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.
Please help to close that nomination when the time has come
Dear Cart: I have re-created that nomination because the bot closed the original one too early (the usual “nomination was added to the list of active nominations only some days after the creation of the nomination subpage” problem). Now we must take care that the re-created nomination is closed manually when (and only when) the time has come, namely around 17 April 2024, 23:25 (UTC) (i.e. 18th April, 01:25 middle-European summer/daylight saving time).
Can you please help me with that, i.e., take a look at that nomination on 18th April and, if not yet done, add {{FPC-results-reviewed}} with the results to the nomination subpage (and the usual ‘featured/not featured’ to the headline)? Then the bot will (hopefully) do the rest. I just want to make sure that I don’t forget this – somehow there seems to be a jinx on me with that nomination ;–), so I feel much better when you have an eye on that nomination, too. Thank you very much! – Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
CCing this to Radomianin – dear Radomianin, if possible please take a look at that nomination on 18th April, too. Mit dieser Nominierung scheint es irgendwie verhext zu sein – daher ist es besser, wenn drei Leute draufschauen und sie rechtzeitig schließen. Vielen Dank! – Aristeas (talk) 08:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Ok Aristeas, I'll keep an eye on that nom too. ;-) You really should apply for Admin so you get the tools to help users fix nominations that were created and added to FPC in some faulty way. With your diligence, good manners, patience, and knowledge of coding, you would be perfect. You'd get my vote. --Cart(talk)08:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Many thanks to both of you, Cart and Radomianin! Now I feel better about this nomination. (And sorry that this thanks come so late – I though I had already answered this but somehow I only clicked “thank” and forget the answer. Stupid me.) All the best, – Aristeas (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Appreciate your efforts, Cart. I was just about to take care of it and saw that you had already done so. Thanks a lot for your help :) -- Radomianin (talk) 06:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Dear Cart, dear Radomianin: thank you so much! Here is a little Robin singing a thankful melody for both of you. ;–) I know it was confusing to ask two people to take care for that nomination, but after all the bad surprises with that nomination I wanted to be absolutely on the save side. I’m glad it’s over. It’s great that besides all the vanity, personal animosities and quarrelling there are still decent, sensible and reliable editors on Commons. Thank you both for being such rocks in the surf! All the best, – Aristeas (talk) 08:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
No problem, there are some benefits to having insomnia sometimes. Cute bird photo! I saw one sitting on my "cat balcony" (dangerous place for small birds!) yesterday. No camera ready though. --Cart(talk)08:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Du får det här meddelandet eftersom du tidigare har bidragit med bilder till de svenska deltävlingarna av Wiki Loves Earth eller Wiki Loves Monuments. Jag hoppas att du vill vara med i år också! Som vanligt ingår naturreservat och nationalparker, biosfärområden och naturminnen i tävlingen! Utöver bästa foto belönar vi även fotograferande av tidigare ofotograferade objekt samt bästa bildserie om minst tio fotografier av samma objekt. Tävlingen börjar 1 maj, och pågår under hela maj månad. Om du har varit ute i världen och rest kan du även se om resorna sammanfaller med övriga internationella deltävlingar, och i så fall vara med och tävla även där. Expeditioner, fotosafari eller en helt vanlig promenad? Via en smidig karta som visar ditt närområde hittar du bra ställen att besöka – eller varför inte damma av fotoalbumen och tävla med bilder du har tagit tidigare?
No problem, Yann. I just saw it and thought it was a shame it should be in such a sorry state. Anyway, not so much if you compare it with keeping the FPs in order. ;-) --Cart(talk)22:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Yann, hi again! Just a note for the next time you do some archiving of that page: When you did the processing of FMC in January, you only added the new FMs to Commons:Featured media, list, which is sort of the 'front page' for FM where only the four most recent promoted media should be displayed. And you didn't add the new FMs to the gallery pages like Commons:Featured media/Animals. It's easy to miss this since FM is less developed with links and templates than FP. I have fixed this for you, so most things should be in order now. Best, --Cart(talk)23:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Jury for Wiki Loves Folklore
Hi,
I would like to invite you to be one of our jury member for the International photography contest Wiki Loves Folklore. If interested please drop us an email at supportwikilovesfolklore.org ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ02:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
have you a good idea for the gallery link of this nomination? The gallery link was invalid (pointed to an obsolete gallery page), so I have changed it for now to Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements, but I am sure there are better solutions. As far as I can tell the photo does not really show a “mosaïque”, but rather painted azulejos – do you see the same? If yes, some other FPs of azulejos are in Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others. Should we use that galley page?
Hi, Do you think that creating more categories would be useful? For example, subdivisions of "Fiction": comedy, drama, etc.? Yann (talk) 14:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Yann, first of all, let's clarify what you are speaking of. It sounds like you mean the FM galleries and not the FM categories. Is this correct?
The galleries are fine for now. New gallery subsections are usually created when a page starts to become too messy with lots of entries. In the case of Commons:Featured media/Fiction, it only has 8 files listed, so it's very small. The only FM gallery page that is close to needing some subsections is Commons:Featured media/Animals, but it's nowhere close to what similar pages of FPs look like. FM is still a very small project, but hopefully it will grow and subsections will be necessary.
The categories however, are virtually non-existent for FM subjects. There should be at least one category corresponding to each gallery page, with the gallery page as part of that category, like we have with FPs. Example. This really needs some work. I'm rather busy this weekend, but I could take some time to fix this at the beginning of next week if you like. --Cart(talk)15:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
It seems to me better to plan this in advance, but OK. I am going to create the categories. Yann (talk) 15:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
If you feel strongly about having subsections on the gallery pages and you don't mind doing the work, by all means create them. I just think it might look a bit thin with so few files on every gallery page. Thanks for starting on the categories. --Cart(talk)15:49, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Is "Time-lapse" a subject? Or rather a style of videos? We already have time-lapse videos of different subjects. I am quite confused what to do with that.
Yann Strictly speaking, time-lapse is a technique and not a style or subject, more related to animation than normal video. I think it's alright to let it have it's own category and gallery page, just like we do with 'Animated'. You could set up a parallell category tree with 'FMs by technique' and have normal/filmed videos, animations and time-lapse as subcats of it. The categories are so much more flexible than the gallery pages. An FM can be in several categories but only one gallery.
I haven't had a closer look at the categories in your other question. Can I get back to you later when I have more time, please. --Cart(talk)16:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Great work Yann! I think you are right about Educational for the NASA file, and to me Le Déjeuner looks like it could belong in the historical gallery, but could be in both historical and documentary categories. I think we should keep the names for all the FM consistent. Having one in 'Commons:Feature films' would look odd as it breaks the pattern. I also discovered some old categories floating around: Category:Featured videos & Category:Featured animations. They are from before media was separated from FPC. It would be great is these could be integrated into the categories you are working on now. You know, files moved, cat redirects and so on. It's all a bit messy and murky in the old archives. --Cart(talk)19:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Yann, getting back to you on your question about Category:Featured media by creator and Category:Featured media uploaded by user name. Yeah, they really are a mess. People have just lazily copied over their cats from 'by creator' to 'uploader' when these are in fact two separate things. Sure, in some cases the uploader and creator are the same user, but this needs to be clarified. Category:Featured media uploaded by user name is also clumsily named, it would be better as 'Category:Featured media by uploader' ands the subcats should be 'Category:Featured media uploaded by Xxxx'. Do you agree? I can get started on fixing these if you like.
Yann, FYI, fixing the FM user cats is going to take longer than I thought. The bug is that Eatcha included the categories in the headings, with no regard for the difference between creator and uploader. I'm going to have to dismantel his system and build a new one. <sigh!> I'll let you know when I'm done. --Cart(talk)10:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Yann, the categories for uploaders and creators are fixed and sorted out. There is probably still a big bunch of FM that doesn't have these categories since they were promoted after Eatcha left, but that is a task for later. I'm rather sick of those categories right now, but at least the system works. --Cart(talk)20:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fab Aurora
So... like most others I was out to catch the totally mind-blowing aurora last night. Up here in the north I could see straight up into the aurora. It was like being inside a dome or force field! As usual, I got a bit carried away and took too many photos, but hey, you would have done the same if you were out and stared up into some CGI for Star Trek. ;-) It's all in Category:May 2024 solar storms in Tuntorp, Brastad. Best, --Cart(talk)20:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
I was going over to your talk page to congratulate you on this ... when I saw "Brastad" in the cutline in the enwiki article I said "I bet I know who took that!" and indeed I had guessed right.
Interestingly, down at our latitude, 17º further south than you, it also appeared to be originating from directly overhead. I didn't try to take a picture because I didn't know how long I'd have to expose for and I didn't have anything to keep the camera steady (Now I do, but our skies have clouded over in preparation for raining all day tomorrow, so it's unlikely I will get a second chance).
But maybe the memory is best ... it was the most brilliant aurora I've seen in a long time, and it wound up being the first time my wife ever really saw the aurorae (I was wondering for a second why the sky was so bright to the west over two hours after sunset, then I realized what I was looking at. A nice sequel to last month's eclipse (which, unlike 2017, was behind a thin layer of cloud, but that created some interesting visual effects you don't get in a clear sky).
Thanks Daniel! :-) Yes, it was one of those "once in a lifetime" shots. When I saw the graphic on NOAA's site, there was a "rouge" big red blob (indicating the G5 probability) that seemed to go on a path of its own a bit further south and detached from the usual polar "doughnut". It came down from around Murmansk and floated south as it crossed the Atlantic. So I guess we saw that odd activity overhead at different times.
The evening started cloudy, but it cleared up just in time for me to get out. When I'm out on these night shoots, I'm usually alone, but not so this time. I have never met so many people at night in the woods as last night, although I was the only one with a good camera. But they tired long before I did, and standing alone the in the field surrounded by the forest with this "dome" over me, I confess that I got goosebumps all over my skin. I have seen spectacular curtains in mid-winter up in Jokkmokk, but this red dome beats everything. I hope it will be allowed to stay in the en article; I think it is unusual enough. --Cart(talk)22:14, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cart ! Regarding the revision here. That looks like an obvious error, as the nominator kept using the comment instead of using reply tab. So, I tried correcting it (as an uncontroversial maintenance, compared to the last one I faced). Your revision looks good, and this approach can be replicated if a similar situation arises.--iMahesh(talk)17:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi iMahesh, yeah on FPC, people are very touchy about having their messages/posts edited by someone else and you should not make a habit of it. This is considered very bad manners. You have to live with messy and annoying situations, as there is no such thing as "uncontroversial maintenance" on that forum. We've had people in the past who also wanted the page to look very neat and tidy; their edits were not welcomed. They only made the situation worse and irritated people. Best, --Cart(talk)17:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for info :) I’ve been active on Commons for years, mostly focusing on uploads and category maintenance, so this side of the project is new to me. I'll do my best to keep up and learn more (especially what not to do).--iMahesh(talk)17:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
In theory you're right, and if I say somewhere "please fix categories", "please choose proper FP gallery", "please add coords" etc., this seldom means I cannot go ahead and do it myself. The reason is an other, especially when I'm talking to someone who actually has a year-long experience... in this case even decades long, longer than myself. Regards --A.Savin19:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
A.Savin, I know, I understand, and trust me, I've been on the same "journey" as you about begging people to do the right thing. It is exhausting! But in this case, my comment was a genuine mistake at first and then relief that someone came to help in sorting things out. Russian geography with all the different divisions is very hard to understand for most people outside Russia. It's easy to make an honest mistake! No disrespect or hard feelings were intended, just plain ignorance for my part, I didn't know that Moscow Oblast was part of the Central Federal District. And I suspect it was the same for Yann since they usually add the sections to nominations, and I thought it odd that they didn't in this case so I checked the gallery page myself and couldn't find the right section. Please forgive my stupidity and accept my sincere apology. --Cart(talk)20:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
No need to apologize? We all make mistakes now and then and you know very well that I usually would not assume "stupidity" if a respected fellow user did something wrong, and you surely didn't. The other thing is, I *might* assume kind of POINTy behaviour if a certain user makes the same mistake over and over again, despite advices. There is an extremely productive "manufacturer of FP's", who is also a sysop, and who is continuing making the same silly mistakes especially with FP galleries. Here I'm inclined to think that's indeed POINTy because it's so tiresome and useless to discuss with him. Guess who's that. But that's a different story, of course not related to you. --A.Savin21:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
@A.Savin: I suppose you are talking about me... that's not very nice. I have no idea about administrative subdivisions of Russia, so I can't know which is the proper gallery. Yann (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
By the way, your statement "I have no idea about administrative subdivisions of Russia, so I can't know which is the proper gallery" makes me smile a bit, given the fact that we are -- supposedly -- in a project that is collecting knowledge, and thanks to Wikipedia and yes also to Commons, never in the history of mankind it was as easy as nowadays to get knowledge of anything. Good night --A.Savin23:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Do you have a new email?
Cart,
I tried your old email address to send you a screenshot of my computer with your aurora pic as its desktop image, but it bounced. So if you've changed it, could you go to my account and email it to me? Daniel Case (talk) 06:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
I was going to "+3" your comments on one of the FP candidates, but the submission seems to be gone.
Nevertheless, I appreciate what you wrote. I think the criticism of FPC photos is mostly constructive, but there is room for improvement, especially along the lines you described.
I've always liked stroopwafels, sometimes when I'm in stressful times like some people (I know they're not good for your health). I wanted to thank you for your comment on FPC, for being a light in the darkness, a drop of water in the desert full of inpatience and toxicity, your evaluations always bring me calm and peace, a constructive point of view. I have no way to thank you for how special you are for us. I will always support you and respect you. Wilfredor (talk) 15:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
The only problem with that is that Google translates Swedish like a Austrian goat. :-D It's such a small and quirky language, the translation algorithm can't collect enough material to process it properly. --Cart(talk)19:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Oh no, dear Wilfredor, there is no cow. "Speaking Swedish like a Spanish cow" is just a funny expression that someone speaks the language extremely poorly. :-) We are simply joking around here now. A laugh is always good! --Cart(talk)23:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
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!
Some FPs which appear twice in the FP galleries (again)
Hello Cart,
this is absolutely not urgent, I just want to note it down before I forget about it. We have again some FPs which appear more than once on different gallery pages; this means that sooner or later we/I must repeat our spring cleaning. That’s clear and simple. The only question is, in each case: On which of the gallery pages do we keep the FP, from which gallery page(s) we remove it? Here is a list of the current duplicates:
All of these belong to two cases: (a) Images which appear both in the “Black and White” gallery and on some topical gallery page; (b) wildlife images which appear both in the “In their habitats” gallery and on some taxonomic gallery page. Do we still have general rules to settle case (a) and (b)? E.g., should we/I put all black and white FPs on the Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Black and White and hence delete all duplicates from the topical gallery pages?
Hi Aristeas, well i's bound to happen from time to time. Old users who don't know the new galleries and some who are vehemently opposed to new things. (a) With the B&W, it's clear that they belong in the B&W gallery where they can be viewed in relation to other B&W photos. These days the galleries are all but obsolete. Even though photos at FPC are often compared to other photos in a proposed gallery and people active at FPC have a lot of opinions about them, the pageviews for them are so low that it's possible these are the only people looking at them. So with the galleriers as a tool now primarily for FPC, it stands to reason that B&W photos should be with other such photos for when voters compare an FPC with previous photos. (b) I think we can remove photos from the 'habitat' gallery and let people put them in the 'animals' sections to reduce unnecessary friction over placing them. Here too only FPC-ers care, so we don't have to be hardliners. Best, --Cart(talk)10:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cart, thank you very much for your answer – and sorry for the delay. I 100% agree with you and will fix these duplicates (acc. to your recommendations) soon. Thank you again and all the best, – Aristeas (talk) 07:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Aristeas. I agree with you on the cheetah photo, I just usually keep clear from the animal sections, since they are "guarded" by quite ferocious users and it's not worth the bother to confront then. --Cart(talk)08:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Den 1 september inleds 2024 års svenska deltävling av Wiki Loves Monuments, där det skulle vara väldigt roligt om du ville vara med och delta! Målet med Wiki Loves Monuments är att fotografera det svenska kulturarvet. De kategorier som ingår är byggnadsminnen, fornminnen, kulturmärkta fartyg och fritidsbåtar samt arbetslivsmuseer – och du är välkommen att bidra med bilder hela september.
Yann, I have no problem with that. Strictly speaking 'History' starts yesterday. ;-) However, I like the loose definition that an historic event/person starts with something your grandparents might have witnessed before your parents were born, and I think we are there for 2000 now. 'Pinging' Aristeas since he is the main caretaker of the galleries now and his opinion is valued. --Cart(talk)14:26, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Ok thanks for your answer. But by your definition, History for me would start much much earlier. Ha ha ha... Yann (talk) 14:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I know that might be the case in several instances. :-D I was going for the moderate average approach for the part of the world I'm familiar with. Using the digital photography guideline might be safer. --Cart(talk)14:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi Cart and Yann, thank you for the ping. After considering this for a while I agree that extending the Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People gallery up to 2000 makes sense. We should just add a hint to the introduction of the page explaining the new threshold and the reason (“until digital photography took over”), and also update the introduction of Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait accordingly.
There are always hard choices to be made when sorting the images. We usually go with the nominator's suggestion. People are mostly placed in the 'Historical' rather than the 'Historical/People' gallery when they are involved in an action that is of historical significance. Like when the thing/situation they are involved with outweighs the individual, like File:Margaret Hamilton - restoration.jpg. But <<meh..>> the galleries will never be perfect since so many users move the images around. If you find some faulty image, please correct it. It's up to the community to keep the galleries tidy, just like many other pages on Commons, it's not just down to two people to fix everything. --Cart(talk)14:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Dear Cart, dear Yann, thank you so much for taking care of the changes and improving the gallery pages! I was too busy in real live over the last week (and will be in this and the next one), so it’s great to see that you have already done everything. All the best, – Aristeas (talk) 11:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Fixed --Cart (talk) 23:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
.jpg)
wikilovesfolklore.org ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 02:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
.jpg/2){kind=link}
Done as proposed above, with a single exception: File:Cheetah at Sunset.jpg is IMHO rather an atmospheric photo of the animal in its environment than an usual species photo, therefore I have proposed to keep that one in the “In their habitats” gallery and removed it from the (quite comprehensive!) Felidae section on the “Carnivora” gallery page. – Aristeas (talk) 08:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
