shustov redux

Could you have a word with Shustov, or perhaps issue a short block? He seems to be fixated on the idea that he needs to find some way to call me (and any other editor who might revert his inappropriate edits) a vandal. A couple of days ago, he committed to stop the childish namecalling, and to start cleaning up his image contributions: [6]. I was hoping that was the end of it, and that maybe he was turning a corner. Today's edit rather unfortunately puts the kibosh on that notion. He also seems to have slid back on his agreement to rename the files to something more suitable: [7]. At this point, I don't think anything but a block is likely to convince him that admins here actually mean what they've said about personal attacks. TenOfAllTrades (talk) 18:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I worry that this may end in the "global blacklisting" that Finn Rindahl mentioned. When an adverse outcome appears likely, I often wonder if another more skillful administrator might be able to find a better solution. Walter Siegmund (talk) 07:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)