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.
Fine to me. I've been trying to focus on older noms, to cycle them through. If you're going to drop notes, I'd preface them with @WP:TFA coordinators, so that Dan and Brian (who schedules every other month) are also contacted. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Crisco, with any luck someone will have come along and taken care of the matter in the next 2+ hours, but if not, I hope you'll be able to promote at least one prep to queue before 00:00 UTC. Right now, five preps are completely filled and the sixth is getting there. Thanks for taking a look next time you're around. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
The article on Ulysses S. Grant was featured specifically today because this is the 150th anniversary of the end of the American Civil War. Unfortunately, that fact is not noted under anniversaries; we have
April 9: Maundy Thursday (Eastern Christianity, 2015); Vimy Ridge Day in Canada; Day of National Unity in Georgia (1989); Bataan Day in the Philippines
1918 – World War I: Aníbal Milhais's actions during the Battle of the Lys made him the only person to be awarded Portugal's highest military honour, the Order of the Tower and Sword, directly on the battlefield.
1939 – After being denied permission to perform at Constitution Hall by the Daughters of the American Revolution, African American singer Marian Anderson (pictured) gave an open-air concert on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.
1940 – During the German invasion of Norway, Vidkun Quisling seized control of the government in a Nazi-backed coup d'état.
1967 – The first Boeing 737 took its maiden flight, eventually becoming the most ordered and produced commercial passenger jet airliner in the world.
2005 – Charles, Prince of Wales, married his long-time mistress Camilla Parker Bowles.
Crisco, can you take a look at this one? It was given an X about a month ago, yet it's still sitting there. The article has not been edited since. If there are neutrality issues, obviously it can't proceed; I can't tell whether it's been actually withdrawn, or if the nominator is hoping for another point of view to prevail. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
We would like to have a group discussion on Skype text chat with everyone on the FC team. In a few days, User:Go Phightins! will contact you privately to coordinate this. Please let him know about your availability if you are willing to participate. Thank you. Gamaliel (talk) 16:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
On 11 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Baturraden, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that young men jump off a 25-metre (82 ft) waterfall for money at Baturraden? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Baturraden. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Have you seen the English Doraemon yet? They've got piles of episodes on YouTube now, and my youngest is drowning herself in it. She seems satisfied with the translations, even though she's not exactly deprived of the originals. Curly Turkey¡gobble!04:55, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Picture of the day on the English Wikipedia for April 24, 2015
Who decided that this dubious and obsolete map should be used as an image to mark the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide? What discussion was held, if any? If it was a decision by yourself alone, please respond to my objections on the AG talk page. [1]Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:16, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
It was requested on my talk page almost two years ago, here. This not being my subject area, I'll observe the discussion, and make a decision in the lead-up to the anniversary. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Now that we're at three queues a day, we're running out of queues faster. There are a bunch of preps ready, and we'll need at least one of them to be promoted in the next eight hours, so we have something ready for the main page then. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
If y'all want to work on the blurb together, that's fine. My internet at home right now is screwy, so I haven't been able to follow anything — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh, if that's the case, should I just go ahead and replace the picture myself? Most of the blurp will have to be what the lead of the Armenian Genocide article already states.
On 15 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pancuran Tujuh, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that according to local legend, Pancuran Tujuh was discovered by a missionary with a skin condition? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pancuran Tujuh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello. Long time no write again. I don't know if you could do range blocks, but can you block the 203.176.181.* range (203.176.181.0/24). It seems this "Bang Habib"/"Said Muqaffa" guy is using several IPs in the range such as:
As you could remember, this guy is the one who keeps putting bogus Indonesian versions of TV channels and shows and connects unrelated TV stations. Please do this ASAP. If you're unwilling to do it, I know and admin who can, but may not be familiar with this Bang Habib guy. Just a heads up. Thanks! - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs02:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
For those who live in the northern latitudes, after a long, cold winter the days are finally getting warm enough to be outside, so perhaps we need to give voters a little more time, ie., be patient if the votes come in slowly.
Well, I'm trying to be patient, but I'm worried that people may simply not know. Maybe everyone who participated/participates should be pinged, inviting them to vote? Sca (talk) 13:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Crisco, here's a draft of the msg. I added names from current FPC comments, so it's not just those who participated in the discussion. What do you think? (Will all those names work as I have them?)
{ { U|Alborzagros|Armbrust|Bruce1ee|Adam Cuerden|CorinneSD|Diliff|EtienneDolet|gazhiley|Godot13|Hafspajen||The Herald|Janke|J Milburn|Jobas|KDS4444|Pine|Sagaciousphil|SchroCat|WPPilot|Yann } } You're invited to vote on the non-mandatory FPC voting advisory drafted here. Planned closing date is April 21.
Dear Crisco, a brief note to thank your again for your image review of the above and to let you know it is now at FAC where, again, your comments would be very much appreciated. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hoax =/= tidak ada rujukan. Hoax = sama sekali tidak benar. Ada rujukan yang menunjukkan, paling tidak, bahwa series ini pernah ditayangkan (dari KPI, misalnya). Kalau mau diusulkan untuk dihapus, silahkan melalui AFD. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:53, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
In case you're still around, DYK queues need filling
Crisco, we've got about 45 minutes until the next scheduled promotion (we're making our way back to the regular times), and the queues are empty. If you could promote a couple, that would help a lot. Many thanks. (I noticed you'd just posted something to this page, so I'm hoping you're still around...) BlueMoonset (talk) 04:01, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Done. In the airport lounge right now (pain in the butt, really... domestic flight, only two hours long, but I've still gotta transit) so I figured I'd surf the web for a bit. Not sure what my lodgings will be like in Bengkulu though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, these days the queues need filling practically all the time, what with three a day and not many admins around. So if you happen to be surfing, hop a wave over to take a look at how we stand. (Right now: empty queues, and four hours until promotion time.) BlueMoonset (talk) 03:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Shame I haven't been able to find any images of him. Even in the old Dutch / East Indies newspapers. Guess he was like me and preferred being behind the camera. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Amer Fort
Hi, Crisco – I wonder if you could look at the article
Hey Crisco. Do you have time to take a look at a few fairly mundane Request Edits that are aging in the queue?
Suggesting "self-storage" instead of "public storage" on the Uhaul page, to avoid confusion with a similar service from Public Storage[8]
Suggesting adding a couple more celebrity spokespeople (one of the things they are known for) to the Marketing section of the Proactiv page[9]
Trimming stock speculation/analysis and redundant information that was recently added to the Yelp page[10] (I also just pinged Coretheapple on this one and he may take it on)
If you have more time, there's also some more complicated requests at
Are you planning to close it soon? Might be good to get a few more votes from serious regulars like Điliff, who voted this morning. (Alas, Haffy seems to be gone for good this time). Closing is up to you. TNX. Sca (talk) 13:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
PS: Did I ever mention that my first wife lived for quite some time in Indonesia and often made satays, nasi goreng, peanut sauce and various other regional specialties? Sca (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Yum. My mom would love to get the recipe for the peanut sauce; she hasn't had luck with the recipes we've sent. I'm waiting until what seems to be the current vote has been up at least a week. That's another two days to go. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Crisco, can you please take a look at this one? It's in an odd situation in that one source, Wired, seems to be indicating that this new installation is the first art in the New York City subway system to bring natural (outdoor) light into a subway station, while other sources make it clear that there was once a City Hall station that did the same thing (it's apparently still there, but closed). However, the source that would seem to clinch it with photos and everything is a WordPress blog. (I can't get access to the New York Times source that talks about the City Hall station closure.)
Panyd pinged me, ready to approve it if only I gave the word, so I'm sending it over to you to decide. Thanks for any help you can give. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:45, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Order of battle in the Biscay campaign of June 1795
Nothing is intrinsically wrong with it. However, it was unable to reach a timely consensus; after being open for two months, it only drew a smattering of comments, and not a single support. You're welcome to renominate later, and may find that you get more responses if you also review other people's nominations. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh I see, thanks. Given the lack of activity at FLC I'll probably use the Military History A-Class review process in the future. Regards.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:32, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Hello, Crisco 1492. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 10:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{
@Armbrust: Hey guys, whom do we credit for when one guy makes a nomination page and another guy adds the alt/edit pic and gets the consensus for the alt? Example here. The problem is that whom hold I mention on Signpost FC? Both or either? Chris once helped me by that. -The Heraldthe joy of the LORDmy strength06:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Seeing from your note chez SchroCat that you have spare capacity at the moment, may I raise the possibility of finding usable images of P. G. Wodehouse? In collaboration with another serial offender at FAC, whom I am not at liberty to name yet, I am planning to overhaul the article to get it up to front-page standard, and suitable images seem hard to come by. Knowing your genius in that sphere I venture to suggest it, if you're short of a job. Ever thine, Tim riley talk18:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Always glad to help, Tim. The nice thing about British and American subjects is that there tends to be a decent amount of free imagery out there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Schlosskirche
Thank you for your sourcing work. Sorry, I couldn't do it myself without understanding what I should/could have done, and said so. If you explain I will try next time, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, now I learned something. Can't explain why I didn't even think of looking for the same image elsewhere, - "Brett vorm Kopf", we say ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
For public domain paintings that's usually a safe thing to do, so long as there is no frame. I generally don't upload unless it's from a museum or auction house website, but that's a personal preference. There's no requirement for that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Non-free images are only allowed in article space, and then only if they meet some fairly stringent criteria. SP definitely doesn't count. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
And no, a misclick is not "borderline vandalism". It's human error, which happens. Since Echo doesn't show us when people revert their own reverts (as usually happens in such cases, when people realize their mistakes) I've generally started checking subsequent edits to a revert as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorted then :) No worries. Bad day etc. Yeah grumpy, shit RL week. Apologies Crisco! Regards
Hello, Crisco 1492. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{
You recently updated Template:Did you know/Queue/1 and I'm wondering if you would do me a small favor and replace the {{convert}} template that it uses with the output produced (as can be seen at Special:ExpandTemplates). Specifically, my request is that you replace the first of the following lines with the second.
* ... that '''[[Ha Gorge]]''' in [[Crete]] is about {{Convert|1000|m}} deep and the fissure is said to be one of the largest in the world?
* ... that '''[[Ha Gorge]]''' in [[Crete]] is about 1,000 metres (3,300 ft) deep and the fissure is said to be one of the largest in the world?
The reason is that a few hours ago I updated Module:Convert but I can't edit it at the moment because the DYK is protecting the module. Unfortunately, convert has a problem and I'd like to fix it. Alternatively, you might like to copy the fix from Module:Convert/sandbox. I have to admit that the problem is not a big deal so it's fine if this request doesn't appeal, but I'm irritated by the bug. Johnuniq (talk) 07:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
He/she has just come back to add the same information. I've reverted it but we may need to protect the page from unconfirmed users if it keeps on. We hope (talk) 15:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Agree. I'm off to bed soon, but I don't think you need to worry about 3RR. Such edits appear to meet the criteria set out at
No idea why a video game keeps getting added to it-have warned the person on the talk page. Good night! :-) We hope (talk) 16:05, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
It's a terrible, terrible pun, so I got it right away. Red Skeletons (also Blood Skeletons) are common enemies in the series. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:06, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Never played this one, sorry. Maybe we'd better watch out so we don't get labeled the newest edit "tag team". :-D We hope (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
I saw somewhere that you were "looking for work". I find this hard to believe, but if you do want to review something you could try the above at FAC. It has some support, but I really would like more eyes on it. No worries if you're now inundated with work and can't get there. Brianboulton (talk) 19:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Crisco, is this image [11] definitely in the public domain? It was shot by Burton Holmes in 1896 in Greece. It was published in 1901 in his book [12]. As the border of the original upload shows [13], Wikipedia's copy comes from Getty images [14]. This [15] says the image is in the public domain, but I want to be sure (Getty is licensing it for money!). Thanks. Bammesk (talk) 01:55, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
If the image was published in 1901, at the very least it is public domain in the US. Since the book appears to have been an American publication, that's all we need. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I only made 2 edits to the article, both of which are already referenced by the article's creator.
The first one was to link Phoa's page to that of his famous son-in-law, Khouw Kim An. The relationship is already referenced by the creator of Phoa's page, and is quite well known among historians of colonial Batavia. All I did was to provide the necessary link.
The second edit relates to Phoa's description as a businessman. I prefer to describe him as a landowner given that he owned particuliere landerijen (landed estates). Or, if you prefer, we could use the term "landlord" which the creator of this page also uses in the main body of the article. The creator of Phoa's page has included enough references to establish Phoa's agricultural occupation. My only point of contention is that this agricultural occupation is better described as "landowner" or "landlord" than as "businessman". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastindiaman (talk • contribs) 13:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Landlord is considerably different than "land owner", which is the main issue with the first part; one can own land without actually being a landlord, and the Indonesian "tuan tanah" makes a similar distinction. The addition of an unglossed Majoor der Chinesen as part of a link was another problem, both because most readers won't know of the system *I had trouble with the 1740 Batavia massacre because of this term a while ago) and because including the title in the link to the person doesn't allow us to gloss it easily... that being said, I wish our article on Kapitan Cina went into more detail about the different ranks, but it doesn't. Anywho, I've reinserted the edits. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello again Crisco. Indeed, you're right. In Indonesian, strictly speaking, a "tuan tanah" or "landheer" was the legal owner of a "tanah partikerlir" or "particuliere landerij". Today, the term is used to refer to any large landowner, but - technically - it was a legal category under the colonial system that excluded even very wealthy landowners who did not own "tanah partikelir" or "particuliere landerijen". The social distinction in colonial Java between a landheer and a businessman would have been immense. My point is to differentiate someone like Phoa whose primary activities were agricultural to someone like Oei Tiong Ham, who was most undoubtedly a businessman. I've noticed that you're Canadian, the colonial Dutch system of particuliere landerijen was rather similar to the seigneurial system of New France. For a summary, see Benedict Anderson's "Java in a Time of Revolution: Occupation and Resistance, 1944-1946: pp. 168-169.
I'm not an expert on Kapitan Cina, but my impression is that in the Dutch colonial context the Malay term "Kapitan Cina would have included all three ranks: Majoor, Kapitein and Luitenant der Chinezen (see Mona Lohanda's Kapitan Cina of Batavia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastindiaman (talk • contribs) 14:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd have to see if my library has a copy; Western books on the subject are rather hard to obtain here. My main area of focus is not the social dynamics in peranakan society, so I don't know offhand whether "Kapitan Cina" applied as a catch-all term for all of the ranks, or if it was always differentiated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It seems i misinterpreted what you were saying yesterday on WP:AN, and you were actually making the same point as i. My sincere apologies ~ no excuses, but the reason may be partly that i was doing other things at the same time so not fully paying attention. I shall try to correct that in future. Cheers, LindsayHello04:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Whenever you get some time, could you please take a look at the article and let me know if its ready for FAC? This is my first time with FAC so would like to know if there any issues with the article. I would plan for PR if required. Thanks in advance. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:29, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
A quick perusal doesn't suggest any major flaws, but I do question how the statue was discovered... I mean, has it remained in one place for two thousand years, or? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick look. None of the sources, including official French government one, mentions about pre-1661 era. So unfortunately that remains unknown! However, article covers various events from 1661 till 1695 where statue had its place changed from one to another. I hope that answers your question. - Vivvt (Talk) 16:14, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Crisco, this may be old news by the time you see this, but the DYK queues are empty, and we're over four hours late to promote to the main page. If you can, please take a look and see whether we need a prep or two moved queueward. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:32, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Placing a warning on my talk page was very bad faith. I never deleted anything from any page, I never highlighted or selected anything to delete. I just posted a two word reply. That was it. And I think it's disgusting that you've said that I've been "pissy" with you since the Grande FLC. Please explain to me how, because I've had no contact with you. I've never had a problem with you, so I don't know where you are making this up from. I literally have no idea what is going on here. All I do know is that you and MeowCat are slating me on ANI, accusing me of deleting material and talking bad about me without even making ANY effort to address or talk to me to see what's happened. Instead, you have both just jumped to conclusions and ganged up on me over something that I don't know what happened. — Calvin99914:54, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
"I never deleted anything from any page". The diff doesn't lie. You may not have deliberately done it (hard to believe, as the two hour difference between the revisions rules out an edit conflict), but you did it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Calvin999, I can't imagine how something like that could happen accidentally, but to avoid anything like it in future, it might help if you not edit the comments of others in any way like you did here: [16] Specifically, don't edit the indentation of other commentators, which confuses who is responding to who. You inserted your comment into that conversation, and then added extra indentation to the other comments, which made it look like the other comments happened after your comment, and making it look like those comments were in response to you, when they weren't. This definitely isn't as bad as deleting multiple spread out comments and also a keep vote in an AfD, but it's still kind of poor talk page etiquette, and it seems messing with the comments of others could potentially lead to more unintended deletions. --BoboMeowCat (talk) 14:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
But I never edited anyones comment! I only added a two word reply of my own in response to who I believe was you, BoboMeowCat. No one is bloody listening to me and it's getting really annoying now. I don't full understand what the diff is showing, because I didn't do it consciously. I never removed, added, changed or reworded anyone else's comments. And Crisco, implying that I did it knowingly and choosing to denying it is further bad faith and also ridiculous. — Calvin99912:51, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Calvin, the diff shows you removed 906 bytes of text, of which included the comments of 3 editors and an !vote [17] from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Title (EP), an AfD you filed. As others have said, apologizing and moving seems an options, but continuing to be annoyed at those pointing out this policy violation doesn't seem constructive. --BoboMeowCat (talk) 13:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
It's not really difficult to see what happened. Calvin999 accidentally edited an old version of the page when replying to someone else's comment, removing all the comments between the old version and the new. Instead of this semi-ridiculous conversation, the way it should go is:
Calvin: Oops, my mistake. I'm sorry, I'll be more careful.
Everybody else: No problem, the software sucks and we understand.
Last I checked, your cache is purged when you load the edit screen (at least, that's always how it was when I ended up with caching problems)... but yes, the software does suck, and the WMF doesn't seem keen on fixing it. Calvin, if you're experiencing caching issues or the ilk, you may want to use the preview feature before committing edits in the near future, at least until it clears up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
It's happened to me before, and it's usually not a cache issue, and not an edit conflict issue. I'm reading through the page by hitting "next diff", "next diff", "next diff", and see something I want to respond to, and forget I'm looking at an old version of the page, and click "edit". There's a warning, but it's small. So I'm not saying it's the software's fault and not Calvin's, I'm saying Calvin made a small unintentional mistake that was amplified by the crappy software. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
CBS obviously took this photo in 1964, but they recycled it for a network special in 1969. The CBS release tag is there with date and there are no copyright marks on the photo. Getty has a copy here, and no one has made any copyright claims (real or fictional) on the Getty listing. Can we use this as CBS sent it out with no copyright marks to publicize their network special? Thanks, We hope (talk) 14:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
When you can, check the EXIF data on this File:Beatles with Ed Sullivan.jpg. I went through the UPenn artwork book for 1964 and CBS registered only a View-Master reel from 1963 in the year 1964. CBS didn't register anything at all in artwork for the year 1965. I checked 1969, when CBS re-issued the photo and they again registered only Terrytoons items. Nothing was registered with regard to any photos. We hope (talk) 17:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Crisco, I've had this image on my user page for a while, and I'd like to add a date to it, or at least an approximate date, but, according to the information on the image file, the painting is undated. There is no article on the English WP about the artist, Rudolf Tschudi, but there is a short article on him on the German Wikipedia, so I can see his dates. Can you give an approximate date for this painting? Do you read German? Maybe you or
I suspect there's an issue with the provenance, as the museum stated in the description doesn't list the painting. Their Peaches still life was 1916, so I wouldn't be surprised if this was around that time (this source says "undated"). (And, a strange thing: an American painter has an article on the German Wikipedia, but not the English one?). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
upload question
Hi Crisco, after I edit an existing image on Commons say for dead pixels, small rotation, or slight cropping, do I upload the edited image as a "new file" tagged retouched, or as the "new version of the existing file"? for example I will be doing all of that on this image. Bammesk (talk) 02:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
As a rule of thumb, generally I upload edits over the source file except when the source file has passed a featured process on Wikipedia or Commons. If this is controversial (i.e. I'm reverted), only then will I upload separately. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Very interesting article! It proves that the adage about every picture telling a story is true-even if one has to do some digging to uncover it. :-) We hope (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Crisco 1492. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 15:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{
Chris, when someone asks me if they can run an image on a TFA that looks fine to me, would you like me to run it by you first, or will you see it if I just put it on the TFA page? - Dank (push to talk) 03:29, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, crap. Over the last 7+ years, I've often thought "I really need to know more about images", and I've dived in several times only to come up gasping for air. This is another one of those times ... I'd like to help, but I can see so many potential downsides, given that I want people to feel comfortable working with me, and I'm often treading on thin ice already in my role as a copyeditor (and worse, my rewriting role at TFA). One problem is that there's a large OTRS permissions backlog (more than two months, in some cases); for all I know, he's tried to get help in the past and gave up. Another is that the recommended declaration of consent form is scary and legalistic. Another is the fact that he's been peppered over the years with "are you really John Romero?" questions; if I ask, it's going to sound to him (since he's unlikely to make careful distinctions among Wikipedians) like "I know you've been asked a thousand times already, but all those others who asked didn't do it in the right way and didn't leave any record what the answer was, so I have to ask again: Are you John Romero?" Another is that he took down the website that he still links to on his userpage, after complaining that he was getting the wrong kind of traffic; that may indicate that he wasn't particularly happy about the kind of traffic that a Wikipedia link was bringing him, and may not be happy about being asked to refer to Wikipedia on his web page. Bottom line: you image guys have to do what you have to do, and I'm glad someone is doing it, but I doubt I'm ever going to understand the process well enough to do it right, or to be comfortable with it. - Dank (push to talk) 16:14, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
That's pretty much it, yep. Now, I have little reason to doubt this instance (the photograph is not the sort of image that would be used for promotion [lighting appears to be "standard flash" (see the blown highlights on the ... server?), lack of an advertorial background, very relaxed poses (alright, maybe not a big issue in a relaxed studio, but the poses appear too casual)], Romero fits the profile for an early Wikipedia editor [male, American, IT background] and the editor's behavior over the past 9 years provide adequate circumstantial evidence for me that they're the same person) but there are cases where I've asked for more substantial confirmation. I'm fine with the current image we're using; I think the circumstantial evidence is strong enough. BTW, The link on his user page went to a personal wiki — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:31, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Image help
Hello! I'm going over some older FAs here or here. As you know, I'm no image expert, but many of the images in the old Australian biographies look very suspect. I'd appreciate your eyes on them to see which ones are safe and which ones should go. Thanks! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Took a look at Bill Brown (cricketer). If this is representative of the batch, most are acceptably free, but need cleanup (the correct date added, a US copyright tag added... some need authors, etc.) I'll see how much time I have for image reviewing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
WP:FANDC and the notepad are all up to date as of today. The over-represented TFA areas are still Media, Literature/theatre and Royalty (probably not a lot coming forward for the last-named). We need to keep the war articles coming. Otherwise the representation over the range of dubjects is reasonably OK. Good luck, and happy scheduling. Brianboulton (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Looks like a good set (though I don't think I'll be scheduling any songs for June; I just noticed we've got quite a few in May). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Thin on the ground
There is something fishy about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_International_School,_Bandung - it smells like something that was set up temporarily, and for some reason the Jakarta part of the system seems to be the dominant point, and the actual Bandung location looks as though it might not exist, despite the web based info... perhaps it is either an extension of the Jakarta site, or has closed... either way your A status suggests to me a suggested Prod might be of interest in the name of whatever... User:JarrahTree07:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
It's got a secondary school (supposedly), so I doubt a prod would stick. This has a scan of a pamphlet, so it may exist... and thus even an AFD would have a hard time sticking. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Gerda was talking with me about the image, so I checked the description, which said: "like the work of the forger Van Meergeren". If that's true, then it's a 20th-century work, but I don't have any idea whether it's true. - Dank (push to talk) 12:24, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Question about a revert (that I didn't see until today)
In regards to your revert here. why? I've seen others comment about other topics and said those should have a paragraph about it. --JDC808♫18:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
D'oh! Looking through
WP:FT, you're right. The problem wasn't the paragraph itself, but the fact that we didn't include <noinclude> </noinclude> tags. It was showing up at the main FT page, and thus disrupting that page's order. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Saya mau nanya, caranya menonaktifkan Beta & mengembalikan tampilan ke versi lama alias non-Beta begimana ya ? Soalnya saya lihat di preferensi nggak ketemu. Gini, saya mau pakai yang versi non-Beta karena versi Beta-nya entah kenapa makin lama makin berat, entah hanya kejadian pada saya saja atau yang lainnya juga & ketika saya buka Tolololpedia (yang tampilannya masih non-Beta) nggak seberat buka Wikipedia. Apa kalo nggak kasih tau aja gimana caranya agar tetap bisa membuka Wikipedia tanpa halangan tapi tetap pakai Beta. --
Not sure of the EV, as we've already got one FP in the focus stacking article (and it is more encyclopedic, to boot). There is some haloing, probably from the focus stacking, but that doesn't strike me as too big of an issue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I tried to manipulate the haloing, but couldn't get far. I will leave it alone. Perhaps other editors (or I) will do something about the haloing someday. Bammesk (talk) 01:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Image advice
Evening, I come to you as my resident "he knows about images and stuff" person! File:Grace Lee Whitney Star Trek 1966.JPG is due to run on the main page through DYK in a couple of days, it is currently in Prep area 5. The license tag is one that I haven't seen before, but seems legit, but the source is eBay, and as the listing has now been removed, is a dead link. I'm a bit wary about this, given it's heading toward the main page, what are your thoughts? Harriastalk18:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
The fact that there is no notice is verifiable through the file history; check the first upload. We hope is pretty darn well versed when it comes to image copyrights, and has found dozens of free images. (BTW, WH, maybe in the future we can archive the ebay listings?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
eBay links don't last forever and you can see this was uploaded in December 2013. I can point you to File:Leonard Nimoy Mr. Spock Star Trek.JPG, which has some additional details about the original Star Trek photos. To get Spock, I went through all the artwork (photos) and film (also covers television shows) original registrations from 1965-1969 and found only a registration for the film Yours, Mine and Ours from Desilu, which was the production company and copyrights in film for The Lucy Show. NBC registered only one slide of Ben Cartwright (Bonanza) on a horse in artwork. Searching artowrk for original registration in 1966 turns up nothing for Star Trek, NBC or Desilu. Let me work at using Wayback Machine to archive in future. We hope (talk) 00:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Yep, that's why We hope, I, and a couple other people always upload the backs in the first version of the file; this allows us to archive both images, and thus prove the No notice template is appropriate (stills generally had their copyright notices on the back, while posters had theirs on the front). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Image licensing question
There's an image on ja.wp: ja:ファイル:Goshikizuka kofun.jpg that I was about to move to Commons, but I wasn't totally sure about the licensing. The uploader Jonirumansei states that permission had been obtained from the photographer 皿うどん, and another user もんじゃ verified that it was GFDL 1.2, but doesn't there have to be some kind of explicit release from the photographer to do that? I don't see anything like that on the page. Curly Turkey¡gobble!23:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Permission to use on Wikipedia is not necessarily GFDL... I think you might have trouble if you put the image on Commons. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
File:Stork Club Cub Room November 1944.jpg also see talk page and Commons page. While they're not listed in the UPenn books, this seems to be quite a large block of Life not to have been renewed. It almost seems too good to be true, as they were very prompt and thorough in renewing almost every other issue. Because I have my doubts, I won't refur and re-license the photo as not renewed and am hoping that this won't bring the file to PUF or FFD. Thanks, We hope (talk) 00:32, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I just checked their other major magazine, Time, and there is a gap in renewals for the same time period. If this works, we have another Stork Club photo from Life in the article that's currently non-free. We hope (talk) 01:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm familiar with Time's gap... not intimately, but I knew of it before. It's possible... can't say for sure without some major checking, and right now I don't have the time. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, can you do me a favour and nom this for DYK and mention it is to be shown on 9 June as the lead DYK for the 150th anniversary of Nielsen's birth.♦ Dr. Blofeld14:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Ipigott Seriously, how much more biographical content to you think could be gleaned on this? My feeling is that from the music section down it is certainly approaching FA quality. My concern though was that the biographical coverage isn't quite as detailed as it could be. I think there should be more detail on specific years and what he really did. Beyond that I'd be prepared to head straight to FAC after what Tim has said and deal with the bulk of the comments there rather than the PRC, given that we have less than a month now but it would still be cutting it very fine if it was nominated today. Is there any chance you or somebody could get hold of that biography or some source to improve the detail a bit? He does strike me as a composer though who'd have less available on him than many of the others. Perhaps it's adequate as it is, I don't know. ♦ Dr. Blofeld14:46, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
I have really tried to include all the essentials in the biography. I could add lots of gossip from the Danish press about Nielsen's extra-marital relationships and his disagreements with his wife (his entire correspondence has now been published in Danish) but I do not seriously think such items would contribute to the quality of the article. Thanks to Brian Boulton, I have now been a little more specific about the period between 1886 and 1889 and added one or two other details. Despite all my pleas, no one has been able to explain exactly what is missing from the Life section. I have just repeatedly been told it is too short! But now that it has in fact been nominated for FAC, I look forward to the constructive criticism this is likely to follow. @Gerda Arendt: I appreciate your encouragement. I'm sure you will have some good suggestions for improvement. Just give me a day or two to clear up a few minor details (wording, wiki-linking, presentation, etc. - nothing of substance).--Ipigott (talk) 10:03, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm told Crisco that you've planned up the 4 June. It is possible you could keep 9 June in mind for Nielsen, but it's quite a big if, I'm doubtful if it will pass.♦ Dr. Blofeld12:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The other TFA coordinators have asked that we schedule at least two weeks in advance... I can give you three days. Four, tops. Otherwise there would be too little notification. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
So basically you mean "no", because obviously it's not going to pass in three or four days, or do you mean you could wait until 5-6 June at very latest?♦ Dr. Blofeld10:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
The same suggested that if Nielsen is not ready you schedule something for the day that can easily be postponed if the miracle happens, - working on it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for nominating the article for DYK on 9 June. That will ensure Nielsen is highlighted on the EN wiki on his anniversary. I think however that if Dr. Blofeld agrees, rather than withdrawing from FAC at this stage, it would be useful to continue to receive feedback for improvement. We do intend to bring the article up to FA quality in the not too distant future. The article has benefited considerably from the comments we have already received and work is continuing.--Ipigott (talk) 10:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ipigott: If Crisco is certain that we can't possibly have this as TFA anyway I think we should probably withdraw and open a formal peer review where we can get even greater feedback. I think people like Tim and SchroCat would feel more comfortable if they commented at a peer review rather than FAC. ♦ Dr. Blofeld10:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt seems keen to press on so I don't see any harm in giving it the extra three days suggested. I have really welcomed all the recent efforts on the article, particularly by Smerus, Mirokado and Maunus in addition to those of Gerda. Maybe we should see what they think about it? And perhaps Brianboulton who has been so supportive could come in on this too? The only major problem at this stage seems to be finding good, acceptable images. Nearly all the other suggestions have been dealt with.--Ipigott (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I am keen to see this article improved as well as we can for the birthday, - if that will be TFA is a different question. Quality feature questions have been raised, not only by me, which are not FA criteria, but simply quality ;) - Images: sometimes less is more. The image of him as a small figure in front of a house that is well pictured on another image adds little for me. Better a few good images. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Crisco here, logged out. Yeah, I meant three or four days since my post... not much time, I know, but it has happened before. I suggest going on, as at the very least you'll get some good input.36.73.111.104 (talk) 11:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I figured since Google already makes my user page the first result, and a lot of editors are going by their real names now, there's no reason for me to not do so. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Ever see this one? I saw it when it debuted 30+ ago and thought it was very well done. (Practically the only flick I've ever liked Mel Gibson in.) No idea how historically accurate it might have been, though. Sca (talk) 16:32, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen it twice so far. The Indonesian government, of course, flipped; there's a reason most of the cast are Filipinos. The film (and novel, I assume) still follows the official New Order narrative of the Communists being behind everything (something which has been challenged since the fall of Suharto), but I guess because it humanizes some of them it was banned. New Order tellings ended up like Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI: three hours of praise for Suharto and his handling of the situation. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
The character Kwan (Linda Hunt) certainly embodied the "prophetic" role of the journalist. And Sigourney Weaver was dazzling.
I seem to remember reading that half a million Indonesian Communists were killed in that era. Guess there's not much new under the sun.
Yeah, that's the estimate. And those who survived had their identity cards branded with a special code, so they received sub-par facilities and treatment for the rest of the New Order... a lot were ostracized. Some of the former communist party members are still alive, and though things have changed they haven't gotten that much better. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Here's another image I'd like to transfer to Commons, but I wanted to make sure of the license—it was taken by the user and uploaded as GFDL. There's some automatic message on the page that says as of 15 June 2009 that GFDL is compatible with CC-BY-SA. Is this one kosher? Curly Turkey¡gobble!04:57, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to use this photo of Rod Serling. It was issued by Universal for the Night Gallery anthology series and it mentions the date of the second season premiere, minus year (1971). Serling died in 1975; 11 years after the photo was issued, it was stamped as used by print media (1982). Can this work for Pre-1978 because they had issued it and made it available to the media, who may have put it in their file cabinet all that time? Thanks, We hope (talk) 16:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Will keep hoping another one shows up with better dating, thanks! BTW, if there's a contest for a slogan for your talk page, I'm submitting "More pictures than a Post Office wall." :-D (And a very good thing those shown here aren't at the P.O.) We hope (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry I keep bothering you; the Request Edits are not reliably answered and often stay in the queue for 3-9 months. Do you happen to have time to look at a couple?
Markmonitor: Mjb may not like it, but there is pretty strong consensus here to remove a paragraph he added cited exclusively to primary sources. There is also similar content cited exclusively to primary sources on the Copyright Alert System page. Based on the discussion, whoever makes the necessary edit can probably expect the usual accusations of COI corruption that occur from editors that don't get their way in these circumstances.
RealNetworks: Here I've requested a few updates based on the company's new headquarters, its recently released product and suggested removing a recent piece of spam. Some of these might require a bit of hammering out, because editors have made some changes since the Request Edit was submitted, but for example, I don't think adding "aims for" to "superior compression efficiency for high-definition media" makes the unsourced statement not promotional.
BTW - you may remember me asking about whether I should AGF on the Shaygan Kheradpir page. One of the accounts involved were confirmed to be affiliated with an astroturfing service in a recent SignPost story and I was able to obtain a block at SPI by demonstrating behavioral patterns. The account insisted it did not have a COI/financial connection to the bitter end, just as the other accounts from the same astroturfer have done. CorporateM (Talk) 18:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. FYI, an IP already restored the spam.[18] *sigh. I noticed you changed your signature to include your full name; that's bold, with all the harassment and stalking that goes around here. CorporateM (Talk) 05:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
And gone. Again. I've been shifting towards using my real name for a little over a year now; since I got the 60D all of my photographs have credited me as the author in the EXIF data, and when I nominate my own images at
Okay, it is very possible that my brain has fallen asleep... This is my idiot moment of the day... I hope this discussion can get archived as soon as possible... I may have just earned a trouting.--Godot13 (talk) 07:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The article linked above did have a link to a 47-page pdf uploaded by WPPilot. It contained emails sent by him to lawyers; it does give an insight into his methods of dealing with those he regards as adversaries. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Well you don't have to read it He did the same to Hafs. There is off-wiki communication; however I'm at a loss as to how to get Hafs back. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Chris- I know you've already done more than your fair share of work on this review, but all I'm waiting on, as far as I can tell, is a source review. Would you mind taking a quick look, if you have a few minutes to spare? I'm asking you specifically as I know you wouldn't pull punches, so I'm not scared of being accused of canvassing! Josh Milburn (talk) 15:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Saya melihat banyak artikel buatan abang dan memperhatikan sumber-sumber yang digunakan, tampaknya banyak sumber yang abang gunakan menggunakan bahasa Belanda. Sebenarnya, abang fasih berbahasa Belanda atau tidak, sih? Hanamanteo (talk) 09:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Begitu ya, lalu abang menerjemahkan sumber berbahasa Belanda dengan kemampuan sendiri (tanpa menggunakan media penerjemah apapun) atau menggunakan mesin penerjemah? Hanamanteo (talk) 09:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Apakah menggunakan Google memang dibenarkan, dengan syarat, nantinya terjemahan yang dimasukkan ke Wikipedia tidak boleh kacau? Hanamanteo (talk) 09:58, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Kalau dibaca dengan agak kritis (maksudnya, apakah terjemahan itu memang pas dalam kalimat yang sedang diterjemahkan), kemungkinan besar bisa... satu kata. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I've got this image on the Yoshiharu page that someone scanned from a book. The LoC's got a couple of copies of the same print: this one, for instance, which they appear to have restored to some degree (?). Would this be an improvement to the one in the article? Or do you think the LoC one could be better restored? Curly Turkey¡gobble!22:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Damn that's a yellow print. The book scan appears clearer; to get that clarity from the LOC scan, you'd need to do some tweaking. Chris or Crisco, either one is fine. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I prefer the book scan... the LOC scan may be nice to have, but without any modifications you'd likely have someone revert you if you tried to add it to the article. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
; I was surprised to learn that they continued to wear those uniforms into the post-independence era.
Javanese masks for dancing
President Sukarno hugging his general, Sudirman, upon meeting in the palace after the latter's guerrilla campaign. Interestingly, the general is not hugging him back. This photograph appears to be the first one taken of the meeting by Frans Mendur; the second is a bit more famous.
Sukarno returning to Yogyakarta after his exile in Bangka, 6 July 1949
Interesting Image scenario
The Emeco 1006 is a chair famous for being an ultra-durable (ultra-expensive) chair that was originally built for battleships for the marines and bolted to the surface of the ship, before being consumerized. It was popularly believed (though probably not actually true) that they were intended to survive a torpedo blast.
But here's a picture on the Emeco 1006 page that suggests it can't even withstand LA city streets. That is one cheap-looking beat-up chair. The person that uploaded it on Flickr said it was an Emeco 1006 chair, but the chair is also famous for prompting copycats that the company is generally helpless to prevent.
The image's uploader @Sandstein: restored the image here with an edit-summary suggesting a source is required to verify that the image is not of an authentic Emeco chair, but I'm left thinking we need a source verifying that it is, not the other way around. From what I've seen, sourcing requirements to verify the authenticity and description of an image is sort of a grey area.
I thought as someone with a strong focus on images, you might have some interest in this puzzle. I figured the best way to go about it is to just find a better replacement image that we're confident is an image of a genuine Emeco chair. CorporateM (Talk) 17:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Assuming the Emeco hasn't changed in design, the pictured chair is certainly a copycat. The Emeco 1006 on the manufacturer's website has a seat which is one solid unit, whereas the picture we use is two pieces. And to be honest, looks like wood sprayed with silver paint. Harriastalk18:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Another (talk page stalker)- there's a difference in the seat rails- the ones on the manufacturer's example are curved with underslung crossrails. The WP one has straight one-piece rails. There's a firm called Interiortrade which makes Navy Chair Replicas with those characteristics; maybe it's one of those with a wooden seat mounted on it. The back of the chair has a gleam which suggests aluminum. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
If you take a look here-the Just in case files, you'll see some the Museum uploaded to Flickr with a license we can use. This was only done if it became necessary to "fill out" large areas of text. After spending some time at HathiTrust, only the Nielsen 1917 photo turned up re: what was in the PD. We hope (talk) 23:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
It's a darn shame, but if the 1917 image is the only undoubtedly free photo we've got, we should stick with it. I do think the childhood home image can be used. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to ask for 2 I uploaded to Commons to be deleted now that I know they're not OK-my first try with Danish licenses. When you find something that works for one license, it's lacking in what's needed for the second license. We hope (talk) 23:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
It's that blasted "photograph" vs "photographic work" definition they use. One person's "blah" is another person's photographic work... I really don't want to say "No, this image isn't okay", but per the precautionary principle I have to. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
What's been very frustrating is when you do find photos, there's often no firm dating that's reliable or there's no name of a photographer. Then when you do find something with a photographer's name, you need to hope that you can do some searching and find out if the person's living and if not, when he or she died. There are plenty of photos at the Royal Danish Library but so many have no information about who took the photo so you can try to find out if the photo "works" or not. I hope this can all work out somehow so the FAC can go forward and that the photos aren't going to be the reason for its not being promoted. We hope (talk) 00:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Agree. I doubt that it will get to the point that it won't be featured. If we start ruthlessly pruning the uncertain images, promotion would probably be done with 4 or 5 days. Plenty of time to get the TFA ready. Sadly, my translation work is keeping me busy. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd suggested that someone who's knowledgeable about images and who hasn't either contributed to them or a considerable amount of text simply remove the ones with issues. The majority of the main editors were in agreement with this. Maybe a reminder that this can likely be closed favorably and swiftly once the questionable photos are gone would help in having them removed. We hope (talk) 01:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't think Ian or Graham would have an issue with that. I've temporarily scheduled L'Arianna for TFA on the 9th of June, but if the article is promoted before June 7th or 8th I can pull it and schedule Nielsen for the 9th. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
If I haven't said so yet, I like what you're doing ... I see no problem with copying in the whole lead and leaving it that way, sometimes for up to 2 or 3 days (depending on how caught up I am). If someone misunderstands and starts working on TFA text, all the better, it gives me a chance to say what I said on Robert's page. - Dank (push to talk) 13:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
At the end of the video, it displays the title (File:Ricketts Glen - Ice Waterfall on Flickr - Photo Sharing.ogv), author, and date. Just noting that this is different than what normally shows up at TFA, particularly the "Flickr" attribution. Of course, I don't know enough to have a position on this.
The TFAIMAGE includes "|Ganoga Falls video|", but there's no hover-text. Is there a parameter that will create hover-text? - Dank (push to talk) 13:27, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Hope you'll stay "decloaked", Bench (from your edit summary). Hell, feel free to fire off a photon torpedo or two if you see anything you don't like. - Dank (push to talk) 14:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not aware of a way to include hover text, but it is possible to display the text as a caption. I just edited the subpage accordingly. I also specified a time of 00:01 for the thumbnail (replacing the default behavior of generating the still image from the video's midpoint) to prevent the superimposed "Play media" button from obstructing the waterfall. —
And I wonder if that would reduce the two-line white space below the image. But I won't bitch, I'm happy it's working. - Dank (push to talk) 16:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
The specified time works great for me; it's a very good idea. I'm just not sure I can go for the caption. I'd rather we just didn't have any further text. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
When you nommed quite a few files at Commons from Academy Award for Best Actress, one of them was this one. Well, we have another one of them, but over here. Just tagged it and was very surprised to see it; the only thing I can see is that the file was transferred to Commons some time ago, but wasn't tagged to be deleted here. What's to be done with it here? We hope (talk) 00:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I've deleted it. It was restored on the 28th because "now not on Commons". I fail to see why an image deleted as a possible copyvio was restored, but that's a question for another day. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:07, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Probably because it had been restored to the English Wikipedia (it had first been CSDed as "Redundant to a file on Commons", then restored here after it was deleted on Commons). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
As you may have seen, Samak's en-1 Babel box says he "can contribute with a basic level of English," so maybe that's an impediment to a longer comment. (I felt I should say something due to the previous discussion about explaining support votes.) Sca (talk) 15:29, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
HesioneHushabye seems to have a problem with the markup for the winners in the Academy Award for Best Actress (particularly the double daggers). Can you explain to him that it is for accessibility reasons)? Otherwise, what else can I do to satisfy the accessibility of these lists?
For your contribution of 'Reviewing process flow chart'. Such an amazing and clear in specifications graphic! Thank you. Mr RD (talk) 00:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I notice you've been tagging a number of images based on what is a clearly false premise: per latest example You've written on those, "No evidence that the image didn't have a copyright; such promotional stills, if they had a copyright notice, tended to have them on the rear of the image."
However, the exact opposite is the case. Promotional images rarely, if ever, have a notice on the reverse. The few instances I recall of seeing reverse-side notices have been for press photos, usually with a simple stamp. And there have been many discussions supporting the common knowledge that even press photos were "rarely copyrighted."
To write that there is therefore "no evidence" of copyright is contrary to the facts. The very front of this image has the name of the studio, the name of the actress, and even some filing code. If a notice was printed, it would have been there. And as film still makes clear with legal support, ""Publicity photos (star headshots) have traditionally not been copyrighted."
Hence, you are using the precautionary principle incorrectly. Without a clear copyright notice, there would be "significant doubt" that a copyright existed, especially for studio publicity photos. If you need links to any previous discussions explaining all of this, let me know. I would also kindly ask that you copy this post to the image's DR page unless you decide to undo the tag. Thanks. --Light show (talk) 01:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I have seen a copyright notice on the obverse on exactly one image. On the reverse, however, I've seen it several dozen times. Unless you can conclusively show that there was no copyright notice on either side, then the images should be deleted. And have been, on several occasions.
I'd say you could post your objections on the DR yourself, if you hadn't been blocked for... copyright violations and "not respecting the PCP". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I was blocked, with your support, for questioning the conclusion of the blocking admin, who wrote:
Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons.
You were blocked for not slowing down and looking into the copyright status of what you were uploading. That's the same reason why you've been banned from uploading here on the English Wikipedia since Nov. 2014. That and an extensive CCI under your former user name. Quite simply put, I'm more likely to start a mass deletion nomination of your uploads (better safe than sorry) than to withdraw any of the nominations I made this morning. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:45, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Aksi Cepat Tanggap
I encountered this article and thought I'd ask WikiProject Indonesia which it seems you're a member of so I'd like to request your help. The article obviously needs a rewrite but my searches only found Newslinks and some at Books. Highbeam and Thefreelibrary found nothing so I'm not sure how useful the News links are and if they're sufficient to show notability. Any help is appreciated, SwisterTwistertalk05:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd doubt the notability. They appear to be a subsidiary organization of Dompet Dhuafa (a name which I recognize, unlike ACT), so if the main organization had an article, I'd recommend redirecting... but it doesn't. AFD may be the best way to do this. The COI editing is also a concern. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:01, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like it was just adjusting the "temperature" of the file and not changing the greens to blues... that would probably still be acceptable. Last I checked, it's not required to ping someone, but some people consider it good manners. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
required/manners: that's what I was looking for, wanted to make sure it is proper. I think my reply there is already pushy. Didn't what to be more pushy by pinging the editors! Bammesk (talk) 02:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't matter to me when SBA is TFA. Panama-Pacific is more important, as this is the centennial year.-RHM22 (talk) 10:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Makes sense. How about SBA on March 13, 2016? 110 years after her death. Or on International Woman's Day, five days beforehand? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I like March 13, 2016, for the personal relevance to SBA. That's a nice anniversary. Thanks for that suggestion!-RHM22 (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Toshusai Sharaku (act. 1794-95) Tanikaze and Daidozan Signed Sharaku ga, inscribed Tanikaze Daidozan Ink and light color on paper; mounted on paper board 13 1/8 x 9 1/8in. (33.2 x 23.2cm.)
Now that is awesome. And scary. Anyways, I can download it fairly quickly, but I've got a 114mb upload going on right now, so it may be a few hours to reach Commons. "OSAGAWA TSUNEYO II AS KOJIMA"? (Also, they sold a lot of porn in that lot). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:03, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Oooh ... I see a bunch of nice ones. I like the Harunobu, and I think a bunch of those Kawase Hasuis would be nice ... actually, a lot of images I think we don't have on Commons. None that I see an immediate home for, though. There's also this Hokusai painting—I find it hard to find decent images of ukiyo-e paintings online. They've got piles of books of ukiyo-e paintings in the library, virtually none of which I can find online (or if I do, they're the tiniest, shittiest photographs or something). Curly Turkey¡gobble!11:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Did you click through the link above? I get 29 hits (though not all with images) for things like this or this. Don't put anything on hold for this stuff, though—it's just stuff that would be nice to have. The only things I had an immediate home for were those Sharaku sketches. Curly Turkey¡gobble!21:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeeks! 414 hits for Kawase Hasui, and most of them aren't on Commons. I'm going to have to go through the Utamaros—he did a bunch of series that I was having trouble finding complete sets of before, but I can't remember what they were, now. Curly Turkey¡gobble!22:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, can you scan an image? I was working at Lester Dragstedt and would like to add a photo and noticed this had a good one but I'm not sure if it can be used (it says it's from a free archive but the copy use seems to say a bit different). This may be usable as their permissions page says it can be used for educational and scholarly purposes. Thoughts? SwisterTwistertalk06:49, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello Chris, how are you? Brian and I have just put the article Mutiny on the Bounty up for FAC following a successful PR and it has quickly received four supports from peer reviewers. Now I know you have a lot on your plate but there is mention of the Dutch East Indies in this article, so I thought you might be interested. If you could find the time to have a look at the sources or the images we would appreciate it very much. Thanks and I hope you're well. Cheers —Cliftonian(talk)21:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I really do not want to be accused of canvassing, but can you please kindly explain to SNUGGUMS that we've agreed to have the duplicate links remain since the list is sortable? The issue was already resolved with Littlecarmen. It has been over ten days since the last comment so I was trying to get feedback.
, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. It strikes me, however, that there may be an issue with the template excluding the exception which is worked into the policy. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
.jpg)
Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
,_Purwokerto,_2015-03-23.jpg)
,_Purwokerto,_2015-03-23.jpg)
,_Purwokerto,_2015-03-23.jpg)
,_Purwokerto,_2015-03-22.jpg)
,_Nusakembangan,_Cilacap_2015-03-21.jpg)
.jpg)
_face_%C3%A0_Taron_Voskanyan_(Arm).jpg)
.jpg)
,_Bengkulu_Museum,_2015-04-19.jpg)
,_Gembira_Loka_Zoo,_Yogyakarta_2015-03-15_03.jpg)
.jpg)
,_Kota_Jogjakarta_200_Tahun,_plate_before_page_153.jpg)
,_Kota_Jogjakarta_200_Tahun,_plate_before_page_145.jpg)
,_Kota_Jogjakarta_200_Tahun,_plate_before_page_129.jpg)
,_Kota_Jogjakarta_200_Tahun,_plate_after_page_160.jpg)
.jpg)
-late.14c.jpg)
,_Tanikaze_and_Daidozan.jpg)
Toshusai Sharaku
Hokusai
Style of Matsumura Goshun
Shibata Zeshin
_SPARROWS_AND_AUTUMN_GRASSES.jpg)
,_Album_of_12_lacquer_paintings.jpg)
![[11]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1896_Olympic_marathon.jpg){kind=link}
![[13]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/4/43/20101102003205!1896_Olympic_marathon.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
