User talk:Wsiegmund/Archive/Jul2008

Petasites frigidus‎

First of all, I am sorry for disembling that gallery. I think it is the only disembled gallery, but I cannot be certain about that. I was experimenting, and that "experiment" seemed to make the process too involved.

Second of all, thank you for reassembling it. "I was experimenting...." -- carol (talk) 04:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand. That happens to me, too. I try to self-revert when it happens, but sometime need help too. You are welcome. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't revert it because it looked nice and the failure of the idea was evident much later, like when I saw you had reverted the changes.... It did look nice at the time, heh. -- carol (talk) 04:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

It did look nice. I have to agree. Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

One of the commons TOL people has blocked me indefinately on English wikipedia. The wiki are all working together? -- carol (talk) 05:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, now it isn't User:JoJan here that blocked me there. That is some sad stuff when the version has to change that quickly. -- carol (talk) 06:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The enwiki log shows that en:User:EyeSerene blocked you and wrote an unusually detailed explanation.[1][2] It is apparent from the discussion that the block has broad support. Please try to take the (mostly constructive) advice that you have been offered. Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Aquilegia formosa flower.

review

•  Comment A common wildflower of western North America, this individual was photographed in a protected forest near Seattle, Washington. Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Meets all 6 criteria. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 12:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

--Mbz1 (talk) 02:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ An image you created has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you created 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:
Corallorhiza maculata, flower.

review

•  InfoSpotted Coralroot is an uncommon w:myco-heterotrophic orchid of forests near the Pacific coast of North America. This individual was photographed in a protected forest near Seattle, Washington. Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment It is an interesting and valuable photo of the flowers of this species. With the scope stated I would actually expect a photo of the whole plant. I therefore suggest to narrow the scope to "Corallorhiza maculata, Flower". You have other photos in the series which show more of the plant. Unfortunately none of them seem to show the whole plant. If you had that you could nominate the best of those within Corallorhiza maculata. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Corallorhiza maculata to Corallorhiza maculata, flower --Walter Siegmund (talk) 01:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

,

•  Support With adjusted scope. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support With scope of the plant's flower I can support too. --|EPO| ^da: 15:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support =>

Promotion. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

--Mbz1 (talk) 02:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

TOL related threads on COM:VP

Hi Wsiegmund, Did you notice that there are quite a few TOL related threads open on COM:VP? -- Slaunger (talk) 06:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Slaunger; I've been travelling and haven't had an opportunity to comment. Thank you for reminding me of the discussion. Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Discussion on Kilom691's talk

Hello, I am just commenting to keep you informed of the situation. I went ahead and fixed all the images, and brushed up any copyediting errors that had been left there when I uploaded them. I also linked them to galleries of each species and added categories where appropriate. I think this is satisfactory. If you would like to look at the images and see anything I can do to the image summary to improve them, please do so. All of the images should be linked through here. --Kugamazog (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry I did not follow through on this. It wasn't obvious to me how to identify the intersection of Kilom691's edits with your uploads; how did you manage that, if you don't mind me inquiring? If you aren't aware of the discussion at Commons_talk:Categories_vs_Galleries, you may wish to review it and comment. I don't remember seeing comments from either you or Kilom691. My opinion is that only species categories should be added to images of biota that are classified to species and that are on gallery pages. To do otherwise needlessly clutters higher taxon categories. I'm not sure that view will prevail, however. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I made a gallery of all the images I have taken on the English wiki (here) and just copied the code over to wiki commons. Since I set it up to link the species name to the page (so it would show up as red if I hadn't created the page yet). So, I just created a page per species over here as well and added the Category of the Family to the gallery page. I also interlinked it back to the English wiki page. While doing this, I just checked the image info and corrected any errors. I only have access to the insect collection, I don't know Subfamily, tribe, etc. otherwise I would have placed them in that category. I don't have too much spare time, unfortunately, so my main goal is to take the images, and upload them where other people can easily access them. Since there are so few pictures of insect species, I figured this to be the best use of time. I try my best to stay out of the politics of wikis as much as possible, so whatever is the best solution, I will try to conform to that. I tried changing the English wiki page on en:Stag beetle to Lucanidae and my GOSH that created so much drama within my talk, the page talk, and each others talk, so I am on the steadfastly on the sidelines. If there is anything you can see I should do to make things better, I will try me best :)--Kugamazog (talk) 20:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that. I've been taking pictures of insects as I see them in the wild, but except for some of the families of Lepidoptera, I have identified few. I'm inclined to see them as clutter without IDs, so I've not been uploading them for the most part. Image:Salix sitchensis 39207.JPG and Image:Salix sitchensis 39230.JPG are a couple of exceptions. I will try to ID them when I have more time.

It looks to me like you may not have discovered interwiki links. It took me months to find them. I added one to your page so you can see how it works; please revert my edit if you don't want it.[3] It adds a link that reads "In Wikipedia: English" somewhere on the page when it is interpreted. Selecting "English" links to a page on enwiki.

Yes, it seems that drama on Wikipedia is part of the package. It would be nice if people would just do their work and try to get along. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 03:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

TX

[4] --Beentree (talk) 18:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)