User talk:Zscout370/Archive 5

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, 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.

Contents

Mistake correction

Hello Zscout, can you redo a flag on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Supposed_Serbian_Empire_flag.svg since a tiny detail is missing-part of the feather if you cant could you at least tell me where i can find a person who can? Thanks

Help

I am having problems with the User:Anonmoos, who has taken it upon himself to interfere with the Arms of the province of Prince Edward island. He feels that the Blazon version should be used, and is insisting that I upload my version under another name. I have explained to him that A:the file in question was under an improper name, that B: I requested it's rename to "Arms of Prince Edward Island" in action to consolidate the names of the Arms of all the Canadian Provinces, and C: that in that act, I have uploaded the prover versions. He refuses to upload the blazon himself with that in it's name, and is now attacking me claiming I am being disruptive, when I have recieved no complaints from anyone else. He will not leave the file alone, and will not accept my explaination that a Government has the right to decide how it's Arms are too look, and if he wants the Blazon on here, he needs to upload it with that title, as the proper file name "Arms of" belong to the official version. Please request that he cease in this course of action. Fry1989 (talk) 02:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears for now, that Anonmoos has stopped reverting, after I told him I will contact the original uploader for his say. I'll contact you if this flares up again, as that user seems to have a problem with me, since we've "disagreed before". Thanks for your time. Fry1989 (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
For the blazon, I am using http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/wordmark.pdf. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:01, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Just for reference and to work off of, on the Discussion page of the file itself, I have put up a link to the website of the Provincial Government, with it's depiction of the Full Coat of Arms of the Province. Fry1989 (talk) 03:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Just so there's not a future problem when I upload the shield of New Brunswick (which I have requested being made), could you change back the name of this file to it's original name? That way I can upload the new shield with the name "Arms of New Brunswick" without doing it on-top of the blazon version by Ssire. I guess I should have done that in the first place, and this problem we're resolving now wouldn't have happened. But atleast this way I can prevent it from continuing in the future. Thanks Fry1989 (talk) 21:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Armoiries république française.svg

Hi, could you upload File:Armoiries république française-without unused definitions.svg on top of this file, and then delete the former? I just cleaned up the unused definitions. Thanks. –Tryphon 12:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

And also add {{validSVG}} to the description page, please. –Tryphon 12:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Done and done. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:30, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Don't forget to delete the now duplicate File:Armoiries république française-without unused definitions.svg. –Tryphon 18:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I got a problem. I was reviewing some of my files, and some of my versions of the Southern Cross have a very nasty message about user:Tiptoety attached to them below the licensing section, and I can't figure out how to remove it. I've looked at their histories, and it doesn't so anybody altering these files besides myself, so IDK how they got put on there, or who did it but I want them removed. The files in question are File:Southern Cross (Jaguaripe).svg, File:Southern Cross (Mercosur).svg, File:Southern Cross (New Zealand).svg, File:Southern Cross (Papua New Guinea).svg and File:Southern Cross (Tierra del Fuego).svg. Thanks for any help. Fry1989 (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

A vandal got access to templates and put the messages there. They were removed, hidden and the user blocked. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
I have discussions with you on my user talk page. Tân (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Flag of BiH

Hi can you change the colors of the flag of BiH. The correct colors are
PANTONE Reflex Blue CVC (#004996)

.

and PANTONE 116 CVC (#FFD500).

.

These colors are taken from a sketch wich appears if you download the .ai-file from http://www.parlament.ba/sadrzaj/1/0/25.html --DzWiki (talk) 19:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The colors I picked were first sent out from the 1990's when the flag was changed. I can try and ask for the right colors again, since I tried to download images from that site before and got strange results. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 08:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
For Pantone shades, we use http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx. Regardless, new file uploaded. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:32, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Arms of Ghana

I have read what you said about the Arms I uploaded on it's deletion discussion. I just want clarification. If I can get an independently made version of the Arms (I have a friend I can request that of), and it's licensed properly, that would be allowed on Commons? I'm just making sure because we need a correct version of the Arms, and using the ones provided by Liptak are simply unacceptable due to their many errors. Fry1989 (talk) 22:40, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

According to the copyright law of Ghana, legal texts are not copyrighted. So take the information that is given on the pages I linked in the deletion discussion, redraw the arms and that should do it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Alrighty, thanks. Fry1989 (talk) 19:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Canada (color)

Hi there,

With as much work as you do on images around Commons, I'm sure this has come up before and I'm sure you're equally sick of hearing it, so I first do apologize in advance. However, I feel I must voice a small note of concern at the shade of red (RGB 255-0-0) used for File:Flag of Canada.svg.

While it may indeed approximately match the printed shade, when displaying on a computer screen, it looks excessively bright compared to both the actual shade of the flag as well as the shade of red used on historical flags of Canada.

The present Canadian Heritage page on the design of the flag has a construction sheet which uses hexadecimal #ff0033 for the flag, which seems more accurate when compared to the actual flag colors and the other historical examples. It should also not drastically affect the printed color of the flag using conventional printing methods (which anyone printing the flag from Wikimedia would use).

Just thought I'd bring it up for your possible consideration, and thank you for your continued dedication to improving images here and on Wikipedia. Mnmazur (talk)

P.S. The archive bot seemed to crash your talk page just as I was trying to post :( Mnmazur (talk)
http://www.canadianheritage.gc.ca/progs/cpsc-ccsp/sc-cs/df11-eng.cfm says "When printing in four colour process, the proper mixture is 100% yellow and 100% magenta." and when putting it in the four color process, the result comes out to 255-0-0. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Dealing with Liptak

IDK if he's bitter or insane, but his constant accusations of my being a thief, and a copyright violator need to stop now. I've just dealt with his incessant pestering and accusing on my English Wikipedia page, despite my repeated requests for him to leave me alone, and he only stopped after I reported him to an Admin. However, he hasn't stopped there, As per this page(since crossed out), AND this page(which he has yet to cross out, or appologize for), he has continued to accuse me even on Commons. I am therefore requesting you speak with him and tell him to stop his assault upon me. I'm sick of his childish obsession with revenge just because I nominated his arms for deletion. Thank you for your assistance. Fry1989 (talk) 22:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_South_Africa.svg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Flag_of_South_Africa.svg 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Jappalang (talk) 03:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:PD-South-Africa-exempt solves this debate. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:46, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Photograph removal from Peter Deriashnyj article

On 20th May 2010 you removed two photographs from the above mentioned article on the basis that there was no permission given.

I sent permission to Wikipedia in April 2010. I still have he emails in my archives and can re-send them if required.

Can you arrange to put those photographs back please. (Kharkiv kobzar (talk) 11:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC))

Give me the OTRS ticket number of the emails please. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 11:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Arms of Prince Edward Island.svg

You should change the name and the creation of the arms of IPE, since they have nothing to do with the one created by zorlot in 2009. or best, create a new file with a new name. --Fralambert (talk) 20:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Did the first option. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Brazilian symbols

Scout, thanks for your help on those files. I was able to find the offical file of the Brazilian coat of arms and have already uploaded it. I did a new version of the presidential flag with the very same coat of arms, and would like to upload it.

Since this is the official version, I really consider any change on it based on personal understandings a flagrant new research and POV. Thanks. Tonyjeff (talk) 16:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

About the blue used in the national coat of arms (law N.º 5.700, 2nd Attachment)
I - o escudo redondo será constituído em campo azul-celeste, contendo cinco estrelas de prata, dispostas na forma da constelação Cruzeiro do sul, com a bordadura do campo perfilada de ouro, carregada de estrelas de prata em número igual ao das estrelas existentes na Bandeira Nacional; (…)
I - the round shield is going to be constituted of a sky-blue camp (…)

Note that "sky-blue" ("dodger blue") is very different from "blue" (which is darker and has a red shade), which is the one the other user is trying to impose. Note, also, that the law recognises that the shade of blue used by the arms is different from the one used by the flag (I do not know the reason; I only know that it has been like this since the beggining of the Republic). Thanks. Tonyjeff (talk) 17:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, because when I looked at the actual photographs of the Presidential flag and with what we have, the shades are just not matching. I think we should try to use the shades of the national flag with the presidential flag, but I have no evidence to state that except for photos. But glad to help you on the symbols. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Scout, thank you very much for your understanding. Please, take a look at file File:Flag Vice-President of Brazil.svg. I have already shown that the coat of arms is the official one (the only detail changed in this file), but user Fry insists on edit warring.

Also, about the green shade of the presidential flag, the point is that: even the Brazilian national flag is presenting a different shade (not only of the green, by the way). Compare a vector file with a picture is hard because there are many external factors. The proposal is exactly that: using the green shade of the vector file of the national flag, the only "official" color reference that we have.

I really ask your help because there is no condition of dialogue with user Fry. He uploaded a new file not bothering with consensus, argued that it is my duty to prove anything and simply cannot accept another point of view. Anyway, thank you again. Tonyjeff (talk) 20:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, just look another edition war caused by Fry. The editor has a long background of disrupting attitude and imposing point of view. Tonyjeff (talk) 22:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I have dealt with Fry in a lot of edit wars about symbols. This is not the first editor I dealt with before over the edit wars of symbols, but the premice is still the same. We need official laws about the flags. Seems like you deal with Brazil more than any other country (I am just taking a guess here), can you find for me any Pantone details for the coat of arms? That is the biggest thing I notice is the problem. If we can find that, we can fix the images from there. About the Vietnamese arms, I was also trying to solve that too between the 3D and non-3D star. Hell, there was issues about other coat of arms too. I do agree this needs to stop. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Scout, thank you very much again for your attention. I do not want to disturb you too much with this issue, so please just say when you get tired.
About the color
Yes, there is no defined Pantone by law, just that the coat of arms must use "sky-blue". Whatever it means, certainly cannot be the blue seen at Fry's photographies, seeing that the shade of blue is much more reddish.
Since we do not have a specified Pantone, the best source is the official files available. Based on them, you may notice that the shades of the photos are very different.
About the pictures
Also, note that, even on Fry's pictures, the shade of green is the very same for the Presidential flag and for the National flag. This is the very same logic defended by me. However, since we do not have an official source for this Pantone also, I am assuming the green of the national flag adopted for its official file available.
Again, we cannot compare the color of a vector file with the color of a tissue. Also, we cannot tell that the person responsible for the manufacturing of those flags photographed has respected the official shades.
Just to demonstrate what I am saying, just compare Fry's pictures 1 and 3. Note that the presidential flag on photo 3 is without the "yellow shining" behind the coat of arms, what is an absurd. Where is it written that on the presidential flag one may alter the coat of arms (its colors and shape)? It was cleary manufactured with no respect. No surprise: such disrespect is really common in Brazilian "heraldry" and "vexilology" (with quotation marks, since we cannot consider seriously that there's anything similar to that).
About the law
Probably, there is no law disposing about the presidential flag other than its use. Considering the organization of the Brazilian bureaucracy, I am really admired for finding laws in such detail for the national flag and arms. I have contacted the Brazilian chancelary, but I have little hopes. We must assume that, as a private symbol of the head of state, there is no law or available file for it. In fact, I also doubt that there is any law for another private State symbol: the presidential ribbon.
Summing up
The only reliable sources that we have are the vector files available at the government's site. I am not creating anything. In fact, I would be happy to find the official file of the presidential flag. Certainly it is not available, since there is no sense to dispose it for the general public officially.
Just take a look at the discussion page of the national flag. User Täjder understood my points and accepted the official file, even pointing some little mistakes on it. And I did not change it before his approval. This is the right attitude in a colaborative project.
Just again, thank you. Tonyjeff (talk) 18:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
I am not going to ask you to stop. I am going to do some research first. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Scout; I am going to send an e-mail to Inmetro; anyway, I do not know how much it must be considered as an official source, anyway. I call you when I have it. Cheers. Tonyjeff (talk) 22:14, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I am looking at various other sources too and see what I can come up with. Some of the government agencies are using logos with the Brazilian flag and some of the Pantone colors are the same. However, some are not so it is just making a major guess right now. I am going to check a few other things too. However, there is one request I have. Please just call me Zach :) User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 08:06, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Answer from INMETRO

Gostaria de saber quais são as cores oficiais da bandeira do Brasil. Vocês teriam as tonalidades em CMYK e em RGB? Também, vocês teriam as cores oficiais do brasão da República do Brasil? Obrigado.

Sugerimos verificar a Lei Federal 5.700 de 01/09/1971, que dispõe sobre a forma e a apresentação dos símbolos nacionais, e dá outras providências. O Inmetro não regulamenta a Bandeira Nacional, os símbolos nacionais estão sob a responsabilidade do Ministério do Exército.

I'd like to know which are the official colors of the Brazilian national flag. Would you have the shades in CMYK and in RGB? Also, would you have the official colors of the Brazilian coat of arms? Thanks.

We suggest you to check the Federal Law 5700, of 01/09/1971, which regulates the presentation of the national symbols, and gives other parameters. Inmetro does not disposes about the national flag; the national symbols are responsability of the Ministry of Army.

Seeing that the referred law does not state anything about the shades, I'm going to reach the Ministry. I may send a copy of the e-mail to you. Regards; Tonyjeff (talk) 14:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Please send me a copy. I also tried the Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas but they have nothing either. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Brazil

I made a new comment in the discussion at File_talk:Flag_of_Brazil.svg#Upload_of_new_version, and as you are involved in it I'm notifying you in case you don't watch that page. TigerTjäder (talk) 13:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Compliment

I really like the image which is the flag of Singapore and it's wonderful. Continue your hard work. :) LunaHunting (talk) 09:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Now only if the NHB sends me a construction sheet. :) User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Coat of Arms of the Russian Federation.svg

Hi Zscout, how are you? I'm sorry for bothering you with this coat of arms, but I think you're a fan of the matter. The issue concerns the design of the knight in the inner coat of arms: why it is preferred this version instead of this one (please, don't mind the rest of the image)? I can remember that Pianist didn't like at all the knight, but I think the second one resembles closer those at http://flag.kremlin.ru/gerb/. What do you think about? Cheers, F l a n k e r (talk) 09:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

He also wants the image to have a border, but other users do not agree with it. However, I will make some changes soon as I got new software for making images. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 09:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
OK. --F l a n k e r (talk) 11:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
From looking at both images now, the knight still really looks the same. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

serbia flag

hi i wanted to ask you if you could make state flag of serbia with the new coat of arms on it??? i have seen that you have made civil flag already

I been working on the state flag, but I am just not sure if I will be able to complete it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

OK i hope you complete the state flag soon,i could give you some help http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Serbia_updated.svg try this!

Thanks for all the help, Zachary! It looks great on the wiki now :) - Alison 03:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Awesome :) User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

HI AGAIN! want to ask you if you could make this flag:http://codegeass.wikia.com/wiki/File:Britannian_flag.svg the borders are not defined completely but i think you will manage it you could post it up on code geass wikipedia page under holy brittannian empire section :)and thanx!

I remember doing the Black Knights flag some time ago for another site. However, I do not think I will be able to finish that design at the moment. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

OK i can wait for you to finish it :D

Flag of Serbia

I know you have a source for the colours of the new version of the flag, but I'm not sure they're right. The flag is practically pink now, and I've never seen a pink flag of Serbia before. Do you plan on continuing research on the colours in the future? Fry1989 (talk) 01:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

192, 280 and 192 (coated) are the new official colors. My source is "О УТВРЂИВАЊУ ИЗВОРНИКА ВЕЛИКОГ И МАЛОГ ГРБА, ИЗВОРНИКА ЗАСТАВЕ И НОТНОГ ЗАПИСА ХИМНЕ РЕПУБЛИКЕ СРБИЈЕ (110-8204/2010)." The colors are like that because of what is required and used the main Pantone site. The colors are final. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Flag Of Loussiana

Hey I have no idea how to edit .svg files, but the Secretary of State of Louisiana has high resolution graphics of the New Seal and Flag on his website, could you update them? http://www.sos.louisiana.gov/tabid/1015/Default.aspx --Thegunkid (talk) 01:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Probably not. The state will not send vector files either because they refuse for the files to be modified. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hello! If you can convert these file (File:Флаг Российско-Американской торговой компании (1806 год).JPG) to SVG format. --Kolchak1923 (talk) 00:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion closure.

Can you please close the deletion nomination on the Arms of Greece, it's invalid. The user who nominated it doesn't want it deleted, what he's asking is that the file be reverted to a previous state, with green leaves. Philly boy92, who uploaded the new all blue version has given plenty of proof that the official emblem is as he uploaded, and I have uploaded the verion with green leaves seperately as "File:Coat of arms of Greece (colour).svg". I also explained to Sv1xv the difference between reverting, and nomination for deletion, and that had his nomination gone through, the whole file would be removed from Commons all together, and that nobody, including himself, wants that. Thank you Fry1989 (talk) 20:39, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Template:Attr-Tartu

Hi. The validity of Template:Attr-Tartu (discussion) has recently come under dispute. I'm contacting you since the creator of the template, User:HendrixEesti, seems to be inactive for 2 years now. You deemed the license acceptable ~3 years ago after a permission was sent to OTRS (archived discussion). Could you help in clarifying the situation? —Quibik (talk) 14:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

OTRS ticket 2008032110005668. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! —Quibik (talk) 16:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Welcome. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:59, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleting a File

Hello. I don't know if I can (or how to if I really could), but can you delete this file? It is a screenshot of a film, which of course could not be free for use. Thank you. Novice7 (talk) 13:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Serbia

Wow, sorry, seems that I haven't paid enough attention to the file history. Thanks for the information, though. odder (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hi. Can You tell why does black rectangle appear here and here? -- Bojan  Talk  12:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I will be able to fix it in a few hours. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 13:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
It got solved. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hello! If you can convert these file (File:Флаг Российско-Американской торговой компании (1806 год).JPG) to SVG format. --Kolchak1923 (talk) 21:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure right now. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Presidential flag (again)

Hi, Zscout. After he had abandoned the discussion for a while, user Fry is trying to impose his point of view again.

Since you blocked the file against new uploads, he is removing its categories and misusing the tag "superseded", in order to promote his version of the flag.

Not just that, but he is changing the files in some articles of WP:EN, what can be considered "self promotion".

I really cannot understand why someone prefers to destroy the history of a file just to validate his own version of it. Tonyjeff (talk) 01:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

What country is this? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:01, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Ah, Brazil. Hmm...I might have some ideas, but give me a few days. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

[conflict of editions]

Sorry, this one. And he is also removing the warning tag from his discussion page, what is another disruptive attitude. I really think we had enough of edition war in that file. Tonyjeff (talk) 02:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Email me everything you have about the Brazilian flag at zscout370 at hotmail dot com. A lot of my flag materials are at home right now so I am not able to compare notes. Also, I would suggest for a Brazilian flag out of cloth, but that will be expensive. I just want this debate about this flag (and other flags regarding colors) to be stopped once and for all. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
It's a matter of opinion, and calling me a vandal over it is rediculous. I might add that Tonyjeff still has never given any proof for his version, whereas I have. Also, regarding my page. Tonyjeff is not an admin, so stop warning me, and also, don't undo MY edits on my page, I have a right to remove things from it after I've read them, there's no rules saying I have to keep your harassment and acusement on my page for any set time. Fry1989 (talk) 02:10, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Fry, however, I am one. I suggest for the both of you to have a cool off period. Though, while you are not a vandal, there are a lot of times you cause disputes and edit wars Fry. I suggest to lay low for a while and figure the issue about the flag colors out one at a time. If you and I can do it for the DPRK, then there are others we can do it for. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, that's fair. Fry1989 (talk) 02:20, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Now that we are on this subject, Flickr has some photos of the presidential flag. http://www.flickr.com/photos/governodetransicao/5263391097/ if you notice, both the national flag and the presidential flag have the same shades. While this image points to a darker shade, I have not found any official colors for the flag. I found official colors for government workmarks that use the national flag, but doesn't work. A website released numbers for Pantone, but the website has been long gone. So here is the thing; if we find out for one, we know what the other is. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Excellent, another source corroborating my colours, along with the 5 I have on the Presidential Standard's discussion page. Fry1989 (talk) 02:39, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I was think different fabrics give a different shade, so the main thing I am getting at is if we know the national flag colors, we know the presidential flag colors. Once I get better, I will try and fix up both images. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Scout:

  1. A cooling period is excellent, considering no one will vandalize (=removing categories and imposing tags) the original file. I really cannot understand how a person may do what he is doing here and receive not even a warning (except from another user).
  2. I have already stated that: these pictures shows different shades for the national flag and blazon, comparing them to the official SVG files. There is no other file or law to get the CMYK shades. So, for the SVG file of the presidential flag, these two SVG files are the best source.
  3. No one here can explain why the national flag at the picture has different shades from the official file. Seeing that, we have two possible valid sources for the shades, with one difference: one source is a SVG, CMYK, official file, which demands no interpration of its shades.
    1. if we know the national flag colors, we know the presidential flag colors Exactly what I am saying. And we know it. In CMYK, what is even better. Also, we know the shades of the blazon, also in CMYK.
  4. These flags photographed are different one from another. The lack of gold splendor at one of them reveals how poor it may be.
  5. There was a discussion opened, abandoned by the other part. Why it is preferable to remove information instead of discussing? Maybe because there is no other arguments.
Tonyjeff (talk) 03:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Tonyjeff is still ignoring something. I have sources to match my claims. All he has is the national flag and arms, and the assumption that things have to match(MUST match, he's so adamant). He has no source for the presidential flag itself, nor any photos that disagree with mine. Fry1989 (talk) 03:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Nope, I am not ignoring. In fact, I have demonstrated how "precise" your pictures may be, and also how they may differ from a SVG file (like the national flag photographed and its vector version). I am just agreeing with Scout: if we know the national flag colors, we know the presidential flag colors. For a produced flag, the pictures may be some refence, but for an SVG file, another SVG files suits well with Scout's recommendation.
The fact is: a picture is a picture. An SVG is an SVG.
Who tends to ignore something is Fry: ignore the pledges from another user to stop vandalizing. Tonyjeff (talk) 04:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Scout, just keep in your mind this: IF we had listened to user Fry, the national blazon, based on his pictures, would be this (I'm leaving that as so until I can find a deffinative source). However, with a little effort, I was able to show that it was completely wrong. He is still using the same argument to justify another file, and accusing me to be "adamant".
IF his version of the national blazon was kept, could you imagine the damages of it? How many people, specially Brazilians, would take it as truth? Can you notice the responsibility of it? Tonyjeff (talk) 04:11, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Again, there's that accusation, a vandal I am not. You want a cool-down period, stop calling names. I've not called you anything, though I could have just as easily, considering you are trying to force your opinion over me just as much as you may think I am to you. Oh, and damages??? Please. You throw that around like I'm actually harming people, or misinforming them, or like if I was saying something was purple when it was really pink. This is an arguement over stroke borders and shades of green and yellow and blue. You're hyperbole is not desired nor needed in this dispute. Fry1989 (talk) 04:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, you called me names, like silly, like adamant, like "redeculous" as well as telling me to piss off. And I indeed consider you a vandal for something you do not even care to apologize yourself: removing categories and imposing superseded tags. If it is not vandalism, than what? You are not being called a vandal over difference of opinion.
And yes, I am saying that you do not measure the consequences of your acts, you do not care if something is right or wrong, just if it suits your point of view. Yes, people may take Wikipedia and its files as reference so we must think well what we are doing here. You almost promoted a misinformation here, what about others? Actually you said something was dark-blue when it was sky-blue. You were eager to change the shades of the blazon, it is even written at the history of the file.
I am cooling down since December, and when I think we are having a civilized dispute, what I notice? Your disruptive actions. Do you want me to cool down? Stop saying that I have no arguments and that I ignore yours. Your provocations are not desired nor needed in this dispute. Tonyjeff (talk) 04:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Scout, every message I've written to you was replied with provocations by this bad user, who is not able to show no new arguments. From now on, I am going to ignore his statements. No dialogue is possible between us. Tonyjeff (talk) 04:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, you seem ot have an issue of taking things too personal. Saying you're adamant, means that you're as strong in your opinion as I am in mine. Saying that you're calling me a self-promotionalist" is rediculous, is not calling you personally rediculous, it's saying your accusation is rediculous. The same with saying what you accuse of me is "silly". Telling you to piss off was wrong, but it wqasn't a personal attack. I have not called you names, I have not, except for a few oversteps, been so rude. Again, you call me names, this time, a "bad user". If anybody here is in the wrong, it is you, constantly accusing me of and calling me things, without any proof. You wanna talk about personal opinion, you are overstating yours about me. As I said, I try and use proof whenever I edit files, pictures, websites, diagrams, that does NOT fit within "my personal opinion", but rather within "evidence towards my argument". Just because my photographic and website sources inconveniently favour me, instead of you, that doesn't mean I'm imposing personal opinions. I've had this problem with 2 other users before, who, when confronted with official government websites and images, say "No, User Fry and the governments and all that stuff are wrong anyways, damn it all, I'm right no matter what" whether it's because of the rules of heraldry, or some other impression they have. Well guess what, sometimes, the rules aren't always followed. Fry1989 (talk) 04:52, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

You two stop it now. Now I got this out of the way, I think I really know what the problems is. Fry wants photographs, you want legal code Tony. There is no way to accomplish both. Legal code is absent on colors, which is what happens with a lot of countries. The next best thing is to use what government websites have, but it seems the website and the colors are different. Colors change, standards change. I seen this happen with Japan, the United States and now with Serbia and Moldova. I don't know what your problems are but this really needs to cease now. If you two don't stop, the both of you will be blocked. I am sick and tired of locking flag images because someone feels the shade is not right or because a photograph says something different. This bullshit needs to end now. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:23, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

You know what, I am going to do something to solve this one and for all and I promise you that NEITHER of you will like it. I got the Pantone color shades from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Brazil#Colors and I am going to fix them up according to http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx. I am going to upload this image and this will be the only image that is to be used for this flag. If I ever see any competiting images because of this edit war, I will remove them and lock them so you won't be able to continue this edit war. I only want one file and that is going to be the end result, one file. Is that understood? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I understand, absolutely. I'll continue my quest for more sources, but leave the issue alone until I have something more "substantive", at which point I'll bring it before you for consideration. Fry1989 (talk) 05:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't like using the big font of swear words, but sometiems I have to do it to get folks to stop. However, if you do notice that some parts of the flag are darker, some are about the same. I also kept your filename Fry. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 13:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I understand why you got angry, I would too if two guys were going at it on my page. Anyhow, I'm gonna back off of this issue and leave the colours alone from now on. I did however take your version, and did just a little minor strokework (most of them you can't even see), I didn't edit any colours or placement of anything. If I were to upload it under an ambiguous name, and you were to find the changes acceptable, would you be willing to put those changes onto the official file and then delete what I uploaded? Fry1989 (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I will need to think about it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
That's alright, I can wait. Let me know. If you wanna see an example of the strokework, I did it on the Vice-presidential standard of Brazil. I made it match your version of the Presidential Standard in colours exactly, but just removed a few border strokes on the glory, stars, and words. Fry1989 (talk) 19:50, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

HBE flag hi just wondering have yopu made any progress with Britannian empire flag?

Never even touched it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 13:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Deprecated License

Deutsch | English | Italiano | മലയാളം | Português | +/−


Hello. Thank you for uploading Image:Wikipedia Jawa.svg, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the image correctly? If you are not able to do this, the image will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the village pump. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 21:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

PNG version of svg files

Hi Zscout370. I need your advice: what we should do about png files created by commons from on svg files, and (re)uploaded by users? I'm having some troubles about this guy... Giro720 (talk) 20:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Usually I let the PNG files stand because some folks will have rendering issues with SVG files. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks =). Giro720 (talk) 22:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
But when it comes to the stuff at the Flag of Brazil article on the English Wikipedia, if the editors want SVG it will stay that way. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

HBE flag hi! does the offer still stand for making this flag???

"in use on 2 different projects"

Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:TFLMuseumBus.JPG, have you actually looked at the uses? It is used by the uploader here and on English Wikipedia on his own personal pages, and on the Indonesian Wikipedia as an unreadable microdot in the Mosaic template. That's it. I tried to replace it in the mosaic, but have been reverted with no reason given. This image is of no value to anybody on any project, it's frankly unreadable, and there are numerous vastly superior replacements. So why is it considered so inviolate? Why should we be keeping it on this flimsy basis, risking the uploader being allowed to stuff it into actual articles as an 'illustration' of the subject again, as he has done before? Ultra7 (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

If you ignore his first close (which I agree should not have been done), other people have said the image is in use at different projects, so can be kept. I don't care if the images were just userpage only or in mosaics, but two different language projects are using it and under our policies, stuff we can keep. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
That is frankly insane. I think you really should care, because the only reason I requested its deletion was because I noticed the uploader had stuffed it into an English Wikipedia article, when it was clearly of utterly rubbish quality, with vastly superior replacements already available here. Not every reader of Wikipedia has the knowledge to be able to correct such a situation, and is likely to see that sort of thing, and think Wikimedia/pedia hasn't got a clue what is and is not a decent image when they see such things. On that score, I thought the deletion policy was pretty clear. The images we host here are supposed to have an educational value, we do not keep images purely for internal reasons like that mosaic, certainly not when you can't even see the image (and again, the only reason it is there is because the uploader put it there), and we are not a web host either - there's not much point declaring his images are inviolate if he uses them on his own pages. What's so disgraceful about this image though, is that in thumbnail size, it looks no different to any other image, which is probably why it went unnoticed for so long. Ultra7 (talk) 21:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Doesn't matter, follows COM:SCOPE#Must_be_realistically_useful_for_an_educational_purpose and can stay. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 21:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Of course it matters. Nobody wrote that policy to put genuine articles and educational images at other projects at risk, and mess Commons users about here by presenting them with utter non-educational crap alongside good images as they browse categories, just because it is possible to use that crap image in one stupidly invisible and totally useless manner, at a template at Indonesian Wikipedia. Frankly, you could write a bot to close these discussions if this is how that policy is supposed to over-ride simple common sense around here. Ultra7 (talk) 21:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Although now you've pointed the section out, it does rather beg the question as to how you thought this was being properly used (per that policy) in "two" projects. From where I'm sitting, it's only the microdot usage at the Indonesian project's mosaic that is the road block here, as user galleries are irrelevant, wherever they are. Ultra7 (talk) 22:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I know it is used on a gallery here at the Commons (a user one) but judging by the edits of the Indonesian Wikipedia, I felt the decision was right. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

(indenting) Well, well done is all I can say. The letter of the rule triumphs over the point of it. That image renders at a mightby 7mm by 7mm on that mosaic on my screen. You would have to be displaying it on a wall to even begin to notice the difference between that and the replacement. If this outcome leads this user to stuff any more completely useless out of focus camera phone pics into actual articles, then I'll send anyone who complains to you. Although part of the tragedy here is, it seems nobody noticed for a long time. An illustration of what they look like at thumb size probably explains that. At least though, the people who care can actually try to make sure he doesn't deface articles in Wikipedias (well, at the English one at least, God knows if people at other projects he might stuff it into are as dilligent), but I guess we can't do anything to help people simply browsing cats here though in search of usable or educational images, and being misled into thinking that these are in any way similar or of use

And it's also pretty ironic to realise that even though it's a cameraphone pic, we are using 8 times more storage space to host that worthless pic compared to the usefull one. Still, you're the admin, you're the one entrusted to do what's best for the project, I guess... Ultra7 (talk) 13:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't matter what the camera source is (we kept images to show the difference between a regular shot and a camera phone shot). This was the third DR of the same image in 1 month saying it is worthless, not usable and it was the opposite. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 13:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Jesus Chirst. Fine, I'm done here, this is getting ludicrous. For a start, this has been nominated twice, not three times. The uploader's interference in that regard is irrelevant. I filed it a second time because I presumed that having been kept as 'in use' the first time, it being removed from those uses that are relevant would actually be noticed, and an admin would not then turn up and keep it again because it's being used on "two projects". But apparently not. If you think you've done something good here, well done. From where I'm sitting, all you've managed to do is make the policy mandated step of having a deletion discussion in instances where we have completely rubbish, beyond any meaningful use, images being hosted here, when we also have superior replacements in abundance, completely irrelevant. Apparently, we cannot have that discussion if the uploader of said shit image manages to stuff it into a template, and someone in Indonesia can see it as a microdot. This image is not 'in use' in any defensible way at all, not at all. This objection is pure policy wonkery at its finest. If I could speak Indonesian, I would go and remedy the situation there, and we could (presumably, although I'm no longer convinced) sidestep this issue, and actually have the discussion I intended. But I don't bloody speak Indonesian, and the reverter could not be bothered to explain his action even in his language, so here we are, and this image is now presumably going to be kept forever, and people have to keep checking forever that it never gets used in articles. This is truly a triumph of absurdity. And the idea that we might be keeping this image just to show how camera phones work, when the image is completely and utterly out of focus, is just laughable. Do we even have a category for examples of 'how not to use a cameraphone'? If I hadn't already wasted enough of my life on this nonsense, I would raise it at a noticeboard to ask the wider community how the hell this situation is considered remotely normal or logical, or whether they think that this sort of nonsense inspires anyone to volunteer their time here working on uploading and categorising actual, usable, images, for proper use in articles. I'm almost tempted to go and plaster this piece of crap over as many Wikipedia articles as possible, just to show this process wonkery up for what it is. But I have at least some respect for the actual goals of the project, and would never do that. Ultra7 15:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_Serbia_(1882-1918).png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Flag_of_Serbia_(1882-1918).png 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Buttons (talk) 04:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Explanation

Hi there Zscout370. Just wanted to clarify why I nominated File:Flag_of_Serbia_(1882-1918).png as well as File:Flag of Serbia (1882-1918).svg for deletion, lately they have been used by a certain disruptive user who insists on their usage without debate and against verified sources. Point is I could really use your help, assuming (hopefully) the mentioned files are deleted so as to make a fresh start in uploading a new svg file titled Flag of Serbia (1835-1918) as per these sources [1][2] according to their design and colours. I would appreciate it very much. Buttons (talk) 05:10, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Consider since the main national flag is the plain tricolor that is used in Serbia today, once the files are renamed, I will see what is the best options for all parties. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:13, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I somehow knew the issue of today's flag would come up lol... I am to this day still convinced that the wrong flag (state flag) is being used for reasons unknown but anyways that’s another matter. As I said I really appreciate your help and input in this matter that’s gone unsettled for a while now. Thanks once again. Buttons (talk) 05:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Your deletion without a discussion

hi there,

I don't think it's in order for you to use your sysop rights by deleting a file without a discussion, if the the status is not clear [3]. A simple "no" that you gave as an explanation Commons:Deletion requests/File:Standard of the President of Botswana.JPG is not enough. Even if, the least you could have done is to convert the file to an .svg, because otherwise deleting a national flag without trying to save it as another file under another license is really a loss of important information for Wikipedia. Since you seem knowledgeable with svg conversions, why don't you create new files first and then propose to delete the old ones? For Kenya, you could at least look here for starters [4]. Gryffindor (talk) 02:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

The Botswana flag has been made into an SVG file. I have a copy of this book (Japanese translation) at my house, so I will be able to look at it again in a month when I go back home. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of the Bagrationi Dynasty.svg

Can you please mediate this issue. Per the talk on my page, the file talk page, and the revert summaries, the change MUST be proven, as it is radically different from the original. However, Ssolberj simply will not stop, despite several requests for a source for his changes. He seems tho think that just because he's given sources for his SVG elements, that should be enough, but he has not given a source for his radically different look of the Arms from the original. I'm tried of reverting and asking for proof. Thank you Fry1989 (talk) 23:17, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I simply don't understand what sort of "proof" he wants, as you will find if you read the discussion in User talk:Fry1989 and File talk:Coat of Arms of the Bagrationi Dynasty.svg. - Ssolbergj (talk) 23:57, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Slovakia

I know you reverted my change saying you got the colours from a Government PDF, however that PDF is only a diagram of the flag. There's not text stating those are the official colours. On top of that, the Presidential website uses different colours for their page on the flag, as you can see. For that reason, unless you have text stating the official shades, I would suggest we go with the ones I reverted to, as that best matches the flag as we see in actual use, official and private. Fry1989 (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

If I run the images from http://www.vlada.gov.sk/7890/statna-vlajka.php into Corel X5, I get 1788 C for the Red and 287 C for blue. I know I used darker colors earlier because that is all we have to go by then until we were pointed out those colors. I seen dark and light flags within photos, so until we find something concrete, we should use the colors in the files at http://www.siea.sk/oldweb/strukturalne_fondy/obdobie_04_06/uzitocne_informacie/loga.htm and http://www.vlada.gov.sk/7890/statna-vlajka.php. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

custom flag

hi! i want to request something,if you could create a custom flag of serbia by putting the large coat of arms of serbia onto the civil flag of serbia? note me about it you do it thanks

I will think about it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

template:keep on talk pages

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Free-speech-flag.svg&action=history

oh.. thanks for the fix. Decora (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure the exact reasoning on why we do it that way, but this is what is usually done for the past several years that I can remember. No problem. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Bandeira do Leal Senado

Hello Zach, I got this request, but I can not help. Maybe you can. Greetings, --Patrick (talk) 18:35, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi!! Could you create an svg of the Flag of Leal Senado (pt:Bandeira do Leal Senado (Macau)) based on this Flags of the World - Bandeiras do Concelho de Macau?? This flag is very relevant, because it represents the old Macau, the Macau governed by the portuguese... this flag is so representative that in the handover ceremony of Macau, this flag was used to represent the portuguese Macau, instead of the Flag of the Government of Portuguese Macau. Can you help me or can you transmit this message to someone that can create this file? AdriAg (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I assume http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Macau_Municapility.png this one? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I would say yes. ;-) THX --Patrick (talk) 20:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh! That is a non-free image, which is not available for Commons. It's a FOTW-image! --Patrick (talk) 21:00, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
At least I now know the design. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 21:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Excellent. It's beyond my abilities. Fry1989 (talk) 21:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I got spring break coming up, so I can give it a shot. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:00, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Shav

Hi Zscout370, you had added the OTRS-ticket to File:OdadjianFest.jpg. However, I wonder why this copy is credited to Legendxo, whereas the older duplicate File:ShavFestiv.jpg was credited to velvethammer.net. Could you check the permission which credit is correct. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The second credit is correct. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
THanks. Is there any information about the photo-date (year)? --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Not that I am aware of. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
2005. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 07:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Jump wings

Hi. I noticed you made File:Master Parachutist badge (United States).svg, and have a comment and a question. I believe that the background (behind teh star and wreath) should be transparent, as it is cut out of the actual badge (example). Secondly, I was wondering if you could upload an SVG file to replace the basic and senior parachutis bades? It shoudl be simple enough to delete out the extra adornments for them (I'd do it myself, but Inkscape confuddles me). Thanks in advance! Bahamut0013 (talk) 18:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I can go ahead and try and fix the badge. As for making SVG files; what I did was I took the EPS images provided by the Air Force and did a basic conversion to SVG. I might not be able to tackle it now, but I will try and work on it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Cambodia

Dear Zscout370, I have got a request for you. Re flag of Cambodia, there's one significant error that most of people, including many Cambodians - i.e. the color of outline of Angkor Wat temple at the center of the flag. The correct color shall be BLACK, NOT RED. Please refer to the correct flag at this link - http://www.cambodia.org/facts/Cambodia_flag.gif Look forward to hearing from you. Thank in advance, --វ័ណថារិទ្ធ (talk) 13:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Tell me how to say the term flag in the Khmer script? I am seeing both black outline and red outline on government sites. I am trying to look for a law about the flag and see what can be done. I also have a postcard from the Cambodian Embassy with the flag, but I won't be able to look at it for about another month or so. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Maine_state_flag.png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Maine_state_flag.png 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Svgalbertian (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Kentucky_state_flag.png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kentucky_state_flag.png 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Svgalbertian (talk) 18:25, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

CoA of PR of Macedonia

Hello. Yes, I have noticed the star and I planned to fix it, but I got reverted (I couldn't do it these days). I did not edit the text, but I will fix it as well. Best.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 12:49, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I would do it myself, but a lot of the programs I use won't show the image correctly. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 15:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Category:Ukrainophobia

on what basis? --Bulka UA (talk) 06:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Japan flag dimensions

Hi, thanks for your layout of the Japan flag construction dimensions. I noticed one piece that is confusing to me: the height to width is specified as 2:3. Thus, the height is called out as 2 on your drawing. The sun in the center is called out as 3/5, meaning 3/5 of the height of the flag. However, this is confusing, since the height is 2 (so it is really 3/5 of 2, or 6/5). I know that saying 6/5 is no less confusing, but there does seem to be an ambiguity.

I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on this. Thanks! 68.73.75.192 13:38, 12 April 2011 (UTC) (Wikipedia user TWCarlson)

This is the original wording of the law, so it would be Height times 3/5 (so the sun is 1.2 if the height is 2). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:28, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate files

The CSD for duplicates clearly states that identical files should not be kept. However, I'm not sure that this is the best approach in some cases. For example: File:Flag of North Vietnam.svg and File:Flag of North Vietnam.svg are identical (or should be). But the two descriptions are very different, and they should be used in different contexts. I'm not sure is merging the files is appropriate, but that's what policy mandates. What do you think?--Nilfanion (talk) 09:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I usually go on a case by case basis. I suggest using our best judgement. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't remove discussions and requests

Please don't remove a link to Commons:Avoid overwriting images with new uploads from this discussion, don't ignore rules about uploading and overwriting files and don't remove {{split}} requests from overwriten files. --ŠJů (talk) 00:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

If you even read the DR, they said to fix the image or it will be deleted. No rename is required. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:34, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
If you even read standard naming and uploading conventions, a new work (derivative version) should be uploaded always under new name. The deletion request is not properly closed yet. An opinion with non-standard proposal should be surely oppugned. --ŠJů (talk) 00:50, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Not really, if the image set at DR is hinged on being fixed at that name or it will be deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:51, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
You're mentioned at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Zscout370, not sure if anyone bothered to notify you. --ZooFari 17:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
It's difficult to "bother" to notify somebody who censored and locked his discussion page in order to avoid notices. Even if this fact was the core of my complaint. --ŠJů (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
The talk page was locked you stopped adding the template. Anyways, for future reference, if my talk page is locked, email is always available. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
It was your own choice from your own self-willed reason that you precluded to be noticed. You can hardly ask me to evade your own obstructions. --ŠJů (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:49, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Flag of DPR Korea shades

Hello! I've left a message on the talk page regarding the darker shades on the North Korean flag here, could you take a look? Thank you! --Shibo77 12:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Seal of Texas

Per the past two deletion requests, the seal was not considered a copyvio. The only claim that Svgalbertian had was that the mathematics were a copy, but they aren't because the file had been altered several tames, and hence the mathematics have changed. I must ask you review and reconsider your deletion, and if you still stand by it, we must find a way of having a new vector of the Seal made. This is a terrible loss and was used greatly across all Wikipedias. Per the above discussion, the seal was not created in 1992, but only standardized. That is according to the Secretary of State's website, so it is still Pd due to age. Fry1989 (talk) 23:35, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

With the VI images, they usually make their own vectors and copyright those. In the case of non-Soviet items, we generally have to delete. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Then there has to be a way to fastrack the making of a new vector version for Commons. Fry1989 (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I might have a few ideas. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:52, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I've been working very hard to get these many symbols of Texas made. Anything you can do would be greatly appreciated. Fry1989 (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Avoid anything using VI as a source (or even as a base). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi. How are you? I have nominated this file for deletion since it is incorrect, nationalistic, original research and offensively named (see talk page of the file). However, it says the nomination is incomplete, so can you check it quickly? Thanks, --MacedonianBoy 10:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

It looks correct now. I always have that problem due to caching issues. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 12:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Copyright of vector data

I am interested in your thoughts about this deletion request: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Seal of Texas.svg. Basically the SVG file was created by converting an EPS file from vector-images.com. I believe that the mathematical data of a vector file could be subject to copyright and I would like to know the thoughts of people in the community familiar with vector graphics.--Svgalbertian (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

It needs to be {{copyvio}} according to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Vector-Images.com. If the image itself is public domain because of time or what not, we have to make it ourselves. In the case of the Texas seal, it was designed in 1992 according to http://www.sos.state.tx.us/statdoc/seal-additional.shtml and falls under copyright. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
These are all derivate works of that file.--Svgalbertian (talk) 23:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Your call. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I must ask that these derivatives be kept, ATLEAST until an independent version of the State Seal is made, so that these deriatives can be altered and based upon it. Surely that is possible! Fry1989 (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I'd say delete. We should not be using artwork from a copyrighted source.--Svgalbertian (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Guys, please be reasonable! Everything can be changed, deletion is such a drastic step! Fry1989 (talk) 23:44, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
What I seen done before is the base image is deleted, but the newer versions are kept (think Fiji symbols). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
He has somewhat of a point... if we can get a replacement oak/olive branch and ribbon, there is no need to recreate all of this from scratch. The rest of it is good work. If there is likely to be a replacement soon, we could hold off for a bit. Otherwise, keep track of the files, and when a replacement is ready ask for undeletion so you can upload new versions (and delete the old revisions when done). Nothing wrong with that. But we can't let these stay here for too long in the current state. Carl Lindberg (talk) 03:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
I could call in a favour with my friend Sodacan. He's an expert in this type of work, I'm sure he'd be willing. Fry1989 (talk) 04:38, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Soadcan does great work, and if he is willing to do that it would be a great addition. In the meantime I have created a quick and dirty version based on some public domain artwork, it has been uploaded in place of the old one at File:Seal of Texas.svg.--Svgalbertian (talk) 14:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
While we wait for the other files to be updated with PD artwork, File:State Seal of Texas.png & File:State Seal of TexasFixed.svg should be deleted now as they are only representations of the seal.--Svgalbertian (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
We can also ask Heralder, he's good at this work as well, if Sodacan is too busy or doesn't reply after a while. Fry1989 21:59, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Sodacan has agreed to redo the coat of arms of Texas by this weekend, at which point we can replicate it on all necessary files. Thank goodness Fry1989 19:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Sodacan has applied his new original version on the file Coat of arms of the Republic of Texas.svg. It can now be applied to all the other derivatives, and the State Seal of Texas. Fry1989 (talk) 20:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Osama bin Laden (CIA photo).png

Please can you reconsider your deletion because of the source given here is no proper proof that the image was created by AP. (An example of this can prettily seen here where the Sydney Morning Herald credits the image to Agence France-Presse whereas the original source of the image is clearly the NOAA-NASA GOES Project, see an example for a properly sourced GOES image). --Matthiasb (talk) 05:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

There is no proof the CIA made the image either, so we are stuck with an image with an unknown author. The document stated that copyrighted images were used without credit, so there is no way of knowing for sure. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hello. I have a problem with one disruptive user that deletes tags, vandalizes pages and makes personal attacks. Here are details of my request for his blocking and here you can see the most recent vaporisation made by him (sometimes he edits with his account, sometimes he edits with his IP, both have the same edits.) I really hope some actions will be undertaken since I have problems with him for some time. Best, --MacedonianBoy (talk) 08:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Assistance needed in the prevention of alledged abuse in some Haifa-themed files

Hi, this user has been seen in more than one event arbitrarily changing categories in both files & categories in a manner suspected as vandalization. He/she won't explain or summarize their do's. One way or the other, those acts are technically damaging the hierarchy of the categories and undermining the correct reference & order across the image attribution group, see here and here for latest examples. Since I'm little familiar with which page I should adress I would thank any admin interveving with that person to further prevent the alledgedly harmful activity. Cheers, many thanx. /Orrling (talk) 22:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Please change category for protected file

In the File:Anatoly_Wasserman.JPG please change category What? Where? When? players to Anatoly Wasserman. Maksim Sidorov 12:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Western Sahara flag issue.

I'm well aware, as I'm sure you are, of the issue regarding the Flag of Western Sahara/Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, and how File:Flag of Western Sahara.svg has been over-written and reverted several times with either a white flag or the UN flag. Well, it's happened again. This time, User:Eddo has changed it to the UN flag, and uploaded separately File:Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.svg, which he feels is a better name. I have reverted his change because it messes up countless wikipedia pages of all languages which use the SADR flag. However, I wonder if perhaps it's either time we have a wider discussion on the matter, or if User:Eddo should be explained to, the current situation about the file name, which is really the only issue on contention, not the flag itself. Either way, this matter needs to be brought to an end, as I'm sure you would agree it's not productive. Fry1989 (talk) 22:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Indonesia currency redux

Please take another look at Commons talk:Currency#Indonesia and Commons talk:Licensing#Indonesia. Jpatokal (talk) 23:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I have. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Juvenilegiantsnakehead.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Juvenilegiantsnakehead.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Request

Would you by any chance be interested in taking this request, or know anybody who could? I've asked a few friends on here, but everybody seems to be busy these days. I really don't care how long it takes, I know people have real lives, but it would be great to have these seals added. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Fry1989 (talk) 02:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Antwerpen Province (Belgium).svg

Hi, the duplicate process is only for exact duplicates - no admin should delete it through that process if they are following policy. Your reasons for deletion aren't covered by any speedy deletion process, it really should just be a normal deletion request (basically "uploader request") --Tony Wills (talk) 19:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I only really use the duplicate process to get the links for delinker to work his magic. I remember there was a speedy deletion criteria that included user-requested deletion (like of own work) but I didn't see it anymore. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:01, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
I see what you mean. How about just making it into a redirect, that would save the overworked delinker replacing it in hundreds of pages. As the file has been here a long time we would definitely want to retain a redirect in its place anyway. --Tony Wills (talk) 01:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hmm...that is an idea. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:27, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Meskhetian Turks.PNG

Hello Zscout370. I add reference to the flag above. Can you fix the file according to that? The proportion of the green part with the moon should be bigger. Thanks. Geagea (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Hungary 1957-1989

Your file shows a flag that has never been a flag of Hungary. The flag of Hungary those years was the plain red-white-green tricolor without any other elements on it. The coat-of-arms was never used on the flag.

As your file is used in a lot of articles in a lot of projects, it should be corrected once by uploading a correct version. Otherwise repairing it requires a lot of work with each use of it.

--Peyerk (talk) 21:24, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I fixed it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Copy of a letter to other editor

I'm attonised of the deletion of several images from me in Commons. I.e. the face of the ex president of Maldive Islans Maumoon abdul gayoom.jpg, that I take personally during my trip to the islands; If this man is a public man and I take the photo how can vandalize it a honorable member of commons.
Anoter. the FARC flag, that I drtaw according a sheet provided by the organization when a delegation was in catalan Countries, with autorization of free use, and was supresed alleging that the logo in the flag was copyrigted, but next day the same flag with the same logo was accepted with no problem because was draw by an anglosaxon and/or any influent commomns member. This man copied the image from me and plagied my work, and Commons are a sort of delinquents that authorize it.
I have also the permission for use the logos of the Emirates cities, that you vandalized even knowing it.
Inutil to answer in my commons page because I stopped to collaborate with after sevral years because I don't share nothing with thieves and vandals.--jolle (talk) 15:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I am going to take a look at each image and see what happened. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 22:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot

Hello, could you please tell me what's the reason why you blocked my bot? Thank you. --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 08:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I've met Krinkle on IRC and he had told me the reason. The next time please write down two words also in my talk page so I can unblock the script and fix the problem faster. I've told him also some bot-settings that you admin can modify without asking (see this edit: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Filbot/Settings&diff=prev&oldid=55412904 ). See you. --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 15:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of the Bagrationi Dynasty.svg

I think it would be best to revert the file back to the version Ssolbergj wanted. The consensus now is Ssolbergj, Geagea and me against Fry1989 and ComtesseDeMingrelie. ComtesseDeMingrelie has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts, and Fry1989 has admitted on the English Wikipedia that he doesn't really know much about heraldry, and that he dislikes the "ancient rules of heraldry that are being forced on modernity". It would be best to revert to the author' update, as per consensus and the author's original intent. Adelbrecht (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Could you please intervene? He is pushing his version by saying it has superseded the consensus version. I cannot intervene without breaking 3RR. Adelbrecht (talk) 22:08, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I am trying to maintain the original and authentic look, of which there is no consensus for the modern style. Either way, it's on the file's talk page now, and I will not make more edits until this has been thoroughly discussed. But considering the insulting language Adelbrecht has used towards me on Wikidepia, insinuation that I'm an idiot, he has no right to complain about me. Fry1989 (talk) 22:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I am almost getting to the point where another version that is neither yours or Ssolbergj's is needed (and you both will like it because it will be the consensus image). This has been going on for some time now and this is getting very silly. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Just letting you know that I am going to refrain from touching that file any longer, and only leave input on the talk page when I have anything to add. Yesterday was a very bad day for me, and I got carried away. Fry1989 (talk) 20:58, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
I am done with this image too, so locked it stays. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with that. Just saying, I got carried away, and I know it, and I'm done with fighting over it. Fry1989 (talk) 03:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Austria (state).svg

Just curious: Which software and color-settings do/did you use to create this version? After living here in Austria for 40+ years your version of the flag is the first I ever saw that comes in pink. --Tsui (talk) 03:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

The reason why it comes in pink is I used the Pantone colors from http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx (the Pantone colors are mentioned by the http://www.bmlv.gv.at/abzeichen/hoheit/abschnitt_1.shtml). A lot of the screens used by Wikipedians do show Pantone 032 as Pink (mine does it) but Pantone is suggested to be used for our images (unless there are official RGB or Hexadecimal codes as mentioned by the Swiss and Moldova governments). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I see, thank you for the info. Makes me wonder if it wouldn't be better to use RGB equivalents for Pantone colors which can not be displayed by most monitors, if at all. At last Wikipedia still primarily is an online project and sticking to rules useful in print does not make too much sense for me if they result in e.g. false colors. But that should be discussed elsewhere. --Tsui (talk) 21:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
The Pantone is made into RGB using the site I pointed above, but I think it has been talked about before where "real flags" should be used whenever possible (but if there are specific guidelines for online use we must follow, we do that). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Undeletion request notification

Hi, you participated in a deletion request at Commons:Deletion requests/Wikipe-tan lolicon (2007-01-04). The same files are now being considered for undeletion at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:LoliWikipetan.jpg. If you're still around we'd appreciate your opinion and feedback. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 23:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Armoiries_république_française.svg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Armoiries_république_française.svg 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:13, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Protected flag file

Hi Zach, if you like you may update File:Flag of Niger.svg where you are the last editor. I tried to explain better the description as I did at Flag of Niger 3!2.svg and by adding the template transclusion {{SimplSVG|Sodipodi|4133|286}}.

As well the coding may be simplified like follows

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="700" height="600" fill="#E05206">
<rect width="700" height="600" fill="#0DB02B"/>
<rect width="700" height="400" fill="#FFF"/>
<rect width="700" height="200"/>
<circle cx="350" cy="300" r="85"/>
</svg>

You may use it, or not, on your decision.-- sarang사랑.svg사랑 09:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Both added. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:27, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Abuse of two files

Can you please talk some sense into User:Care? He has abused two of my files several times despite my objections. He constantly removes valid categories from them, and has now even gone to removing valid licensing for one of them. The two files are File:Logo of the Prime Minister of Finland.svg and File:Order of the Cross of Liberty of Finland (heraldic).svg. He keeps saying that they aren't coats of arms, but the PM's logo is derived directly from the Finnish Coat of Arms, and therefore is an element of it, and belongs in the Finnish CoA category. The Cross of Liberty also does, as this is the heraldic version as used on the flag of the President of Finland, not the actual medal itself. Thanks Fry1989 (talk) 23:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I would also appreciate if you could try to convince User:Fry1989 that coat of arms and their elements are not the same thing. We have Category:SVG coat of arms elements available just for drawings like this, but Fry1989 constantly wants to categorize his drawings as coat of arms instead. Also I understand that as a non-native speaker he may have difficulties to understand the reasoning behind of our copyright counsel decision, but it would be polite to at least listen when it is explained to him that it is not applicable for elements. We have another PD-template for governmental decisions. --Care (talk) 00:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Don't you get it? If somebody wants to find the Prime Minister's Logo of Finland, they're gonna look in Finland subcats, not some obscure cat called "SVG coats of arms elements". You're making them harder to find. Fry1989 (talk) 01:37, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
No, I don't. I am neither looking for any other logos amongst coat of arms. You could create "SVG logos of Finland" or "SVG coats of arms elements of Finland", if "SVG logos" or "SVG coats of arms elements" are not enough for you, but now you are just making it more difficult to find those files, which really should be in CoA-category - and for some reason you sort your files so that they appear on top. I was also pointing out that I am not the only person fixing this problem, but your reaction was in practice to revert that as well. --Care (talk) 05:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Care -- Technically, File:Logo of the Prime Minister of Finland.svg is a heraldic "badge" (or closer to a badge than anything else in the traditional heraldic repertoire), and might as well go into the coat of arms category if there's no special badge category...
Fry1989 -- Complaining about somebody "violating my files" for a mere categorization dispute is unfortunate language which isn't really compatible with Commons policies, and tends to suggest that you're starting down the ALiptak route... AnonMoos (talk) 08:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Zscout370, could you please help on this one as I am hoping you had some influence on Fry1989. I don't really understand why he is trying to flood Category:SVG Coats of arms of Finland with all those files, but the situation is getting soon out of our hands. I have tried to solve this by following what User:AnonMoos proposed above, but Fry1989 insist of adding Coat of arms -categories for the files, which are not presenting coat of arms. The worst part is that he is putting there more and more of different files and sorting them on the top so that actual coat of arms are now shown only after his files. --Care (talk) 22:02, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Five files hardly counts as your hyperbolic phrase "flooding", so lets get that straight right there. Second, you are making these files near impossible to find, and removing them from cats of which they are relevant. Also, repeatedly removing licensing from one of my files I consider vandalism. You've been asked to stop, and you wont. You are the one who needs sense talked into you. STOP removing cats of which a file is RELEVANT! Fry1989 (talk) 22:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
You have added three new files into this category only today! You have been asked to stop as these files are already properly categorized as badges as told by User:AnonMoos, but you insist of categorizing them incorrectly to raise visibility of your files. Also I find it impolite that you are accusing me of vandalism in edit summary even though I have just done edits like discussed above. You haven't been able to justify your actions so far, but still you revert my edits (and those of others who have done just the same change for other of your files). Zscout370, please... this is not going anywhere without 3rd party. --Care (talk) 22:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Even though yall sought me out because of my expertise in symbols, but I have been very busy recently (and will be off wiki for at least 2 weeks). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:41, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Early deletion closure

Please reverse your inappropriate early closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cynomys ludovicianus -Paignton Zoo, Devon, England-8a.jpg. You have mischaracterized the question at hand as whether or not Creative Commons licenses are revokable. That is not the question. The question is whether we should courtesy delete the image out of respect for a content creator who does not wish for it to be here. At least three people are of the opinion that we should. It is inappropriate for you to exercise an admin supervote and not permit that discussion. Please reverse yourself. --UserB (talk) 11:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

In cases like this, the decision is usually clear that the image is kept. The only ones that I know that are deleted is if someone picked CC one day and decided that same day or next few days that it wasn't right or if the image is pornographic in nature and you have identified persons. This is of an animal, picture uploaded in August of 2010 and now he is making a claim that it was never CC in June of 2011. That is not a mistake and that is something we just don't delete. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 15:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Louisiana.svg

Great trace. I had someone on Wikipedia-En asking me about how we get the files updated to the new specs, but had to explain the difficulty of it. However, as good as the trace is (and as good as it can get, I would assume), do you intend in the future to re-work some of the elements, such as the banner and wording, the wings and such that are "choppy"? Just curious. Fry1989 (talk) 23:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Coat of arms of Minsk.svg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Coat of arms of Minsk.svg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

shizhao (talk) 12:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

http://www.minsk.gov.by/ru/tempage/symbolics/gerb_minsk.cdr User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:29, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag-map of Sudan.svg

is there anything you can do about this little server problem? It seems to disagree with South Sudan's independence haha. Fry1989 (talk) 22:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:CoA of Slovakia 1993.svg

Could you explain what your closing comment means? I don't understand it. AnonMoos (talk) 04:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I went to the website and see if there was like a download page for the various symbols of Slovakia. I could not find such page, so I deleted the image for lacking a source. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I still don't understand your point. There are many websites and books where the appearance of the coat of arms of Slovakia can be researched. And in any case, it is really best NOT to delete an image based on a completely new and different reason which was not previously raised in the deletion discussion, since that means there is no way to discuss the matter after you've closed off the deletion discussion... AnonMoos (talk) 10:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
As far as I am aware, we have the ability to do that, but the discussion can continue here. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Anon, just because a new reason for deletion isn't raised in the original post, that doesn't make it any less valid. Fry1989 (talk) 19:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

File:POL Gorzów Wielkopolski flag.svg

In fact that is not problem of browsers, but Wiki renderer. When you open an article every SVG image that this article links to, being loaded as raster image. It shouldn't be so. SVG images should be loaded and viewed as SVG images. Rendering them is excessive and not really good way. Till Wiki won't improve or stop using renderer, fully scalable images won't work really good. And browsers and Wiki is in real not ready for a such technology as SVG. Kind regards and sorry for my English ;) --PL Przemek DYSKUSJA 05:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC).

It is ok, I understand you. All I ask is just make a test image and see if it works before replacing. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Seal of Governor Utah question

Your input would also be greatly appreciated at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Seal_of_the_Governor_of_Utah.svg Fry1989 (talk) 19:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be easier for the numerals to be removed, but I won't lose any sleep if the main editors want it kept. I am just going to say that I won't be on top of updates immediately (if at all) for seals like this and California. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Swint.jpg

The license tag is missing on the file description. --Martin H. (talk) 13:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Added. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Thx, done. --Martin H. (talk) 19:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Kristen Wiig.JPG

Did the permission come from the copyright holder or from some publicist who thinks he obtained copyright because he obtained a copy? The author is not given correctly and a copy given from the copyright holder to the subject for her portfolio is some sort of non-exclusive, non-transferable TFP agreement for personal use by the subject, but its by far not a copyright transfer. What scenario of copyright transfer (I refer to en:Wikipedia:Contact us/Photo submission #1) applies? --Martin H. (talk) 23:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

p.s., since the photo is published elsewhere with copyright notice WireImage/Mathew_Imaging, it can be said that copyright was not transfered and that a non-exclusive free license is unlikely to come from someone else. --Martin H. (talk) 23:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
The OTRS permissions was done by someone else; I just provided the restoration of the image. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 01:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

A question on PD for Philippines

I've been reading about the Seal of the President of the Philippines, seen HERE, and am curious about the possibility of brining it to Commons. Since the main part of it, the Sea-lion over the Sun, was first published in 1947 (atleast), would that not make it PD due to age, and then make the Presidential Seal, the related VP seal and Presidential Standard available to be brought to Commons and SVG'd? I'm curious Fry1989 (talk) 01:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Philippines, it should be public domain. But the Philippines has very, very weird public domain laws. They have a public domain-non-commercial clause and I will have to do some digging. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 01:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, it is such a bother when these laws aren't straightforward. But I do appreciate you taking a look into it. It would make a great contribution, as long as it's permissible. Fry1989 (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Thailand.svg

Please reverted to version 20:47, 6 July 2011. Because YOU AREN'T THAI YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND NATIONAL FLAG AS WELL AS THAI. You should to learn about Thai flag from s:th:พระราชบัญญัติธง พ.ศ. ๒๕๒๒. This is Thai law about national flag.

Thank non-Thai --Jo Shigeru (talk) 13:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I am familiar with the law and also have friends who can speak Thai. The flag color was set down in law at http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g101/apgts/siamflag/trirong_color_problem/doc5_web.jpg (full document is at http://www.t-h-a-i-l-a-n-d.org/thaiflag/standard_color.html) and there was discussions with the Thai Industrial Standards Institute for a standardization of colors of the Thai flag. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:26, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Can you see top of page? It wrote ร่าง. It mean draft not standard and you should to use color from
  1. http://www.palaces.thai.net/king60B/2006-06-09-1280/3/org/20060609-112834-King-60th.html
  2. http://www.palaces.thai.net/king60B/2006-06-12-1280/21/org/20060612-143414-King-60th.html
  3. http://www.palaces.thai.net/king60B/2006-06-12-1280/1/org/20060612-131422-King-60th.html
There are picture from The Sixtieth Anniversary Celebrations of His Majesty's Accession to the Throne is Thai royal event you can see flag in pictures. The flag use not flag like your upload.
Thank again --Jo Shigeru (talk) 05:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Then we got users who will complain about not using the draft standard colors, so it will be just back and forth (like it was before this standard was discovered). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
But you should to know 100% use http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/a/a9/20110708173516%21Flag_of_Thailand.svg color. You can see at The royal palace, The PM office, etc. --Jo Shigeru (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
But here is different. With a few exceptions, we have for years used the real colors of flags when making our images. So if the Internet uses a lot of the lighter shades, it won't have an affect on us because we have a draft government standard to use the colors. Nearly all of the flags we have here are using Pantone, Munsell or some other kind of color format. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
No..... You should to upload another picture by use you color and use Thai standard color in Wikipedia.
Ps. Can you read Thai? If you can I will talk to you in Thai because I don't use English well. --Jo Shigeru (talk) 06:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Then people will fight over the main image. I do not read Thai well; my languages are English and Japanese. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

This is latest standard of Thai flag http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=184652988267866&set=a.103840809682418.6548.100001694983517&type=1&ref=nf --Jo Shigeru (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

What is their source? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Whoops! Sorry, I failed to notice the age of the discussion. Moving my comments to the Jo Shigeru's page instead.
As for the Facebook image, it's from the Thai Flag Museum's Facebook page, described as a Powerpoint slide by Colonel Kittisak Boonsook used for presentation in a related project. Doesn't specifically state the source or derivations though. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC) --Paul_012 (talk) 06:00, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File:UK traffic sign 602.svg

Regarding the edit war, all I did was a colour correction, editing the shade of red, and making the lettering solid black instead of a very dark grey. HorseWitch, a now permanently banned user, reverted me without any reasoning. Then Admin Bidgee attempted to use COM:OVERWRITE as reasoning against my change, however if you read that, my changes fall exactly within what that proposed policy says IS permitted. For further comment, please see my talk page. Fry1989 eh? 17:07, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I must ask that as a fellow Admin, you talk to Bidgee and disuade him from going back through ALL my past edits and undoing them. There are plenty of files where I have tirelessly worked on colour corrections, and have sources to back them, however he is undoing all my work on a personal whim and claiming I'm over-writing these files, which simply is not true. I have not cropped them, I have not rotated them, I have done notyhing but colour corrections (PER SOURCES), which is what COM:OVERWRITE says the "upload new version" button is for. This is getting rediculous that Bidgee would undo all my work just because he thinks I'm over-writing, when that simply is not true. Fry1989 eh? 17:36, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
If the change is undone, put it as another file, as that proposed policy states. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Per my talk: Bidgee is not undoig my changes as an objection to the change itself, but under a false assumption and attempt to corolate a edit war on a road sign as a signal that ALL my edits are bad. Unless he has reason to doubt my colour corrections, he has no reason to undo them. Nobody has doubted or objected to the corrections I made, nor does he. He's only doing it to try and accuse me of violating a policy of which I am not. Fry1989 eh? 19:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
It is only a proposed policy, but still trying to see what this entails. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Look, I know I'm a difficult person, I can't pretend that I'm not rough around the edges, and sometimes even quite rude. That's my personality and I'm trying get get around it. However, I do not understand how Bidgee can accuse me of over-writing (and mor importantly, undo all my past work and threaten to ban me) when I'm not, over one single file dispute. There are tonnes of other examples of REAL over-writing, where ratios are changes, coats of arms in the flags are changed (like San Marino's most recently), that would warrant closer note then a simple colour correction that changes nothing else. The policy (proposed or not) that he keeps quoting in accusation, clearly states I'm not violating anything by simply correcting a file's colour. I can even give sources if that will quell him. But to go back in time and undo everything I've worked so hard for, as is I'm just on here to muck everything and anything up, I can not accept such an accusation, implied or realized. Fry1989 eh? 21:02, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
When looking at this page, the San Marino situation was what I had in mind. The basic flag stayed the same, but specifications was set out and changed a few things. What happens when I get a spec, like lets say I did with Belarus, Sri Lanka and Kazakhstan? I honestly don't know. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 01:37, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Zscout, I'm trying to be better, really I am. And I am willing to self-impose the condition of posting my sources whenever I make changes from now on. However, looking through his history, I do not believe Bidgee's department of expertise is flags, and this is strengthened in my mind by his choice of words on File:Flag of the Seychelles 1977.svg, saying that my change wasn't a simply colour correction, which I would argue, since I kept the colours pretty much the same, only making them more harmonious. It's not like I changed red to purple or something. If there's any way you'd be willing to watch over me, and have him let the issue go, that would be most conductive, I believe. He says things on my talk page which don't make sense, such as wanting me to upload all my changes (no matter how minor) separately, and have a discussion about it, but that isn't imposed on everyone else, and I can list so many examples to back that up, where people have updated the files of others (often without posting sources themselves) without question. Considering my changes to these 8 flags had been up for 2 weeks or so, and no users (including the original uploaders) made any doubt or question of it, I don't understand how he can claim some sort of controversy, when one simply doesn't exist. Fry1989 eh? 23:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I am going to talk to Bidgee because there are a lot of problems with the overwriting policy that I need to figure out. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

My internet access will be over by tomorrow, and I will not be home until the 20th. However, anything you do regarding this is greatly appreciated, and hopefully by the time I arrive home, this matter (which yes, is partly my fault), will be resolved in a suitable manner for all involved. Thank you Fry1989 eh? 04:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Need help

Hi! I uploaded better versions of several images: File:5 3 vycio kryziaus ordino medalis reversas.gif, File:5 4 vytauto ordino medalis reversas.gif, File:5 5 gedimino ordino medalis reversas.gif, File:Sausio13 reversas.gif, File:5 4 vytauto ordino medalis.gif, so it is no longer need to keep them. What do you think? Sincerely, --Kwasura (talk) 17:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Let me think about it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Flag of San Marino.svg

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | 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:Flag of San Marino.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.

Lokal_Profil 15:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

As you may know, SVGs use only RGB (HEX) colors. It's difficult to find a reliable CMYK to RGB converter, so I just used Corel Draw 12, then set all the official flags to the same shade for the reason of uniformity. --Alex:D (talk) 18:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
This document has Pantone shades and the site that I use is at http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx. I am using Corel X5, but since it is a Pantone flag, we can use that above site. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I have no preference for a particular hex value, however I insist on uniformity for the official flags. You can change the value of #59A7D3 with whatever you think it's closer to the Pantone shade. --Alex:D (talk) 20:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
This is what we use for the Pantone flags on Wikipedia. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Civil Ensign of Israel.svg

Would you be able to do one of your traces to make our file as close as possible to the diagram at the bottom of the last page of this Israeli Law PDF provided to my by a user? It turns out the Magen David is elongated after all, but it appears a bit less so in the Law diagram then the elongated version of the file we have. It'd be great to have it as close to the Law as we can. Fry1989 eh? 18:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

According to the user, FOTW also has an exact translation of the Hebrew text from the PDF at http://flagspot.net/flags/il~civil.html, as well as measurement diagrams. That should help you out. Fry1989 eh? 18:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 12:00, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_Sri_Lanka.svg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Flag_of_Sri_Lanka.svg 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Share Bear (talk) 12:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Blue_Ensign_of_Sri_Lanka.svg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Blue_Ensign_of_Sri_Lanka.svg 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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Share Bear (talk) 13:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Carpet nominating of Sri Lankan flags? Fry1989 eh? 22:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Coat of Arms of Afghanistan

I was looking at the file, and in the histories, there's a link to the Presidency's website (http://www.embassyofafghanistan.org/president.html). Noticing that their version looks somewhat different from ours, I right-clicked on it and was surprised to find that it opened to a larger version (http://www.embassyofafghanistan.org/images/crest.jpg). Would you care to take a whack at making ours more like theirs, or would you prefer I take it to a graphic lab request? Fry1989 eh? 23:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Lab. I am not sure if I have enough time. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Rightio. Fry1989 eh? 03:31, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Btw, I think these two files should be merged, as they're identical. File:Flag of Herzeg-Bosnia.svg is the pre-existing version, although the coat of arms isn't true SVG, while File:Flag of Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia.svg is a newly uploaded version that is true SVG, and probably should have just been uploaded over the first one. The same with File:Coat of arms of Herzeg-Bosnia.svg and File:Coat of Arms of Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia.svg. In both cases the first version is long pre-existing, but not true SVG, but are widely used, while the second version was just uploaded and so far not used as much. Fry1989 eh? 20:39, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
{{duplicate|Flag of Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia.svg}} and add to the talk page for CommonsDelinker. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:35, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Libyan notes

Hi, I noticed that you deleted File:Libyan dinar one a.JPG (w:Libyan dinar; issued ~1971) after Greenshed (talk · contribs) tagged it as a copyright violation of the Libyan government. Do you believe that Victor Korniyenko obtained this image from a Libyan government website? I've looked through the tineye results and cant verify this. We have many other banknotes in Category:Banknotes of Libya and it does not appear that the copyright laws of Libya protect this work. File:Libya - 5 dinars 1.jpg refers to "Libyan Copyright Law No. 7 of 1984", which I haven't been able to find a copy of quickly (wipo doesnt have it). However I have read the older law (s:Copyright law of Libya (1968)) and not found any clarity regarding works of the government. Commons:Licensing#Libya doesnt help in this instance either. If we assume that the Central Bank of Libya is treated like any other organisation, the copyright in the original 1 dinar notes expired ~2001, however we would need to compare the original design and the current design to determine whether a new copyright is warranted. John Vandenberg (chat) 01:54, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey John; I will check on the image but I will need a few days. I am moving back to university and will be either very busy or be offline. I will take a look at the copyright laws and see what I can find. I know a lot of the Commons pages that are not helpful when it comes to the smaller countries and I will see what I can find. 70.178.57.174 03:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. No rush. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, in the 1968 law, Article 4 states that official documents are not protected with copyright, but nothing about currency. Honestly, I cannot find the 1984 text too, so I think unless someone provides the text of the 1984 law (either in Arabic or English), I do not feel comfortable restoring the image. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
1968 is one year before Gadaffi took power. So it's likely that law was invalidated in 1969. Anyways, in a dictatorship the rule of law doesn't apply only the whim of the dictator. No matter how many laws they draft to justify their rule. SpeakFree (talk) 16:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Until just recently, Gaddafi's Jamahiriya was the government and their laws were the rule of the land. Disagree with him all you want, but if they passed a new IP law, then we will have to follow it because of who we are. Even if the United States doesn't give two shits about Gaddafi, we have to recognize any Jamahiriya copyright law that was passed in the terms of the Commons. Once the NTC does take power, which I think they will, there would be a new IP that we will follow. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:40, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

高精度な旗を追加していただけませんか

Zscout370さんMtiです。高精度な旗のアップありがとうございます。私は今、日本の市町村の旗をアップしており、1000枚以上アップしてきました。あなたの高精度な旗の画像は見やすいです。さて、この旗ですが高精度な旗をアップしていただくことをお願いしていただけませんか?お忙しいところよろしくお願いします--Mti (talk) 08:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

うん。でも、大学がはじめました。多くの時間を必要とするください。 User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

File:CoA of Slovakia 1993.svg

Your comments would be more usefully directed at User:Trimnapaschkan... AnonMoos (talk) 01:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:CoA of Slovakia 1993.svg

You said you deleted it, but it still exists. Can you delete it completely? This is the second file I've found where an admin has "deleted" it, but it's still here. Fry1989 eh? 21:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

(表示/非表示) 平成23年7月27日 (水) 16:03 LtPowers (トーク | 投稿記録 | ブロック) 「File:CoA of Slovakia 1993.svg」を復元しました ‎ (4 revisions and 2 files restored: per http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AUndeletion_requests%2FCurrent_requests&action=historysubmit&oldid=57221430#File:CoA_of_Slovakia_1993.svg) (global usage; delinker log) User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Fry19189 certainly seems to be elevating his usual level of obnoxiousness with respect to this particular image (not sure why)... AnonMoos (talk) 01:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Because I wasn't aware that it was undeleted, thats why. I already found another file which another admin said he deleted, and it wasn't for some reason, and I assumed it was the same case here. I am TIRED of Anonmoos making judgements on my character, accusing me of malicious intentions, and claiming to know more about the state of my mind than myself. He has done it since the beginning when I first joined. Until he apologizes, I will continue to remove any of his comments on my talk page without replying. Fry1989 eh? 02:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
From what I could tell in the law, there are black outlines on this coat of arms. The only specifications I have is from http://www.psp.cz/eknih/1939ssr/tisky/t0015_00.htm and it is from the 1939 law. I think what Fry wants to do is to have every coat of arms look exactly like what it looks like in the laws; anything not matching that is declared superseded. Also, with this newer upload, he wanted to make sure people use the most official arms with the most official colors, which is derived from the flag. I don't have anything in the terms of Slovakian flag specs, so I will have to find out what the arms look like at a later time. Also, btw, I am using the Japanese layout so all of my logs will be in Japanese. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Accuracy is always a key for me, but my other objective when I mark a file as superceeded is exactly what the superceded tag says: "it is recomended to use the other file". Not mandatory, as some people on here act like (as if superceded means it's forbidden to use the superceded file), recomended. I mark files as superceded when I believe it is best to use another version of a file, for a variety of different reasons. Now, I have absolutely no issues with File:Coat of Arms of Slovakia.svg as it is currently rendered, but I do have problems with different versions floating around all claiming to be the same thing, when they aren't. Using superceded is my way of gently pushing for one version to be used, instead of different ones in different places. Fry1989 eh? 03:34, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
If there are a significant number of closely-similar and semi-redundant images, then there certainly can be some judicious pruning. HOWEVER, just because two alternative artistic renderings of the same emblem or coat-of-arms both exist on Commons, this is really no reason for the alarm and near-panic you seem to feel when confronted with such a situation. In many cases, neither is "incorrect" as such, and both of them can perfectly well coexist here without need of your frantic efforts to stigmatize one of them as being allegedly superseded... AnonMoos (talk) 21:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm pretty tired of Fry1989 behaving like a 19th-century French royalist -- they "never forgot anything and never learned anything" -- and having to be perpetually repetitively bludgeoned into adopting semi-reasonable behavior. I imagine it's not enjoyable for him, and it's certainly grows tiresome for me, but Fry1989 rarely seems to modify his long-term behavior in any significant way, and past efforts to settle things don't seem to result in the next incident down the road being averted... AnonMoos (talk) 06:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

See Zscout, even now he acts with an air of superiority. He's had daggers for me from the very beginning, just because I don't always "colour within the lines". Until he appologizes, I don't want anything more to do with him. If he contacts me on my page, I will continue to ignore it and delete it. Fry1989 eh? 20:33, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Finally recognizing and acknowledging a few very obvious basic simple facts which have been long-standing bones of contention (such as that galleries are selective while categories are comprehensive) would go a long way towards clearing the air... Meanwhile, your announced "ignore everything 100%" policy does not point the way towards meaningful dispute resolution or constructive collaboration. AnonMoos (talk) 21:13, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Takabeg

Can you please talk some sense to this user. He doesn't understand why File:DZKK emblem.svg is free on Commons, and is disrupting it's use, because there is a similar version on Wikipedia-English that is marked as non-free. I have tried explaining to him 5 times on both his Commons and Wikipedia page that the reason the Wikipedia version is non-free is because it was taken from another website, and we don't know which. However, the Commons version was freely made by the uploader, and he has chosen to release it to us. The only copyrightable part of it is the shield in the middle (which can be seen on the Turkish Navy's website). The rest of it was taken from other free seals on Commons. The shield is heraldic, so therefore each version does carry it's own rights, and the uploader has the right to release it to us. Takabeg simply refuses to acknowledge this, continuing to claim that because one is non-free on Wikipedia, that they all have to be non-free, and it can't be on Commons or used any where else. Fry1989 eh? 01:58, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Thai flags

You changed the colours in File:Flag of Thailand.svg, but you forgot to make the same colour changes in its dependent images -- File:Naval Ensign of Thailand.svg and File:Naval Jack of Thailand.svg. -- Denelson83 (talk) 06:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The changes to the dependent images have been constantly reversed. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Japan Air Self-Defense Force roundel.svg

Hi! Do you remember if, in this picture, the red circle should have 14/15 of the white radius or 14/15 of it's area? If the smaller circle is 14/15 of the roundle area, the red circle should have r="1449.1" (= (1500^2*14/15)^0.5), once the external roundle has r="1500". =P Giro720 (talk) 03:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't remember, it was explained to me from a Japanese guy. I will have to ask for details again. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:08, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi there.

If you have time, can you fix the font in the following two seals accordingly to their sources? File:Seal of the Senate of Massachusetts.svg and File:Seal of the Governor of Massachusetts.svg and their sources are 1 and 2. Fry1989 eh? 17:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the flag of Libya. Since they're identical, should we merge the following 3 files (File:Flag of Libya.svg, File:Flag of Libya (1951).svg and File:Flag of Libya (2011).svg)? It makes sense to me, I don't think we really need 3 of the same thing. Fry1989 eh? 22:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Keep the 1951 one, delete the 2011 one. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid you will have to do that. I already nominated it, and admin:JCB kept it. Fry1989 eh? 22:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Because it was in discussion at en.wp. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
That was at a time when the 2011 file and 1951 file were distinct from eachother. However, when I nominated the 2011 file, it had already been edited to make it identical to the other, and therefore redundant. Fry1989 eh? 00:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Libya flag

Hi, did you think about what to do with old flag. Did you create smth like File:Flag of Libya (1977).svg ? 94.251.235.134 19:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Already had a file in place, called File:Flag of Libya 1977-2011.svg that we used. What we did before the change over was to upload the 1977 green flag and replace any usage that depended on the flag, such as Olympic and other competitions. Wanted to be be sure most of the changes were made, along with a definite UN confirmation, of the flag change. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Request

Sorry to ask again, but you never did answer if you would be willing to fix the font in the these two seals File:Seal of the Senate of Massachusetts.svg and File:Seal of the Governor of Massachusetts.svg to match their sources 1 and 2. Fry1989 eh? 00:05, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, could you please take care of something for me. Gryffindor and I had a dispute about categories, but it's now resolved and the two of us have an agreement. Can you please close and keep "Category:Symbols of national legislatures", and delete the following: "Category:Seals of national legislatures", "Category:Emblems of national legislatures" and "Category:Coats of arms of National Legislatures". Thank you. Fry1989 eh? 02:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

colors of the flag of Thailand

Dear Zscout370,

Recently, the office of the prime minister of Thailand has published the new guidebook of the flag of Thailand, it can be downloaded from the link as follow: http://www.identity.opm.go.th/identity/doc/nis04486.PDF

I suggest that colors of this flag in wikimedia commons, include the naval ensign and other flags which based on the "trairanga" flag, should be apply for the colors in this guidebook. Thanks.

--Xiengyod (talk) 07:27, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Give me a few days to look at it please. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Presidential Standard of the Republic of Korea.svg

I would hardly call a single change in over a year an edit war. I have 4 solid sources, and they have been respected since June of last year. My version should be maintained unless you can find something from the Korean Government that explicitly says otherwise. Fry1989 eh? 01:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

http://ehistory.go.kr/photo_pds/PR-%B4%EB%C5%EB%B7%C9%2B%BF%B5%BA%CE%C0%CE%2FPR-2011%2F%C4%AE%B6%F3%2FPR-2011-0091%2F2400dpi%2FPR-2011-0091-001.jpg at least one image shows the light blue. I am trying to find the Korean law about the symbols of the president but the sites keep coming up as 404s. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
The official law about the symbol is 대통령표장에관한건 and I am trying to get a program to open these bloody HWP files. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
I have the following four sources: 1, 2, 3 & 4. While the larger flags are a lighter blue than I have chosen, it's still darker than what was reverted to. Fry1989 eh? 02:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
I am able to open the law. The first thing I notice is that the standard has two sizes, a 20x30 that is used by cars and 70x105 size used officially (so the ratio of 2x3 is confirmed). There is a blue color listed on the flag, but it is a very small hanja writing and all I could see is "blue." I am trying to see if there is a way I could copy and paste the text into Google Translate. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Despite his revert, Shibo77 claimed it was the same blue as the national flag. We know that blue is darker, as I have used. The Presidential Seal of the ROK, which contains the Presidential symbol of two phoenixes, is also explicitly clear about the blue being darker Fry1989 eh? 03:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Let me see if I can get someone to look at that law and give me an idea. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I just read that 대통령 표장(大統領標章)에 관한 건 law you've posted on Fry1989's talk page, it isn't mentioned in the text, but the Attachment 1 construction sheet seems to say “鴉靑色”(Hangul as 아청색?, raven blue?). I wasn't familiar with this colour, but here are the Google Image results. --Shibo77 09:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Croatia

Hi there. We spoke several times about Croatian flag and CoA. Last month Presidency of the Croatian Parliament has adopted decision about graphic standards for the flag, coat and presidential standard. Are you maybe intrested to update relevant files here on commons (i would like to do it, but i have some problems with my computer). So here are the relevant links: http://www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?sec=4317 http://www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?sec=4316 http://www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?sec=4318

Thanks in advance --Ex13 (talk) 21:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I am going to look at it. I also have the book by Zeljko Heimer about Croatian symbols and I can see what I can pull from that (once I get home next month). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 02:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Flags of Russia

I'd like a real good reason why we should keep colours that are absolutely unsourced, as opposed to colours which are extremely likely. I understand we don't have the official colours from the Kremlin yet, but until we do, plenty of users have expressed concern about the colours we're using now, which appear in none of the images on the web. We should go with the most likely colours, as observed, until such time we know for sure. I've never seen an actual reason from anybody to keep these colours which aren't sourced. Fry1989 eh? 21:48, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The colors from the Kremlin are just that, colors from the Kremlin. Various color shades are provided ranging from very light to very dark. Plus, when I made changes to the darker colors, people reverted back the very first drawing I did. As for Russia, there is no official color set of the flag. For the document GOST R 51130-98 which can be seen at http://vsegost.com/Catalog/89/8980.shtml the only thing specific about the flag is when it is made, the colors must be in Pantone. But no shades have been provided by that document or anywhere else. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
I know that, which is why we should go with the mostly likely colours. I have gone through hundreds of images of the Russian flag, and the shades I have chosen are the best match. There's no real reason to keep the flag the way it is, unless we had an official document stating the legal shades. Fry1989 eh? 22:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Which we don't; as I pointed out on the talk page of the image, anything that is darker, faded is rejected and only 1 user agreed with you about the "neon colors need to go down" but that is it. I agree the number of images need to be reduced, but not sure how to go about it. I tried asking the Kremlin for specific shades and found nothing. Let me see what they have now. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
My intentions are always for the best here, no matter how aggressive I can some times be. But how anybody can get the colours we have now, out of [5] is beyond me. I ofcourse always try and yield myself to official sources, but when we lack those, there isn't really much more choice other than observation of actual flags in use. But thank you for atleast looking in to it, rather than dismissing me. Fry1989 eh? 23:45, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
For this specific flag, I been trying to figure out this issue for years. Use the "neon colors" and one person gets angry; go to a darker color and you have the entire ru.wikipedia looking to revert. Colors have been a sticking point on Commons images for years; I remember having issues with the Swiss and Italian flags where we had official sources and guidelines and people are just refuse to listen or focus more on wanting what is "commonly used." So far this year, I am aware of 3 flags that changed color specs (Serbia, Sam Marino and Mauritius) and have obtained so many color sources in the past few years on Belarus, Japan, Ukraine, Thailand and several others. It is almost like a never ending quest. My only suggestion is to discuss before changing, which is what seems to be the issue you and I have (along with others). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
People will always be stubborn, I certainly am. But I try to act in the best interest of our common goal here, to provide information, and whenever possible, provide it accurately. Yes it's an uphill battle, but it's a battle we all share. Fry1989 eh? 23:55, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
These ISO documents will be key; for example what I did with http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Mauritius.svg recently. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Ai-yi-yi, I didn't notice that. You'll forgive me, but as much as accuracy is important to me, so are aesthetics. I don't know what was wrong with the old colours for Mauritius. Sadly, some countries had standardized their colours to a setting which are less than flattering. Thailand, Serbia, some others have come to mind. Oh well, we do have to do what they say. Fry1989 eh? 00:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)