User talk:Tony Wills/Archive005

Archives.
4/Mar/07 - 29/Aug/07
29/Aug/07 - 6/Dec/07
6/Dec/07 - 31/Jan/08
1/Feb/08 - 10/Dec/08

Wikiproject

can you please write under this how you start a wikiproject 04:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Link between photographers page

Hello.

I have made a topic called "More good photographers" on my user page. You could create a similar topic on your user page and you could include me in it. --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

It's kind of you to include me in your list, I will be redesigning my user page, I'm not sure that I will add such a list though. But thanks for the idea :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you

Hi Tony, been a long time. Thanks for the cleaning, though I would have loved to see a different outcome (without hostile attack votes) ;-). Welcome back. Lycaon (talk) 09:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pinus Radiata Resin.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments very good --Böhringer 06:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly drops.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red pouch fungus 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  OpposeThere is a problem on the top edge of the fungus (light part). Other comments: size is borderline, I would have chosen another composition with the fungus more on the left side of the picture. --Eusebius 13:32, 18 December 2008 (UTC)** CommentYes there was a bit of chromatic abberation, and yes I do tend to crop too closely - I've uploaded a broader view over top. --Tony Wills 09:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC) Better. --Eusebius 09:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC) * Support QI for me. Lycaon 09:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

interruptions to the fungus among us

"Officer, I promise to properly adjust the speedometer in the future!"

Please excuse this intrusion, I am in need of an exorcism and this is the only way I know to begin the process. -- carol (talk) 00:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I am uninterested in continuing the lessons I have had since 2003 and that is to not waste my respect on those who were involved in things before me and those who became involved after me. It is a lesson for de-evolution or for how a dominant species begins to not exist?

The motivation to show that there is always a person who can perform a task more effectively than me is interesting due to the size of the earth and the concentration on one single person who possibly already knew this. It is difficult for me to see this same activity happening to others -- a fault of my species perhaps. I can only make the honest claim that the conditions that put me where I did not want to go and could see no place for me at were unusual, mostly wrong and often more illegal than anything I was doing at the time.

I said on my talk page that there are unfinished conversations that torment me but that I wanted to keep those. This was not the entire truth -- I have one interrupted conversation which saddens me, that I do not want to repair using the established methods and that due to the time lapse and the linear qualities that a human life has.... It cannot be repaired and there are some days that my sadness of its interruption is kind of unbearable.

I did not often get to spend time with my natural father. I called him Dad. If Freud needs to be silenced, I can honestly say that there are things about my dad which I find to be very attractive in other men as well as things about my dad which I find to be very unattractive in other men. He was just my dad and made being his next generation to be both easy and a challenge to improve upon. So, that was for Freud and the ancient Greek playrights.

One of those few times I was allowed by circumstance and his new family to spend time with him we were doing what my family had done for all of those years which are my base of experiences. That was exchanging knowledge of technology advances. My dad and his dad were making circuit boards in the 1960s and I learned (a couple of decades later) from a casual bystander that they were pioneers of that era and technology. I remember from those days hanging out at Grandma and Grandpa's house listening to my dad and grandpa simply exchanging ideas and information from things they had seen and read. Their voices did not rise and fall with the noises that motivate political change and eh, class frustration and heh, Freuds life perhaps. Smaller rises and falls with enthusiasm or the quiet of thinking in between.

I know the "cadence" which is the sound of my family interfacing with each other. I knew the places to collect acceptable information from. I was my dads child and my grandfathers grandchild. So, when I would get to spend time with my dad as an adult, these times were infrequent and very valuable to me and it would take a few minutes perhaps to establish the environment again. Some of the infrequency was my fault -- I really wanted my dad to be happy and he seemed to really like his new wife and she did not seem to appreciate or understand my presence in that new environment.

The interrupted conversation is memorable for the interruption. The interruption was disgusting and I don't like the language that was being used. To "fight" this would require the use of this kind of language skill and this language can die and go far far away as far as I am concerned. Our family conversation was interrupted by this woman recounting her observances of watching her dog when she took her to mate. The implication of this interruption was that my dad had been mating with my grandpa. My exception to, saddness of and frustration with this particular instance of a socially enabled accusation/interruption often provides an unbearable torment.

My parents don't know me. They might be able to recognize me but they know so little of the things I have done in those years they did not share with me.

That one interrupted conversation and the class of people who created that language and the content of the statement of this interruption and where it such methods are more productively used -- it is a disgusting I am uncomfortable to talk about. The device was used to prevent our species from being the higher order which it defines itself to be and within the defines!

I don't think that my stepmother was an evil stepmother. My best guess she sees herself as a dog when she doesn't understand the conversation and that interruption to the exchange of information from a father to a father to a child was more of the expression of the ability to keep it all at a lower than the species level. I could be wrong. I would like for this torment to leave me -- I cannot repair it to make it cease. I am not as classy as she is. -- carol (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Small orange ball slime mold 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Slime mold sporangia 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

images that incite...

I have run into a cruel impasse while trying to use what little I know of that "other language" -- that language of imagery and symbolism and such that fits within the polite format. Perhaps you can help? Macros of slime are perhaps very on target for this, but I am trying to think of an image that says that the world is the kind of broken in which one person finding their mate will not repair.

Do you think it is a limitation of the polite world that uses a language that breaks every problem into this solution?

I would like to say that it is an interesting set of people who use that other language this way but the truth should be far more interesting and that lie is as large as a mite is small.

I just read a quote about burning bridges. I don't remember burning my bridges -- I remember reinforcing them (usually, yet not without fail -- for honesty's sake) with contributing towards the stated goals.

Such a large and open language (the means) should not itself be the tool that restricts the solution to such a shallow, ineffective and trite end? -- carol (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I made a quick search for demolished buildings. My goal was an attempt to provide a visual of a pile of rubble (which I have experienced people will gladly donate too unless it is removed) and a fit and standing building. This was to be an example of the "Plants of" category tree -- the pile of rubble and the "Flora of" category tree, the fit and standing building. To make the fit and standing building into the pile of rubble is senseless and suspiciously timed with how I dared to have the emotions of a real contributing person on the talk page of a New Zealander.

Lycaon and Foroa contributed to that move also. Is this a show of strength or of weakness? I don't know who operates the bot and the anonymous operation of that bot should be ceased and all anonymous use of it reverted.

On real public land, people are prosecuted for thoughtless destruction and the anonymous are sometimes gladly ferretted out by those who like that kind of thing.

That there is a set of users with no photograph of themselves here is kind of sad and kind of weak and kind of against the belief in contributing. When I first got started in a gnu project, photographs were exchanged. I have some reason to question the photographs I was shown, but at least those same people in those photographs were at the gatherings -- the second gathering had a very suspicious head of a software group of a newly included library.

That the tight groups are often nameless and most are faceless here really seems to allow a shameful amount of crap, of abuse of access and that the intelligence of the enabled is to be seriously questioned.

It wasn't that long ago when people worked together and made good things, thoughtfully or subtle changes that made sense to existing systems. Anonymity and access seem to be abuse magnets. -- carol (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly feeding on fly 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Macro and action. Very nice.--Mbz1 03:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

QI review

Hi Tony, did you oppose this nomination? Could you make it clear please? Regards, Eusebius (talk) 10:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I posted a  Comment, rather than a  Support or  Oppose, I will remove the extra line break that may have made you wonder (I may yet support or oppose it at a later date :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --Eusebius (talk) 11:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spider Wasp 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Is that there is wasp's underfoot is wood or anything? This wasp is very tiny, so I think it needs more explanation about scale of wasp and his underfoot to description. _Fukutaro 16:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC) Added size info and posted a reply to your talk page. --Tony Wills 10:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Rescue makes for patient posers? -- carol 12:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Image [[1]] question

Hi tony, [[2]] was original artwork. It was of course drawn using a variety of sources from a research perspective but I would categorise it as largely original work. Infact the very reason it was drawn was because the existing visual material on this topic was poor. As I recall none of the diagrams I had were particularly useful, so most of the detail came from photographs and only the part names and most basic ideas came from diagrams. I no longer draw for wikipedia because I have limited time, and can no longer afford to donate work for free so must commercialise my time, but I do occasionaly check back to see how things are going. If you feel the US D.o.Ag. piece your refering to should be referenced please feel free to do so, to be honest its been so long since I drew it that I really can't recall exactly what sources were used or to what extent. I hope this helps. --WikipedianProlific

This just came to my attention - [[3]], it seems HowStuffWorks have had no trouble plaigarising the work since it was uploaded here. --WikipedianProlific

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spider Wasp 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Chemical drawings

Hi there

I noticed your comment here. I was wondering if you've seen Category talk:Chemical images that should use vector graphics. Thanks. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

No, I hadn't noticed that discussion, thanks :-). I have replied there. --Tony Wills (talk) 19:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Large cicada 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Correct exposure and DoF. --ComputerHotline 12:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasp and spider 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments interesting --Mbdortmund 10:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC) --- Correct details. --ComputerHotline 18:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly Agaric mushroom 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Acceptable for QI. Lycaon 10:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thumbnails

Village pump is a general purpose multiple-use page which will be viewed by people using a range of browser programs and devices at a variety of connection speeds. The thing is, just about everybody who visits the Village Pump page will load the images diplayed inline on the page, even if they came there for a completely different reason. If you go to an image description page, you know you're going to view a larger-than-thumbnail-size image preview, and much of the time you went to that page in order to view such an image preview; however, the same is not true for Village pump. In these circumstances, it seems undesirable to have the images be any larger than necessary. Just about all I did was change "300px" and "400px" to "thumb" -- sorry if I made an error while doing so. AnonMoos (talk) 07:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Featured Picture Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Fly Agaric mushroom 04.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fly Agaric mushroom 04.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Karel (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

--> MORE MAGIC TO THE MUSHROOM <--

--Richard Bartz (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

--> MASTER AND SERVANT <--

--Richard Bartz 14:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Featured Picture Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Great Egret strikes for a Fish - crop.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Great Egret strikes for a Fish - crop.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Best wishes and thank you very much.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Comics

Thanks for your input on Commons:Categories for discussion/Current requests/2009/02/Category:Comics. I also asked for help on the french wikipedia wikiproject bande dessinée. Teofilo (talk) 12:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Fly Agaric Mushroom again

Hi! Check this nomination out. Miraceti (talk) 11:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I've left my comments there :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 03:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Important proposal

I wrote a proposal for equalizing the different picture formats on FPC Please have a look. Best regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Deleted files

Hi, I saw your message on User:Siebrand's talk page. Probably the best thing to do is get your friend to send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (read OTRS) stating the that he is releasing all his images for free use (including commercial) and perhaps specifying the free license he approves of. That is usually all the 'proof' that is needed. At the same time request the images be undeleted, either on Siebrands page (as he deleted them) or Commons:Undeletion requests if he is busy (give specific links to each individual image that was deleted). For the image that was your own, you should just have to clarify that you are the source and author etc (after it is undeleted). Hope that helps :-) --Tony Wills 20:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Tony, thanks a lot for the details, and sorry for the late acknowledgment, I was on a long wiki-commons vacation :) I will have my friend email at the above mentioned address. One of the images was my own, I'll request undeletion for that (GNAT at PAF Museum, Karachi) and mention the ownership at the commons page (and provide a link to my personal gallery). Waqas.usman (talk) 13:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Glad I was some help :-) Tony Wills (talk) 20:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Polistes dominulus

Category discussion notification

Category:Polistes dominulus has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Lycaon (talk) 20:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

Greetings belong on talk pages, not userpages. He's perfectly welcome to greet the user again, but on his talk page this time ;) -- Editor at Large • talk 23:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The reason the deletion log states that it's "vandalism" is because it was originally an IP who created the page, and I run across numerous cases on a daily basis where IPs vandalize others' userpages with random gibberish or rude/inappropriate comments. At first glance, I saw an IP editing a userpage with what seemed to be a random string of letters (of course, on closer inspection it translates to "what's up man"), so I deleted according to my initial impression. If Orbah1 is offended he can request I restore and then re-delete with an explanatory deletion reason. -- Editor at Large • talk 17:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red billed gull-14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good composition and details --Mbdortmund 18:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

QI Rules

Hi Tony, you might be the best person to ask about QI rules:) Let's say somebody, but me nominated my image for QI, and then this somebody moved the image to Consensual review. I wonder, if at that point I have the right to oppose my own image that is being disussed in this Consensual review, and if I have no such rights, why not. Thank you for your time. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

If you didn't nominate it, then you could probably review it (in fact the rules don't seem to say that a nominator can not review their own image, even if they nominated it :-). You can certainly vote in CR, for or against the nomination if you are not the nominator :-). --Tony Wills (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Tony It was kind of you to respond my message. I really wish me and some other users were at least half as nice as you are :) Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:23, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

"Let's do it one by one, shall we?"

Hi, I think the above thread is just going to make Lycaon feel harassed by you. Personally, although I do pursue arguments of principle strongly, I find doing it on peoples talk pages feels very personal, you are in their 'personal space' and are most likely to get either defensive or aggressive responses rather than a resolution. I think the point about whether voting on ones own image (if you are not the nominator), is something that can be discussed on the QIC talk page. I hope the issue is not simply being used to score points due to building antagonism between two valued Common's contributors :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC) I responded the message at my talk page, but because I've got more than enough from Commons, I decided to close my account and I will ask to delete my talk page right now. I'm leaving it all to Lycaon , who I have been "harassing" for "several years". In order for you to see my response before my talk page is deleted here it is: "Tony, I respect you a lot, and I am sad that you always take Lycaon side trying to find some explanations of the behavior that cannot be explained. Lycaon claimed that I was "harassing" him for "several years". The only thing I like to find out what in his opinion was this harassment. I even explained to him once that I came from a different culture, and maybe what is not considered to be "harassment" in my country, is considered to be "harassment" in his country. I simply wanted to learn in order do not repeat the mistakes(?) in the feature. He's never responded Do you really believe it is so much to ask for? Don't you think that maybe I'm feeling harassed by you posting this message at my talk page? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)"--Mbz1 (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC) Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if you felt I was harassing you, that was not my intention, and a single posting usually isn't construed as harassment :-(. I am also sorry if you were looking to me for support, and I seemed to come out batting for the other side, I'm not. I'm just trying to mediate between two 'online friends', two people I have respect for, but who don't see the world the same way :-(. --Tony Wills (talk) 06:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Excellent work!

Hi, Tony Wills!

Excellent research about dragonfly wings. You attentive to trifles.

--George Chernilevsky (talk) 06:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes I like my trifles with dragonfly topping  ;-P --Tony Wills (talk) 06:37, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ever thought of occasionally reviewing at COM:VIC?

Hi Tony,

I have often had you on my mind when it is going a little slow reviewing images at COM:VIC. We have one of those periods now. I think you would be an excellent VIC reveiwer, and I would like to ask you if you have ever considered giving it an occasional try-out? We are on the lookout for a few more reviewers (it is not a closed club or anything, any registered user can review there) as it would be nice if the review effort could be spread out a little more. In case I have managed to tease your curiosity you could have a look at the criteria and give it a try. If you have any quetions, just ask. And if you do not feel like you have the time or interest in it, that is something I respect as well. --Slaunger (talk) 13:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. I have been interested in the VI project from before its inception ;-), and have considered submitting images to it. But to be frank, it has always looked like a lot of work, and I waste too much time here as it as :-). Admittedly as George suggests, perhaps my energy is wasted, and it would be more useful if more directed. So I might come and have a poke about :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 13:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I do remember your early interest, and after all it was you who first coined the term valued images. I will never forget that. Concerning a lot of work, I will not lie. It takes more time to review a VIC than a QIC and an FPC. Just helping out with one once in a while would also be great. --Slaunger (talk) 13:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I seem to have been suggesting "Significant Images" was better. That is an opportunity missed as we would then have been able to have had a SIC(k) process ;-) --Tony Wills (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't be so modest, you mentioned "valued" on equal footing with significant in your edit summary. So you're the father of the name. Period. SIC(k), . --Slaunger (talk) 13:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)