Discussion in VIC
Hello Walter Siegmund.
- regarding the question of scopes of drawings in VIC, I understand that you think my oppositions are "unfair". I'm sorry for that, it was not my intention to be unfair. I oppose, because I think the scope is not good in these cases. Many reviewers do oppose because of a disagreement about the scope, that is only what I do here. I like these drawings very much, then I think they deserve a "drawing" subscope. Furthermore I agree with Archaeo's arguments, and I think that we do not need a change of the rules, but debates and kind discussions, nomination after nominations, because a definition of the idea of "scope" is impossible. I've read the discussion page, and I've nothing to add for now.
- Kind regards from Paris --Jebulon (talk) 23:07, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Bonjour Jebulon; I apologize. I thought you were opposing because you didn't like the current rules. It is fine to oppose because you think the scope is too narrow or too broad. But, "there will be conflict between the drawings and photographs" (Archaeodontosaurus' words) is not listed as a criterion. I'm missing something because I don't see that it is important. If a photograph comes along later, it can be nominated either in mainscope or subscope "photograph". If a drawing in mainscope is demoted, that drawing can be nominated in subscope "drawings/artwork". Myrabella seems to think the same. Meilleurs vœux, Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:52, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Wsiegmund. All is fine, it is only a polite debate. I'll read this evening (in France) the next part of the VI discussion and I'm very interested by the evolution. Btw : the words "Meilleurs vœux" are (almost) never used in this case in french. Only for the new year (and sometimes birthday) wishes !!
- Amicalement, depuis Paris sous le soleil, --Jebulon (talk) 16:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted★
Congratulations! Rubus spectabilis 1564.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.
Commons protected edit requests
Thanks for the apology, but nothing at all to worry about! To be honest, it made me do a double take when I saw the upload, as the squiggle under the C was hidden by an underline. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
- You are welcome. You have a nice userpage. Thank you for the picture of the Geneva Consulate building. May I invite you to join our geocoding group? Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion
You protect justifiably this file but did not revert to the version before the start of the edit waring. I believe that the version from 21:16, 13 November 2009, the last version of User:Kwamikagami, is the right one. The last version is really uncorrect. Geagea (talk) 02:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'm happy to unprotect the file and/or revert to another version. Please discuss this matter calmly with the other editors at File_talk:Map_of_Europe_(political).png and gain a consensus for that version. I will make the change. Thank you, --Walter Siegmund (talk) 06:50, 15 April 2011 (UTC)