User talk:Tony Wills/Archive011

Hi Tony!
Russia, Ukraine, Serbia, the Republic of Macedonia, and the Republic of Moldova celebrate Christmas on what in the Gregorian calendar is January 7. -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Difference between revisions of "File:Pineapple pub at night2.jpg

Not sure I understand why you edited this page File:Pineapple_pub_at_night2.jpg thus... FLICKR link holds all size and Creative Commons Licence etc. The image loaded to Commons is just one version. I recall I uploaded the original and hence largest image. Gordo (talk) 10:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

It is a slightly strange situation, the largest version on flickr, the "original" sized version is 900 x 597 you uploaded that here on May 2005. The previous version you uploaded here a couple of hours after it was taken in January 2005 is 1024 x 768. We don't really need to keep both, but they are two versions with different provenance, one can be verified by a bot as coming from flickr (with appropriate license), the larger version appears to prove that you are indeed the flickr user as you have access to a larger version. Might be useful proof as sometimes we have people using usercodes here pretending to be the same user on flickr when they're not.

Someone nominated the larger version to be deleted as a duplicate, whereas we normally keep the largest version. Rather than delete either I thought it reasonable to keep both :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Gordo (talk) 16:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last yearReply

Hi Tony, please see my reply at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mexicanos en usa 2010.png. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Tony, Some time ago you uploaded picture file Bul02Bird293a.jpg In its description you inform that the author of the picture is Walter Lawry Buller. This is not correct. It is William Dougall. See the online collections of the Museum of New Zealand (Te Papa Tongarewa), at: http://collections.tepapa.govt.nz/ where this picture can also be found. The birds shown on the picture are the Erect Crested Penguin (Eudyptes sclateri) and Salvin's Mollymawk (a type of Albatros: Thalassarche salvini). These are two of only 7 species of birds that breed on the islands, among which there is only 1 species of albatros and 1 species of penguin. You might want to correct both the author and the bird's names in the file's description. Thank you! Loranchet (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't think Buller's book acknowledged the source of any photos etc, thanks for the info. It is a wiki, you are welcome to make such corrections directly yourself. I have updated the file description page. Did you upload a copy of the original plate? If so, link the two versions together with wikilinks in the other_versions fields. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:15, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

You may remember that back in January we talked about the possibility of enabling AFT for Commons images. I've finally written up an RFC on enabling it - would you mind taking a look before I make it public and start inviting comments? The draft proposal is at User:Andrew Gray/feedback. Thanks, Andrew Gray (talk) 11:50, 15 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the comment! I've now moved it to a formal RFC - Commons:Requests for Comment/Feedback. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Tony,

A lot of images which are nominated for QI, are not assessed (positively or negatively) and after the 8 day period they are assigned to the Unassessed QI Images Category. Can these images be renominated?

--SuperJew (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I know the standards at QI are much higher than VI. I don't know anything about what QI expects other than reading the guidelines. So I'd like to ask, is it worth the bother (ie, does this image have a chance) to nominate this image for QI? Thanks. PumpkinSky talk 12:22, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

QI is just about being able to take technically high quality pictures, and giving you feedback to help improve your images. That image certainly has the basics right, good resolution, reasonable focus, good exposure (not over or under exposed), no chromatic aberration (colour fringing). It is a bit too compressed (only 706kb), which probably contributes to the overall colour quality and adds unwanted compression artifacts. I'm not sure what the cameras normal settings are, but set it for the highest quality setting, and when you edit photos, save them out at the highest quality setting. So I would submit it to QI and listen to the feedback :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Disregard; changed it to a simple move request. I just think it should be "Samuel D. Ehrhart"Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

You are using an extremely tight definition of feral; the term is very commonly also used for any non-native populations, whether they were of domesticated breeds or not, when introduced. The purpose of these categories was to remove the images of non-native individuals into their own categories so they are separated from images of native individuals; if you think the name 'feral' is wrong, then rename the relevant categories, don't mix the files back into the categories for native individuals. Now I have to go back and remove them all again - very tedious :-((. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 07:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

I am using the definition of feral - See my reply on Category_talk:Cygnus_atratus_(feral) :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:00, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

OK! I find it a mite pedantic (and have seen similar definitions rejected elsewhere on en:wikipedia on the grounds they are "prescriptive not descriptive") but being generally in favour of accurate naming, I will rename the relevant categories (probably to [[Category:Cygnus atratus (naturalised)]] etc., unless you would prefer something else?) - MPF (talk) 22:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Rename away, but keep in mind that if the names you choose are not precise people will of course remove images that don't match the category!  :-). Also did you note my comments on Category_talk:Cygnus_atratus_(feral): the NZ Cygnus atratus are a special case in that they have been re-introduced into their natural range, and it is thought they may have additionally self-reintroduced now that hunting presure has been removed. This also means that the category "Invasive birds", which the current Category:Cygnus_atratus_(feral) falls into, is not appropriate for the NZ birds. --Tony Wills (talk) 03:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

File:PR Vysoký tok, hovno.jpg‎

Hi,

you have recognised this as sheep product, but I would say sheep would never step there during recent 100 years. It is a deep wood. So it might be something simmilar to sheep like muflon?--Juandev (talk) 17:03, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'm sure you are right. But Sheep == w:Ovis, not just w:Ovis aries. --Tony Wills (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ha, ha - I see. I am not sure if Category:Sheep feces is international cristal clear. I would use scientific name Ovis or Ovis sp. or just write a description to the cat.--Juandev (talk) 20:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

:-) I was just sorting out some photos from Category:Mammal_feces and all the categories underneath it are by common name rather than scientific name, so they are rather general categories. --Tony Wills (talk) 20:56, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thx for your work.--Juandev (talk) 15:47, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

(Sorry for the sarcastic title...!) Have to say that you were FAR more tactful than I would have been. Looking at this long list of "helpful" comments I am acutely aware that it would be useful to have access to a rollback tool on Commons... Anyway, seriously, I'm impressed that you were so tactful, and is there a way to revert more quickly than going to each and every file individually? Mabalu (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

There was no point in being aggressive to them, they are obviously (well they appear to be!) a new user who has stumbled across the wonders of our file repository. In some ways it is nice to see their enthusiasm in adding 'helpful' comments to peoples photos! I wish to redirect their energy to somewhere more useful. If you hit them with a sledgehammer by blocking them, they are almost certain to never contribute anything useful :-). They are doing no real harm, just a bit annoying, but it is not vandalism, and I think it is unreasonable to use anti vandalism tools on someone whose intentions seem good!

But I do wonder why they haven't replied, or modified their actions if they have seen my posts. I am willing to give them a bit more time, perhaps I will try sending them an email (if it is enabled). --Tony Wills (talk) 11:35, 17 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

You are a good Wikipedian. I fear I am not so much (especially not after a few run-ins on the main site!) I agree it's not vandalism, but it's also not really very helpful or constructive. (I am impressed that they've worked out how to tag pictures though - they already know something I've never managed to work out how to do in years!) Mabalu (talk) 13:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

On each image page, directly below the image, I get a little "Add a note" box, don't you :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Oh. In plain view after all! Feeling really stupid now. I do see that the editor is STILL adding their incredibly useful notes to every image they look at... Mabalu (talk) 11:38, 19 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello Tony Wills, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

• Never actually used VFC, but have cleared the js page as I have long forgotten what customizations I have made, and it is totally unmaintained -- Tony Wills (talk) 02:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

What is the url of the original source where you got the high resolution image from? Please modify the images details with that info. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 23:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

If you check the history you will see that I changed the link to the page that is the source (you have to login to get the full version as per the download button there), I can try and find the URL of the image file itself, not sure if it is a stable URL and accessible directly though. Is it not best practice to link to the source page rather than deep URLs into peoples websites? --Tony Wills (talk) 10:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

https://bugwoodcloud.org/images/3072x2048/0023001.jpg would seem to get you there. --Tony Wills (talk) 10:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Everytime (almost) that they talk about waffle house here in my real life, I think of you.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• File:Виталий.gif
•  
•  

I haven't had a waffle party in years :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

•  
  a waffle
•  
•  

That sounds rude, but take a minute to watch this and you will have tasted waffle: https://web.archive.org/web/20151127015433/http://archive.freeenterprise.com/content/detroit-s-one-true-pop-faygo-and-future-fizz

And as the almighty creator said "We are here on earth to fart around. Don’t let anybody tell you any different" --Tony Wills (talk) 11:53, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

JopkeB (talk) 11:49, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Reply