User talk:Crisco 1492/Archive 60

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.

Archive 55

←

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

Archive 61

Archive 62

→

Archive 65

Saya punya suatu masalah nih, saya pingin ngusulin artikel

) 03:16, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

• Habis proses AB, diusulkan sebagai AP. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Maksudnya harus menunggu, gitu. Kalo secara bersamaan diusulin jadi AP boleh nggak. Atau bagaimana kalau halaman usulan AB-nya dialihkan jadi pengusulan AP. Atau saya negosiasikan saja sama pengusulnya saja agar pengusulannya diubah dari AB ke AP --

) 04:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

• Di Wikipedia bahasa Inggris tidak boleh. Paling2 nominasi AB ditarik supaya nominasi AP bisa dijalankan. Saya tidak tahu kalau WP Bahasa Indonesia. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, we're once again without any filled queues. The next two preps are ready to go; a promotion or two would be nice. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

• Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Have you noticed that Jobas has voted 20 one-word supports in the last two days? Sca (talk) 15:00, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Is't a problem to vote for pictures? I don't think i'm broking a wikipedia rules by voting and supporting Featured picture.--Jobas (talk) 15:12, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Did I say it was a problem? Sca (talk)

• Jobas has voted before, a while ago. Considering how many images are nominated right now, 20 doesn't strike me as surprising. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:20, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Daruma doll, cut out, 03.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 02:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, there's disagreement between nominators and the reviewer as to whether this has neutrality issues, and I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at the article, hook, and their various points and see if you can offer a deciding opinion on this. It's one of the oldest nominations, so it would be nice to get this settled. Many thanks. (PS: let me know if you'd like to be called "Chris" going forward. I'm happy to do so if that's your preference.) BlueMoonset (talk) 17:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

• I more or less agree with WNT on this. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:21, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

• Then it would be quite helpful for you to post it there as a way of getting it started again. If you don't want to do the actual review, then please post starting with a "review again" icon. This would at least restart the review process. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I noticed ealier today that File:RiP2013 GreenDay Mike Dirnt 0002.JPG, a picture you nominated for FPC, that which became a Featured Picture, is not part of any articlespace. There's grounds for delisting it on that account as I recall but I'm just letting you know about this since I know you know what can be done. GamerPro64 05:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• It was replaced by an image of less quality after it was vandalized by Bsmofficial. I've reinserted it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You need to watch the latest edits by Krimuk90. He is back in action and is trying to get me in an edit war. He has threten me to get me blocked by his friends administrator when I told him I will list his manipulated edits. He needs to understand that what he likes is no less than what he hates on wikipedia. Here, fact works and I think this user have been manipulating lot of stuffs here and there. He has given more weightage to mixed reviews in DDD but, I see not a single negative review in Piku or TWMR because these films are by her favorites and DDD has Chopra. He is changing his way and he is doing this for getting me involved in this. I dont care about this fact but, he should be given a lesson.—

07:04, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• Considering how you've treated me in the past (in fact, I do believe last time you posted here I asked you to stay off my talk page) I think you need to try and work with editors, rather than against them. "Teach people a lesson" is rarely a good reason to do anything. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:14, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I have treated you how? I respect you lot. I try to work with editors. In fact I am friendly with all the editors. I also tried to clear things with Krimuk. But, he was not ready. What should I do?—

Prashant

07:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yes. User_talk:Crisco_1492/Archive_41#FAC.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:08, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh Sorry for yhat. But, that was 2013. Today, Im not immature that I used to be in those days. That was a temptation to get ny first FA. Now, I work on so many FLs and you can see. Not a single problem with my flcs. Please, move on.—

Prashant

08:40, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You're still as immature as ever Prashant. You've demonstrated this very recently.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:11, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Crisco. Having followed TFA for the past decade, I've never observed a preference for a photograph of an "individual involved in production" over an illustration of the article's core subject or a major element thereof.
The former is common simply because we seldom have a viable alternative when the subject is a non-free work. This is a rare instance in which we do (and we even utilize an animated version in the article, alongside the various fair-use images) because the non-free work is based upon real-life scientific concepts.
The "individual involved in production" option is particularly suboptimal when the person isn't widely recognizable or when the photo is of relatively low quality. (Both apply in this instance.) —

12:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• For video games, we haven't (for instance) run a hedgehog where Sonic the Hedgehog was the main character. That would be a bit too far reaching. This isn't that bad, but the manoever is but one of many possible actions that can be undertaken in the game. Meanwhile, there is only one project manager for the game. As such, we don't have to give undue emphasis to any one move. Since this particular nomination was made at TFAR, it would be nice if considerations about the image had been brought up then. It is a bad habit for any of us to start unilaterally changing images while the article is on the MP. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:28, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You won't find someone more opposed to the type of substitution to which you've referred in your "hedgehog" example. I wish that such a scenario were purely hypothetical. Unfortunately, this actually happened. As you can see in the subpage's history and on its talk page, I was far from pleased.

I appreciate your acknowledgement that "this isn't that bad", but I don't know why you've even drawn a comparison. An animated illustration of the flight maneuver appears in the article. Due to bandwidth considerations, I used a static diagram from the same contributor. I didn't introduce something new.

I don't quite follow your "one of many possible actions that can be undertaken in the game" reasoning, as there's nothing unusual about covering an example (in both the article's prose and the accompanying images). It's no different than displaying a mouse as an example of a rodent, despite the fact that it's merely "one of many" types. That isn't undue emphasis.

When TFA is an article about a flight simulator, it's natural to expect an illustration with some relevance to an aircraft's flight. Ideally, the image should grab readers' attention and provide a visual cue as to the article's subject, thereby encouraging them to read the blurb and visit the article. A photograph of a widely unrecognizable man doesn't accomplish that. His physical appearance has absolutely nothing to do with the subject and provides no pertinent information whatsoever. Only after reading nearly half of the blurb does his identity (and connection to the software) become apparent. The photo is essentially a decoration (and not a particularly good one, given its flaws). —

David Levy

13:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• The issue was of showing an element of gameplay without actually violating copyright. That was an extreme (though, from your link, apparently not unprecedented) example. I agree with that the blurb could clearer be as to his importance, and have rewritten it a bit.

The mouse question is interesting, because

User:Bencherlite

solved that by using a rotating set of five images (working off memory here), so that a greater range of examples and representation could be given. We haven't yet done that, but I can think of several articles for which I'd use a similar system.

The question of nobody knowing what he looks like applies to the manoever itself; very few would recognize the maneuver by sight alone, particularly at 100px. Considering the heat we've had with gravestones and other more abstract representations, I just don't think it works.

BTW, are we going to have the discussion here or at WT:MP? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

That was an extreme (though, from your link, apparently not unprecedented) example.

Sadly. In my view, that's one of our most embarrassing main page incidents.

I agree with that the blurb could clearer be as to his importance, and have rewritten it a bit.

I don't consider that an issue. The man's essential role in the software's development is undisputed, but that doesn't make either snapshot a suitable illustration.

The mouse question is interesting, because

User:Bencherlite

solved that by using a rotating set of five images (working off memory here), so that a greater range of examples and representation could be given.

In that instance, we were dealing with people's cultural heritage. Conversely, I doubt that many readers were outraged by our flagrant mouse favoritism or exclusion of other flight maneuvers.

The question of nobody knowing what he looks like applies to the manoever itself; very few would recognize the maneuver by sight alone, particularly at 100px.

Many would recognize it as some sort of aircraft pattern, read the blurb (and possibly the article) and gain a better understanding of the concept than they would have from the prose alone. How does a photograph of Seamus Blackley enhance readers' understanding of the flight simulator on which he worked?

Considering the heat we've had with gravestones and other more abstract representations, I just don't think it works.

I don't see how that's comparable.

BTW, are we going to have the discussion here or at WT:MP?

I'll reply to messages wherever you post them. —

David Levy

14:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• We've gotten a response from TRM at the MP talk page, which is why I ask. I rewrote the blur to address your concern that "Only after reading nearly half of the blurb does his identity (and connection to the software) become apparent"; hopefully I accomplished that goal.

The image shows almost nothing at 100px; there is a U turned on its side and a red blip that kinda-sorta looks like an airplane. As for how that relates to gravestones: you remember this discussion, don't you? There were numerous disparaging comments on images considered that were either too abstract, or of little use at 100px, including "The gravestone is terrible, because we'll have green with an unreadable white block in the center nearly every time"; with this maneuver image, it just looks like a U. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, if image quality is a concern, there is an alternative that I posted above. Still not something to be proud of, but it's a bit better than what we have (at 100px). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I rewrote the blur to address your concern that "Only after reading nearly half of the blurb does his identity (and connection to the software) become apparent"; hopefully I accomplished that goal.

Yes, you did address that concern (and I thank you).

The image shows almost nothing at 100px

It's clear on my end, but it certainly could be displayed at a larger size.

As for how that relates to gravestones: you remember this discussion, don't you?

Yes, but I don't recognize a substantial degree of similarity (apart from the size issue, I suppose).

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the flight maneuver image is ideal. (An ideal image won't exist unless and until footage of the actual game is released under a free license or enters the public domain.) I'm opining that it's a better option.

Also, if image quality is a concern, there is an alternative that I posted above. Still not something to be proud of, but it's a bit better than what we have (at 100px).

Agreed. —

David Levy

15:18, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• Odd, I'd have thought that 100px on your screen resolution would have been smaller. Glad you agree about the Blackley image. I'll upload locally. I do wish mainstream studios would release free images...  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:38, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

It might have more to do with individual perception than with size. The visual details absorbed and interpretation thereof vary greatly from one person to another, with context playing a significant role. (It's likely that certain image types tend to seem clearer to you than they do to me.) Of course, amplifying the input (by increasing the image's size, in this instance) reduces the disparity. —

David Levy

16:07, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• 
  Black lory (nominated)
• Gertie the Dinosaur (nominated)
• 
  Tape recorder (nominated)
• 
  Portrait of a Man with a Blue Chaperon (nominated)
• 
  Paweł Mąciwoda (nominated)
• 
  Martin Ryckaert (nominated

  )
• 
  Saint Gregory the Illuminator Cathedral, Yerevan (nominated)
• 
  Alba Madonna (nominated)
• 
  2004 Indonesia Tsunami (to delist; nominated)
• 
  Cornelis Kruseman, Self-Portrait (nominated)
• 
  West end of

  Nusakambangan (nominated

  )
• 
  Girl in White (Nominated)
• 
  Köln Hauptbahnhof (nominated)
• 
  Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord (nominated)
• 
  Mochtar Lubis (nominated)
• 
  Ksitigarbha (nominated

  )
• 
  Collared whitestart (nominated)
• 
  Seth Rollins (nominated)
• 
  The Three Musicians (nominated)
• Claire Chase (nominated)
  Claire Chase (nominated)
• 
  Lathyrus pratensis (nominated)
• 
  Big Ben (to delist; nominated)
• 
  Daruma doll (nominated)
• 
  Monument to Alfonso XII (nominated)
• 
  Salak pondoh (nominated)
• 
  Ruby Loftus Screwing a Breech Ring (nominated

  )
• 
  Jack Johnson (musician) (nominated)
• 
  Christ Falling on the Way to Calvary (nominated

  )
• 
  Intentional camera movement (nominated)
• Night of the Living Dead (nominated)
• 
  Performance of Chinese fashion, at Chinese Indonesians (nominated)
• 
  St. Sebastian (nominated

  )

• Archive me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:00, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, this review has been stalled over questions on the image licensing (and accuracy?). Can you please take a look and post your opinion on the nomination template? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chris, Just a (hopefully) quick question on an image I'd like to upload. Am I OK to put this on Commons under a {{PD-Scan|1=PD-UKGov}} licence? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

• Should be, yeah. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:10, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

• Excellent - cheers! - SchroCat (talk) 13:11, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour and find ten missing articles on this for Intertranswiki? If on Indonesian wiki add a ill|id| link. Doesn't have to have an article on another wiki though of course, just to address systematic bias.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:10, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• What do you mean, missing articles? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:30, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

10 articles related to Seram Island which are missing on here, what else did you think? Villages, rivers, bays, tribes, perosnalities etc, whatever.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I thought you'd have been pleased we're taking an interest in Indonesia! Oh well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:19, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

• I've been busy as a ****, so I didn't notice that you'd replied to my question. I think I've got a map of Maluku on my shelf. I'll check when my RL work is finished. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

I've done it and created Template:Seram Island!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Evening Chris,

) 21:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Monumento a Alfonso XII de España en los Jardines del Retiro - 04.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chris-

FYI- New information as part of the Faroe Islands deletion request here. Any comment would be welcome.--Godot13 (talk) 08:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, can you please check this for neutrality, particularly in the hook? I seem to remember that something like this was an issue before, and Cwmhiraeth is worried about neutrality issues, since this is currently in the process of being tried in court. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:06, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

• Glad to help, Gerda. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Salak (Salacca zalacca), 2015-05-17.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 06:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

This file was uploaded for a DYK appearance, but it looks nobody got to delete the local file after it. Could you do it now. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:43, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you. BTW I have compared the files in Category:Featured pictures and in the various subpages of WP:Featured pictures, and found numerous differences. I have fixed all of these and now they match completely. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:00, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• Excellent. Thank you. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, and one more thing. I have create an account, Armbrust FP watchlist account, some time ago. It's watchlist has an open RSS feed (works for previous 3 days). Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• Excellent, if too technologically advanced for me. Strangely, I can't access the RSS feed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:40, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, there's a request that someone check the warning notice related to this image on Commons to make sure that the image is actually okay to use here. Is this something you can do? Many thanks either way. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

This is one of my very early Antarctic FAs. It is among several that require some serious work to ensure that they still meet FA standards, and I don't think I'll have time to give it due attention. So can I request that you replace this as TFA (it is one that I asked Bencherlite not to schedule until I had given it a thorough overhaul). Thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 23:15, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

• Alright. I'll get to it when I've got some time. Just preparing for a seminar. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ruby Loftus screwing a Breech-ring (1943) (Art. IWM LD 2850).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:52, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

FYI, Jcpag2012 has just nominated two other images, which were clearly under the required size (now speedy closed). Also instead of striking his duplicative !votes, he struck your comment on both pages. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Something needs to be done about this. Now he also added a third support to these two pages. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• Godot and I have stricken his extraneous votes, and I've sent him another warning. He's got two more shots, then.... — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Jack Johnson 2014.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:08, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:청자 어룡 모양 주전자.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 05:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Another pesterer here! I found and uploaded this image, but I wondered if you could double check and let me know if you think it can be hosted on the Commons? Given the age of the image, I assume that our policy means that the MCC's claim of copyright doesn't affect it, but I thought you'd be more likely to know. I was considering an FP nomination, given its high EV (woman playing in that era, wearing "normal" dresses, bowling underarm, and two stump wickets) but I'm not sure the quality holds up at 100%, any thoughts? (Irrelevant if the copyright is in question of course!) Harrias ^talk 12:59, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• MCC's claim doesn't affect the image's ability to be used, according to our policies, but it may open British users to prosecution (read National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute for an instance). I get the impression that the border used to be considerably wider. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Possibly; I trimmed it very slightly when rotating the image, but the Bridgeman copy itself might not feature the whole border. Harrias ^talk 13:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    • No, I get the impression that they cropped a considerable bit of the border. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Would that be an issue, given the border adds no real value to the image? Harrias ^talk 14:07, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
        • You'd have an oppose from Adam and me within a day, so yes, it would be an issue. Borders serve to balance the captions (which are part of the original artwork), and by removing only three sides of the border, the work looks unbalanced. By cropping out the caption, we are removing a key part of the work itself (see Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History for examples of what lithographs pass). The old rationale, that it makes images hard to use in articles, has been rendered moot by things such as {{CSS image crop}}, which allows us to crop images for article use without actually removing any information from the file proper. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
          • No worries, I know pretty much zero about FP, hence popping here to ask! I just saw a nice image, and thought it was worth asking. Harrias ^talk 14:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
            • Always worth a shot. You can't learn without trying... it's taken me four years to get used to the system, and I still misjudge what people will support. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
            • Thanks for your advice anyway: one day I'll find a cricket image worthy! As an aside, if you get a chance, any further thoughts at Wikipedia:Peer review/The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes/archive1 would be appreciated, as once I've got the format set, I can start work on the other short story collections. Harrias ^talk 15:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
              • Shame we don't have as many good images of cricket as we do footy or baseball. Sigh. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
                • Yeah – the problem is, most of the action is happening about 100 metres away! File:Adil Rashid sharp.jpg is probably the best I've managed, which is a bit depressing given it was almost five years ago!! Harrias ^talk 15:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
                • Diliff explained it to me a while back. Aside from the great distance, bringing in the kind of lens you'd need for good shots would require a special permit. If WMUK would spring for it, though... I'm sure we'd find takers. If not Diliff, maybe (?) Colin. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:41, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
                  • I just bought a Sigma 150-600mm lens (it's in the mail, apparently), so who knows... Maybe it won't be such a great distance for that lens. ;-) But yes, getting the permission to use it might be another thing entirely. I'm planning to shoot a few days of Wimbledon with a Wikimedia UK grant this year. Unfortunately I didn't organise anything early enough or I might (might!) have been able to get a press photographer accreditation via WM-UK, which would mean two things:
                    1. I wouldn't have to line up for about 4 hours each day, starting at bloody 6-7am (the real dedicated ones camp there overnight for the best tickets) just to get a regular pleb ticket on the day. ;-)
                    2. I wouldn't have any problems with the restrictions of 'no lenses greater than 300mm'. I'm going to try to bring my Sigma 150-600mm anyway (maybe I'll cover the focal length etchings with black tape!! ;-) ). I don't know how rigorously it'll be enforced. I'll still have a 70-300mm lens as a backup if they're really going to be Nazis about it. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Is that a line or a picnic? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• If you had to sit on the grass for 3+ hours just waiting for the line to actually start moving, you'd make yourself a picnic too. ;-) They start letting people in at around 10am, but by then the line is so long that only those who were there from about 7am will get in. Everyone else will get turned away. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 01:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Cripes. Am I glad I don't usually do sports shots. And concerts. Shudder. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:09, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Other than Twenty20 matches, county cricket is nowhere near so bad thankfully! Somerset don't advertise a restriction on long lenses either, though I know most of the international matches apply it. Of course, the issue there is more financial that regulatory. And of course, it's traditional to have a picnic at cricket matches too! Harrias ^talk 08:49, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, sebagai ahli translasi Inggris-Indonesia, Anda bisa bantu masalah disini: id:Pembicaraan:Felice Beato

Masalahnya tentang kalimat ini:

"Sumber-sumber lebih awal menulis tahun lahirnya sebagai 1825 atau kira-kira 1825, tetapi tahun tersebut mungkin keliru dengan tahun kelahiran saudaranya yang bernama Antonio."

Yang versi bahasa Inggrisnya seperti ini:

"Earlier sources had given his birth date as 1825 or ca. 1825, but these dates may have been confused references to the possible birth date of his brother, Antonio."

Katanya "Masak adik lebih tua dari kakak ?"

Monggo dipecahkan masalahnya --

) 10:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• Itu lebih ke masalah artikelnya sendiri kurang konsisten, kalau sampai menyatakan "adik". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:32, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I have List of census-designated places in West Virginia at FLC. If you have the time, do leave a comment. Thanks. Seattle (talk) 23:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Christ Falling on the Way to Calvary - Raphael.jpg , gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:30, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't realise you were quite so serious about discussing this, and I didn't really want the blame for causing one of Wiki's infamous long winded stalemate's. Oh well I did kind of open the can didn't I. --wintonian ^talk 16:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• For a MP discussion, it's managed to avoid the dreaded stalemate pretty well so far. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

• You speak too soon. --wintonian ^talk 12:31, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Bluebells ICM, Ashridge Estate, 2015.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Crisco 1492,

I am not too familiar with the POTD circuitry at EN, but I was wondering if it would be possible to place a planning request for the newly promoted FP as appearanc as POTD: File:Viborg Katedralskole Symmetrical.jpg. I would like to suggest/request that this pic makes a POTD appearance on September 9, 2016 as that would fit well with the 160th birthday of the architect. Regards, -- Slaunger (talk) 07:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

• Sure thing. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:27, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

It looks like

06:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

• They need to confirm through OTRS first... shame if we do anything to it, and it has to be deleted. I'd crop, probably. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Alright, I'll contact them. Maybe I can get them to contribute images of other cartoonists, too. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, saya lihat disini Anda mengurusi proyek-proyek FA, FL, FP, dan sejenisnya (CMIIW) kalo gitu bisa tidak Anda ikut serta urusi

) 12:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

• Saya sudah jarang sempat menyunting, jadi saya mau fokus di WP bahasa Inggris. Kalau WP bahasa Indonesia, itu saya lebih banyak membantu dengan program-program off-wiki. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

{{

) 14:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

SchroCat recommended you as an expert in the matter of images. I am facing a problem with image acquisition for John Grimek. Strength & Health magazine covers were used in the past, but deleted in 2007 for fair use counter example #8. As he was the subject of multiple covers of that magazine and was also its editor, I think it might actually be appropriate. I went into the article's history, and the fact that he was also the magazine's editor was not taken into account when the image was deleted. Thus, I believe that Strength and Health magazine would be in keeping with Fair Use for him (depicting his work and his person) where a baseball card would not for a ball player. Additionally, I have a signed copy of a photo from him from the 1940's. Would a modified image like that be acceptable for me to scan, and upload? Thanks much in advance for your input! Scr★pIron^IV 20:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

• It would still not meet NFCC#8, even though he was editor, because quite simply an example of a magazine cover is not necessary to understand that X edited magazine Y. If one of his features is discussed in the article, we might be able to include one, but the threshold for that is quite high (the John Lennon/Yoko Ono cover of Rolling Stone, perhaps one of the most famous magazine covers of all time, isn't even used in any of their articles). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

User:ScrapIronIV-I think we can do what you're asking. A quick scan of Strength and Health magazine from before 1964 shows they didn't have a habit of renewing copyrights on their back issues. Take a look at the list of copies with covers here and pick out one from before 1964 with Grimek on it. I'll then run a renewal check to see if they renewed the copyright on it. The only one I'd say would be "off limits" would be their May 1949 issue where he's posing with the large trophy; the trophy may be copyrighted and it's much too prominent in the photo to be called de minimis. Let us know which one and then I'll run a copyright renewal check for that issue. Some back issues are sold on eBay so we may even be able to get you a larger photo in the bargain. :) We hope (talk) 03:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much, We hope - I am considering December 1941 (I have an autographed print of that one that I could scan, added interest, I think) or the most iconic photo of him, September 1945. I don't have my own copy of that, but it is definitely available. Is there a place I could post the three photos I have, so that they can be reviewed by you, or any other interested party? That would make selection easier, I believe. That way, I don't upload more than Wikipedia needs. Scr★pIron^IV 15:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

• If they are free, there's no harm uploading images to Commons; other users on other projects may want to use different covers, and at the very least it's readily available to possible reusers. But if you want to upload elsewhere, Flickr often works. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

User:ScrapIronIV-Here's the link for the September 1945 issue of the magazine as your source Have just done a copyright renewal search for Strength and Health for 1945 and the issues weren't renewed. You can just copy this to the file template because it includes links to the UPenn books used to check for renewals:

• A copyright renewal search was done in periodicals for the years 1972 and 1973. There were no listings for the title Strength and Health; there's no evidence of continued copyright for the magazine.

Then you license the image as {{PD-US-not renewed}} Here's a bigger copy of the cover if you want it. :-) We hope (talk) 15:42, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

For December 1941-source

• A copyright renewal search was done in periodicals for the years 1968 and 1969. There were no listings for the title Strength and Health; there's no evidence of continued copyright for the magazine.

Use the same license as shown above for not renewed. Larger copy of the cover if you want it. We hope (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I have uploaded September 1945 and will add it to the article. For the December 1941 image, I will be scanning a copy of my own autographed promotional image, which appears to be in better condition and higher resolution. Scr★pIron^IV 19:23, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Night of the Living Dead (1968).webm, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

What's up with FPC? Voting is rather dead at the moment. Finals? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 16:40, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

• Possibly. Or people are tired of so many months with lots of nominations to choose from. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Ah, weel. I'll just keep working on File:Giuseppe Verdi, c. 1872 Aida vocal score cover - Restoration.png - reckon when it's done, it'll be pretty impressive. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 23:23, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Ay, that it will be. It's looking much better already. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your comments at the recent PR for

) 01:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

• I'll see what I've got time for. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chris-

Any chance of getting this image as POTD for July 14th or 15th?--Godot13 (talk) 02:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

• Sure. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:38, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Scheduled for Eid (Template:POTD/2015-07-17) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Many thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 04:56, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

An IP has decided to "do the math" with a source at Winsor McCay and has decided he knows when McCay was born, even though the author of the source explicitly says there's no record of his birth and one date is merely more likely than the others. Yes, I've been edit warring, so I suppose I should be blocked, but the IP is changing information in the article to something the source they're using explicitly contradicts. The article itself gives the details of what's known of McCay's birth circumstances—but the IP is clinging tenaciously to a timeline in an appendix of the source that only lists one of the disputed dates (the most likely, but unconfirmed, date), despite the fact the the author of the very source spends basically a page in the book discussing what's known and concludes that nobody knows. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 01:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• I think you're safe with an exception for reversion of vandalism. The sources are clear that what isn't known isn't known. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chris. I was about to post a summation to this multi-part discussion and propose a vote, with the addendum: All we need is a neutral admin to monitor the vote. Would you be willing to take on that job? (Remember, virtue is its own reward.) Sca (talk) 13:35, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• Not particularly well-versed in the technical matters of implementation... thus, I'm not sure I'm the best choice. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Should I take that as an "I'd rather not?" Of course, that's up to you. Sca (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, that's pretty much it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:25, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

What d'ye think? Did this because a new FA deserves a high-quality lead. =) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 04:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• What's the US status of the image? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It's from 1908. {{
    PD-US-1923}}. Adam Cuerden ^(talk
    ) 05:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
    • But we don't have evidence that it was published before 1923, so we can't claim PD-1923. That was why the article's images were a pain in the butt during FAC. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Don't need it. Danish rules don't require publication for a photo to go out of copyright. it's 70 years after death. And the photographer died in 1923. It can't have been in copyright in 1996, therefore. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:36, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• For PD-1996, we don't need it. But PD-1923 is definitely out. Quality is good; tag has been updated, so that's good too. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, it appears to have been handed out by him. [1] Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:52, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yep, definitely a carte de visite. Looks good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:21, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, kind of inclined not to bother in future, because it's been pulled - due to claims of copyright statu sproblems. When I heftily documented copyright status already... *grumble* Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:14, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

• I've reinserted it. As I said, the images at FAC were a pain in the butt. I can understand why Ipigott is being extra careful. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:40, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

• I suppose you're right. It's just annoying - I'd have waited longer for the FPC had not everyone been saying how well it suited the article already. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 12:44, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

• I know. Sigh. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Hector Berlioz, Béatrice et Bénédict score cover.jpg This is a first edition ([2]) - that's enough to overcome the not-amazingly-illustrative illustration, right? Or should I throw this to the back burner? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 12:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

• Perhaps. Not sure how the current crowd of FPC voters would go. I've been busy with my own editing (eight books thus far, all PD) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Good work! I've been a bit encouraged in that line by the
    Fringes of the Fleet FPC a while back, if you remember it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk
    ) 13:25, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Yep, I remember that. I think it's due for the main page in the next few months, actually. I just finished preparing the files for a PDF of Serat Jayabaya (attributed to Jayabaya; this print edition is from 1925). Sadly, the stains on pages 100 and 101 have obscured the text too much to be read in places. Can't upload it yet, though; missing pages 6 and 7. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
      • What I generally try to do in those situations is find a second copy so I know what I'm restoring. It's where a low-res copy can still be very useful. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:02, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
        • Sadly, I haven't got the budget to hunt down another copy. This project is being funded by Wikimedia Indonesia, and we've only allocated funding for one location. I'll keep an eye out, though. (BTW, that Wagner image will have to be hosted locally; Stassen only died in 1949) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Does any library have it? You might eb able to talk them into transcribing it or photocopying it if it's less than two pages. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• • • • • • Noted! I do try and check all of that once I've got the full image up. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
• The "Valenti" in the Médée score is it:Giuseppe Palanti - quite obvious once you see the reproduction of his signature. That one needs to stay here until 2017. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:28, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Could you buy that the signature in File:Fromental_Halévy,_L'Éclair_score_cover.jpg is a really messy signature of "Gavarni"? Because it does look a bit like Gavarni's signatures. File:Paul_Gavarni_-_The_Barmaid_-_Walters_371442.jpg, File:Paul_Gavarni_-_Gulliver_and_the_Brobdingnagian_Philosophers_-_Walters_371482.jpg File:Paul Gavarni - Lady on Sofa - Walters 371427.jpg but much more of a scrawl. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• A really, really, really messy one. It does have similarities. Agree, the Medee image is definitely by Palanti. Didn't realize that was a P. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • A linked G and P, actually. That's why it looks V-ish. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)
  • [3] - it's mirrored - as a surprising number of his signatures are - but once you flip it, and compare his other very messy G's, it's very clearly the same signature, I think. I'm calling success, and declaring this a Paul Gavarni work

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Portrait of Tsaritsa Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina - Google Cultural Institute.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 04:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, any chance you might be able to promote one or more of the waiting preps to queue? If there's a queue filled, I can ask Materialscientist to do a manual promotion of a queue to the main page, but the queue needs to be filled first. Thanks for your help. Labs is still in trouble, so Shubinator can't start up the bots until they've sorted out the problems there. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Crisco. Materialscientist has updated the main page with the Queue 2 you promoted, so we're set for a while, especially with Queue 3 already promoted as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Just stopped by after a day away from the computer, and discovered that the hooks on the main page are approaching 28 hours, which is really too much. The bot is working, so if you can promote at least one of the preps, it will be whisked to the main page provided there aren't any image or other issues that the bot worries about. Many thanks if you can get at least one prep to queue. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Wilhelm Friedemann Bach sketch.jpg-have a look and see if it can leave non-free content review. We hope (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yep, that looks right. Glad to withdraw — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:56, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Will let you do the honors. I really like HathiTrust for things like this but it just makes me frustrated that only those in the US are allowed free view. :) We hope (talk) 14:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• Well, that's one of the good things about being American. A lot of the books I've been digitizing appear to have been digitized already (from other copies, of course) but the files are only accessible in the US. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

If you know where I can find some, it's always possible for me to upload items to my OneDrive. Quite a bit of information and images for William Burges' work were available after searching out the old UK architectural papers and magazines. They were considered PD in the US but Dr. B. and others working on Burges were outside of the US and couldn't have full view. I copied and uploaded the material to my OneDrive and gave out the link to the folder. There's still material on it waiting for the next Burges castle. We also worked in the same way to get the material for the Ritz, London, as the trade papers from the UK were available to me but not to Dr. B. ;) We hope (talk) 15:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• Like this, basically. Like, these would all be free. But I'm uploading full books, and that would be time consuming. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

I can get the full PDFs and put them into a OneDrive folder if that would help. We hope (talk) 15:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, Hathi lets you get full PDFs? That would be great. At the very least so that we have the files available for everyone. The project I'm working on isn't just the works themselves; it's also about digitizing part of a museum's collection... but there's no harm in having extra copies or editions available. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

I see that Hathi won't let you take the entire PDF unless you're with a partner organization, but they do allow you to download page by page. Checked the book at Google Books and over there, I'm told its snippet view only even though it's from 1922. So if you can see what you'd like to have, I can download and then put into OneDrive folders. We hope (talk) 15:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• Ah. No need to worry then. I've got enough on my plate (our target is 75 books, but we may reach 150), and I wouldn't want to burden you. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

How about you let me know if you do need something and then I'll get it from there and upload it? We hope (talk) 15:56, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

• Will do. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:17, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, just in case the

fixes haven't been done before you next edit, please take a look, as they require an admin to edit and the set will be promoted at 03:29 UTC.

The main reason I'm writing is the DYK nom in the subject header. I've never been sufficiently clear on how far BLP goes and what it affects, and it may indeed not be involved here as the nominator maintains. Still, could you please take a look at the hook and related material in the article (my comment explains my initial concerns), and let me know (or post there if you'd rather)? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

• Looks like TRM got the first. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:17, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks for doing the second; I've taken the next step there. As for the first, TRM did do a bunch of fixes, but one of his corrections needs a further adjustment: the fifth hook should have a "the" before "lead actress": ... that the lead actress —BlueMoonset (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

And, if you could, please spread out the bios and the non-bios better? Right now the set starts with two bios and ends with three bios, with three non-bios in the middle. It would be very much nicer if the non-bios, at least, alternated with the bios, perhaps after the first two bios? Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

• Done and done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:54, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Plastic comb, 2015-06-07.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 03:56, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

On 24 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Iman Budhi Santosa, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Indonesian poet Iman Budhi Santosa (pictured) worked in agriculture for over a decade? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Iman Budhi Santosa. 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.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, now that the oldest DYK has finally been approved, the next-oldest is Template:Did you know nominations/In silico clinical trials. This is the only other one from way back in March, but it can't proceed because it's stuck in a Merge discussion. I just now discovered that the Dame Etna account, which had raised a great number of objections to the nominated article and actually posted the initial Merge template (but didn't start the discussion or participate in it), was indefinitely blocked the next day as a sock of Kiefer.Wolfowitz.

Can you please take a look and see whether the concerns raised are germane and a merge is appropriate, or if this should be closed? (Or, if there's a minimum time limit to merge discussions greater than the current 19 days, when it might be legitimately closed?) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

• I am singularly ill-suited for judging medical articles. Perhaps User:Doc James or another WP:MED editor could comment on the viability/lack of viability of a merge. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

• If User:Bluerasberry, who was the WP:MED editor who showed up initially, and began pursuing the merge issue, does not follow up on the merge, I'll ask Doc James if he's willing. Thanks for the response. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

• Belle just removed the merge templates from both articles, and approved the nomination. I have no objections; it seemed to me that the agreement was that the article should remain standalone, but with perhaps a bit added to the medicine article on the various areas of in silico, including the trials. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, it's been two weeks and no one seems interested in stripping out these problematic images from the article as you suggested. (I have to confess that I'm not, either.)

Dravecky just proposed a new ALT hook, but of course that doesn't do anything to address the image issues that will prevent the article from running under DYK unless they're taken care of. Is removing the images from the article—you did suggest leaving one with a fair-use license, which I'm assuming you'd take care of if you did that—something you're willing to do so this can proceed? At this point, it's unlikely that the nominator will be back editing any time soon. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

• Images are gone, except for one. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you. I've called for a new reviewer to finish this up. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:42, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, a promotion should have occurred about 25 minutes ago. If you happen to be around and have the time, a prep to queue promotion would be most welcome. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:52, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• How the heck can we not have an article on stuffed mushrooms? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Cris,

Would you help me to make the shadows better because am not that expert in PS, please help me. Blacknclick (talk) 13:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• You may have to retake. Are you using a light tent or something to diffuse your lighting? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

No light tent, direct inbuilt flash. Blacknclick (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• It's going to be hard to take an image with soft shadows if you're using direct flash. The only alternative would be to individually trace the pods (excluding the shadows), then artificially lighten the shadows... but that would introduce noise. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:19, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:2014 Origami modułowe.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Need some help re: a photo of Walsingham House. Have found one as a page of an 1896 book Round London. Author is George Newnes, who also published the book. Hathi doesn't have a copy, Google's is not searchable or viewable, and Internet Archive's only photo book for Sir George is his compliation of seaside photos. The photo company is Bedford-Lemere, who went out of business in 1911; I don't know if Harry Bedford-Lemere took this photo or not (he died in 1944). Do I have enough information here to use the book photo as pre-1923 abroad? Thanks! We hope (talk) 13:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Pre-1923 abroad on the English Wikipedia: definitely. I'd go with PD-anon-UK for Britain, assuming it was published there. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! This was published in the UK. Thanks also from Dr. B. as this is a new article he asked me to find a photo for; am now running through the British trade publication, The Builder, for some drawings of the decor. This hotel was razed circa 1904 and the current London Ritz now occupies the site. Another trade magazine took a 1907 photo of the Ritz at about the same angle. It looks like someone just "erased" the Walsingham House and put up the Ritz. :) We hope (talk) 15:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Can't view it, sadly. Yeah, I figured it was for Dr. B. He's done some great work with the lost/destroyed houses. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry--this is from my OneDrive and I think I've opened the door now. :-) We hope (talk) 15:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• You're right. Shocking change. They should both be free enough for Wikipedia, if the Doctor (no, the other Doctor) wants to have them readily comparable. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:29, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:1alessandromartinelli2015.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey Cris...

I rejoined to DreamSparrow from Bellus Delphina and trying to be very much active in DreamSparrow. I have two things to ask you. First one is, is there any possibility to move all the contributions of Bellus Delphina to Mydreamsparrow ? Secondly, I have created a new article for

19:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• Gotta some really big RL stuff to handle, but for your questions:
  "Move" function (available from the top of the page) to rename an article. — Chris Woodrich (talk
  ) 00:40, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Paul Gauguin, Nafea Faa Ipoipo? 1892, oil on canvas, 101 x 77 cm.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:27, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Single note angklung ('G'), 2015-05-21.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 23:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

	Congratulations!!
	Congratulations!! Hafspajen (talk) 12:47, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

• and from me Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:02, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks, everyone. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Jajan Pasar in Jakarta edit.JPG, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 21:58, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your edit, improvement and support for the kue jajan pasar image. I do really appreciate it, terima kasih. Gunkarta  talk  06:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

• Sama2. Nice to have some Indonesian food featured. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, this nomination has been at an impasse for over a month, so I was wondering whether you could take a look and see whether it can be saved. There seem to be possible issues of SYNTH, and maybe others as well. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

• Bare URLs, etc etc. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Johann Christian Bach by Thomas Gainsborough.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Fatoumata Diawara - Festival du Bout du Monde 2012 - 016 - edit.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 21:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Iman Budhi Santosa at book launch, 2015-05-30 01.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 00:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

How's this looking? Think it'll be featureable when done? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Impressive! I do think it's a possibility, yes.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I think I may have asked this before, but do you know if we can use google maps images? Google seems to be saying that we can so long as there is an attribution in the image, which would be easy to do. CorporateM (Talk) 03:32, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

• Definitely not, as they don't own the copyright to all of the images. We've got OpenMap or whatever it's called which can be used. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I checked out OpenMaps, but it doesn't have a street view to get an image of a building. Oh well. CorporateM (Talk) 16:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey Crisco. I saw your username on the Featured List talk page. I'm working on this List article with a COI and have proposed a rename here. I haven't worked on a list page before and I'm wondering how inclusion in the list is evaluated. For example, does the person need to be notable enough for their own Wikipedia page to be included? Are primary sources acceptable to verify their most current job title if secondary ones can't be found? Some are primarily notable for a prior position and some don't have strong secondary sources available verifying they belong on the list.

BTW - I posted some stuff on the Emeco 1006 Talk page, where you previously participated regarding an image that wasn't of an authentic Emeco 1006 chair. I got some great photos from them under a free license; the Declaration is with OTRS now. In case you're interested in that stuff. CorporateM (Talk) 19:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• If your goal is FLC (and this should go without saying), prioritize secondary sources. You may be interested in including a table (a sortable table, for instance). As to who gets included, there is a recommendation at
  WP:LSC, though that's apparently under discussion. — Chris Woodrich (talk
  ) 22:44, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much! That looks like exceptional guidance to me. CorporateM (Talk) 23:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Peter Lely - Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, in case you drop by, there are a few preps ready, but no queues, and there should have been a promotion about 45 minutes ago. Anything you can do to make sure there's a prep promoted would be wonderful. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey Crisco, I'd like to nominate Flag of India for TFA and was initially looking at Aug 15 (Independence Day) but saw that there's already a nomination. I also saw that in this month's queue that July 22 appears to be open and that's sort of fine too as it'd be the anniversary of flag adoption (not something that's celebrated though). I've never nominated for TFA, and am a bit confused as all entries fro TFAR are only for August. So, I'd like to check if it'd be ok to nominate for July out there. If yes (and given that the current nomination for Aug 15 already has supports) I'll do a nomination for July 22 in a couple of days. Please do let me know. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi SpacemanSpiff. The flag article was previously on the main page on 14 August 2005. Although we occasionally will run an article more than once, there generally needs to be a very good reason for it. I can't see a 68th anniversary as having the necessary importance. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Ah well, I wasn't aware of that, though the article changed completely at FAR. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 02:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    • That the article changed drastically has not always meant success at a second TFA. Several have failed. To get an idea of how rarely we rerun articles, check out Wikipedia:Today's featured article oddities; it's only happened five times in the more than 10 years of TFA. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
      • That page is interesting, I've never been involved in main page processes before (except for a couple of DYKs), good to find out about this. cheers.—SpacemanSpiff 04:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chris, After a recent re-write, the Hitler Diaries are now at peer review, should you have the time and inclination. Any and all thoughts on the article are most welcome. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 11:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

• The inclination is there, but I quite honestly don't know about the time. I'll try. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

• No problems - I know you have your hands full. If it's just a question of flagging up problems with images, that is a always a huge area of weakness I have, but not to worry if you find other things getting in the way of that! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

) 01:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

• Bot? What are you smoking? Tan's transcluded. Mandarax, does this perhaps have something to do with the clearing out of inactive nominations? I don't understand the workings of bots like this. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

• No. I only cleared out noms that were either promoted or rejected from under headings more than a month old (May 26, specifically). I do, however, have a strong suspicion about what's going on. The MediaWiki API software was just updated, and I noticed that this resulted in an AWB problem: lists of items returned are truncated at 500. I'm pretty sure this is also what happened to DYKHousekeepingBot; when it looks for things transcluded on T:TDYK, it only gets the first 500 alphabetized items (nominations, both active and inactive, plus other templates which are transcluded). I bet every user with a nomination subpage starting with about "S" or "T" and later alphabetically got a notice. Note that if the bot started after I did my clearing out, I actually prevented some of these notices from going out, because those inactive ones I removed would have been included in the 500, resulting in fewer active ones being returned. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

• That makes sense. Thanks, WMF! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Netherlands East Indies Java Rupee 1803-Z.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

the possible puns, however unfortunate come to mind, your possible (not to many sigh, ugh, etc please) comment would be very welcome at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indonesia#Category JarrahTree 08:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

On 5 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kue gapit, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the snack kue gapit is more popular among tourists than local residents of Cirebon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kue gapit. 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.

Thank you for your help (pass it on) Victuallers (talk) 12:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, there are about 45 minutes before the next DYK promotion to the main page would be done, but there is no queue ready. Any chance that you have time now to promote the one complete prep to queue before then? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, 2015-05-17 04.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 02:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Would you mind deleting this page for me please (if permitted). Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

• Sure. Next time you can also tag it with {{
  DB-U1}}, which will let admins know you want to get rid of a user page. — Chris Woodrich (talk
  ) 05:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks, and I wasn't sure how to tag it...--Godot13 (talk) 05:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
    • No worries. Dang those pictures look cool. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

What do you think of the selection of images on this page? Any you'd remove? Anything substantial missing? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

• Why is File:Set design by Philippe Chaperon for Act4 sc2 of Aida by Verdi 1871 Cairo.jpg coming back empty? I'd probably nix the trumpets. There's still too many images in the article, I think. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Er... don't know what you're talking about. *shifty-eyes* Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Anyway, lost the trumpets. Anything else? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
    • No. But I would have to say that the score cover sure as heck isn't the set design...  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
      • Fixed. Dagnabbit... Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Wrocław Główny (Breslau Hauptbahnhof) by night.JPG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

We hope

has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey Cris,

Have a look at my new clicks 1, 2, 3, would love to nominate those for FP, is it up to FP level ? if so which one you suggest ? If any correction, please help me to retouch. DreamSparrow ^Chat 20:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

• Pretty good. The shots themselves are definitely FP quality, but I'd redo the cut-out if I were you. What post-processing tool are you using? Photoshop? GIMP? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:36, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I use Photoshop but not an expert. Common things I know that's all. Could you please have a try if you don mind, as you always do with my classical dance shots... :) DreamSparrow ^Chat 18:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

• I've done a bit here. Try comparing the two (particularly the bottoms). Next time, use shorter stretches with your straight-line selection tool, and try and avoid too many sharp turns. Also, it's a good idea to feather your selection (Selection -> Modify -> Feather). 1-2 px is usually enough. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Ya, it looks cool. Shall I suggest it to FP now ? I will be careful in future editing. Today also I went for a classical dance performance and will be uploading a picture of a cute performer, am sure you will say wow to that, may be not the photo but sure for the artist. DreamSparrow ^Chat 16:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

• How is this ? - DreamSparrow ^Chat 19:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
• How is this ? - DreamSparrow ^Chat 19:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
• This is with 50mm. DreamSparrow ^Chat 20:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, she's adorable! All very nice shots. And yeah, I think it's FP ready. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much and counting the day for voting -- DreamSparrow ^Chat 06:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

• DreamSparrow, I touched up File:Egg fruit DS.jpg. Might want to try a set nomination (i.e. add it to the current egg fruit nom). I'd support. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Done, looks amazing now. Waiting for the response. Thank you so much for the effort and the kind support Cris. DreamSparrow ^Chat 14:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Am I being too hard on the new water-lily FPC? Sca (talk) 13:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• Can't say I agree about the DOF (probably the only way to get better DOF would be to focus stack like this). But the haloing, and what looks to be some oversharpening, could conceivably lead to an oppose. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

This makes sense to me (in perhaps not a perfectly linear manner though). Perhaps I'm being too bold? -- Godot13 (talk) 20:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• Makes sense to me too. I'd just specify Max Mirowsky's contributions, if possible. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Done, and thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 23:43, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Hope you're well. From what I recall, you're the delegate who promotes most of the music ones. There's a dispute on one of the older nominations at the FLC about whether the above list can exist as a stand alone list as the Angel Haze article only has 3.4K of prose (588 words). I believe Lorde which is the most similar to this situation i.e. very few releases, was at 5.5K when her discography was split. Given we're at the 6th week of that nomination, delegate input is probably needed sooner than later. Cowlibob (talk) 13:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

An alternative has been added here, if you'd review. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:43, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I will admit, by the way, that I kind of hate providing alts. Have seen too many situations where too many alts split the voting enough that nothing passes. Think we're justified enough here, though, where many people ask for the same thing spontaneously (and it's not like it's something like "Can't we make the sepia-toned old photo black and white?"). Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 20:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

• It does look good though. And it's passing, which is always nice. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Indeed. One of the big reasons I don't mind the alternative, especially with the other version remaining available. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, Anda bisa menerjemahkan kalimat ini tidak: I found that the best way to handle [filmmakers] was to hang medals all over them ... If I got them cups and awards they'd kill them to produce what I wanted. That's why the Academy Award was created

) 03:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

• Kurang lebih "Saya menyadari bahwa cara terbaik untuk menangani [pembuat film] ialah menggantungi mereka dengan medali ... kalau saya memberikan mereka piagam dan penghargaan, mereka siap membunuh supaya dipercaya dengan film yang saya minta. Karena itulah Academy Award didirikan."05:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Alexis I of Russia (1670s, Ptuj Ormož Regional Museum).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:48, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, I need your help. In the section

) 00:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• How's it look now? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, I like the fact that the block quote now looks like a block quote, but I'm not crazy about two images right next to each other. Also, on my screen, it makes the block quote into nearly a square. Is there any other arrangement? Could you separate the two images?

talk

) 00:18, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• The only other choice would be to have them vertical in one box, like at Amir Hamzah. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I think they would look better arranged vertically at the right, but can't they be separated?

talk

) 01:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah. I've put an example here. Awful lot of white space, though. Or do you want them to be just separated by the captions? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:28, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Crisco, can you please take a look at this and see whether it's ready to be approved, and if so, could you please do so? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Sega-Nomad-Front.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Cris,

I don't know why the last edit by an experienced editor is like this, please have a look. DreamSparrow ^Chat 19:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• Like what? Adding a navbox? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  • The first edit by that user you can see, no way related to the article, then he changed it I guess. Now its fine. DreamSparrow ^Chat 05:37, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
    • I'd assume that he had been cleaning up the template, and accidentally posted the missionary to Divakaran's article instead of the template. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Cris,

Have a look at these files Pear, Amber Plum and Banana, what do you think ? Are they meeting criteria ? I have done small feathering also, what you say ? -- DreamSparrow ^Chat 08:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• And I have a plan to nominate this, this or this also, which one you suggest ? If needed, please do retouch also. DreamSparrow ^Chat 08:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  • It's looking much better, but I think you're still using straight lines that are too long. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:04, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Am trying my level best to improve, as you said its now better means, there is an improvement, I will keep doing and make it perfect soon, any correction, try to touch and which one you suggest for the cute dancer ? DreamSparrow ^Chat 09:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• Which article would it be illustrating? Which dance? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Odissi it is. DreamSparrow ^Chat 09:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Might have trouble with EV, since we've already got File:Odissi Performance DS.jpg. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Ya ya, I understood but still I wanted one of this will have a try, if other are against also, at least they will see a cute little girl performing a very difficult art form which needs practice for more than 10 years to get established. I am collecting references too, if possible I may try an article for the cute little one. There are many references but not getting time to sort it and start preparing due to hectic office work. The one is already FP is also mine. DreamSparrow ^Chat 14:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, I know. Well, it might be worth a try, but if she's notable enough for an article, that will definitely clinch it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Ya I will try that too. Have a look at this too, I have updated with a new photograph. Just have a look. I believe better one is my click, what do you feel ? DreamSparrow ^Chat 18:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• Not sure I agree with you. The photographer slightly missed the focus in the old image (it happens) but the image is something like six times the size and it shows several books by the author. It's not backlit, either (something I consider a small issue with your shot). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

But it was a kind of studio shot and was not directly uploaded, so I thought to change it. DreamSparrow ^Chat 05:34, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• We've got plenty of studio shots, though, including numerous featured ones. Allan Warren has donated dozens, if not hundreds, of studio portraits he took during the 1970s on. Kyle Cassidy has likewise donated a number of pictures, but unlike Warren he doesn't upload them himself. Studio shots are not, in and of themselves, bad. I'll reinsert the old image a bit lower down. (It is nice to keep the infobox image fairly recent) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:44, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Nice. Thank you. DreamSparrow ^Chat 05:52, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

This wasn't one of yours, but I have a question about the image: where would you put (... pictured) in this one? - Dank (push to talk) 00:35, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• The information template there is singularly unhelpful. Based on the caption in the article, I don't think I'd include (pictured). Unless we went with French soldiers / troops (pictured) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Kue gapit, 2015-06-16.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 02:33, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

In this edit [4] to

) 22:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• It's possible, but it would be much better if we could ID the image better. We don't even know the year. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• 
  Peter Gabriel (nominated)
• Jim Morrison (nominated)
  Jim Morrison (nominated)
• 
  Natalya Naryshkina (nominated)
• 
  Comb (nominated)
• 
  Modular origami (nominated)
• 
  Alessandro Martinelli (nominated)
• 
  When Will You Marry? (nominated)
• 
  Angklung (nominated)
• Craig Gentry (nominated)
  Craig Gentry (nominated)
• 
  Johann Christian Bach (nominated)
• 
  Iman Budhi Santosa (nominated)
• 
  Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich (nominated)
• 
  Les murmures de l'Amour (nominated

  )
• 
  Netherlands Indies gulden (nominated

  )
• 
  Blangkon (nominated)
• 
  Wrocław Główny railway station (nominated)
• 
  Alexis of Russia (nominated)
• 
  El Castillo, Chichen Itza (to delist; nominated)
• 
  Sega Nomad (nominated

  )
• 
  Kue gapit (nominated)
• 
  Atiśa (nominated)
• 
  Convair X-6 (nominated)
• Jim Morrison (nominated again)
  Jim Morrison (nominated again)
• 
  Turmeric (nominated)
• 
  George Clinton (nominated)
• 
  Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany (nominated

  )
• Ai-jen Poo (nominated)
  Ai-jen Poo (nominated)
• 
  Amplang (Amplang
• 
  Lettering guide (Nominated)

• Please?  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Atisha.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:NB-36H with B-50, 1955 - DF-SC-83-09332.jpeg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 00:54, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

nominate ) 12:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC) Vegemite I was reading the article on talk ) 02:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Vandalism. I've nixed it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Informal opinion... Hi Chris- Could you let me know if you find that the image for this DYK nom does not show up well enough. Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 04:11, 16 July 2015 (UTC) I'd use a CSS crop, yes. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:13, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Good suggestion, done.--Godot13 (talk) 04:40, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Updated Hi Cris, I have updated Sameer Khan (fashion choreographer) with a new photo. Have a look, I have a plan to nominate this for FP, if any rectification, please help. DreamSparrow Chat 15:50, 15 July 2015 (UTC) I have a small clarification Cris, people have voted for the Egg fruit FP nomination in different way, some of them have given Support and some of them Support Set but how it will be calculated ? The people giving Support will be calculated for both or the first ? DreamSparrow Chat 16:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC) Not sure the composition is FP worthy; a crop may work better, focusing on his head. The rest of his body isn't really doing anything. The eggplant should, by my reading, pass as a set. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:21, 15 July 2015 (UTC) Ohhh... ok ok, will try updating a better version. Thanks. I think you have noticed the discussion on article re-created by me. Have a look Sana Althaf. I have noticed she is having not heavy potential but still as an actress, I thought, she deserves a page. There are many single line articles in wiki we have but this I have spent a little time and created again. Have a look, if you really think, she still needs to be noted, support for delete but if any chance to keep, try for that. DreamSparrow Chat 16:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC) I believe Adam's commented already. Regarding the dead links, did you try the Wayback Machine? That should help locate them. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:37, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Ya I saw that Cris. I requested him to have a look while discussing the horrible FP nomination. I never used archive.org but will try for sure. But in my system, I can still open those links, have you checked the links he mentioned ? Are they still seen dead ? DreamSparrow Chat 08:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Thuluth An editor moved an image to above the infobox in talk ) 16:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Agree, but none of the images are particularly clear. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:30, 16 July 2015 (UTC) talk ) 16:54, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Egg fruit An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Egg fruit DS.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 19:30, 16 July 2015 (UTC) An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Egg fruit cross section DS.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 19:30, 16 July 2015 (UTC) TFA July complete, so it's over to you for August. All schedules should be up to date, ping if you find anything out of order. Brianboulton (talk) 08:49, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Excellent. Ready! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:09, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Regarding POTD Hi Chris, is it ok if you include the credits for the edit of the Eurasian Sparrowhawk that is going to be the POTD on August 6, 2015? If it is, then can you include "Edit by Nikhil"? Many thanks in advance talk ) 02:47, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Sure. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:06, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Request Hi, Chris. Zoomify stucks on my notebook and nothing happens when I try to save the images. Could you download these and upload them over the top at commons:Category:The Course of Empire by Thomas Cole? I'd appreciate. These versions seem to be of higher resolution than what we currently have. Brandmeistertalk 08:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC) I'm getting "Access Denied" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:41, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Request Edits Maybe I'm being a pain, but with WP:COI and the Request Edit queue not being processed, I seem to be stuck with asking individual editors to answer my request edits. I've pasted below about six Request Edit-type items; most of them are pretty mundane and have to do with small updates and new sources. If you have time to review even just a couple of them, it would be very helpful! I apologize if I'm being annoying by pinging you so often with them. CorporateM (Talk) 21:36, 12 July 2015 (UTC) Request edit-type items An update to the SAS Institute page about a new building (their HQ is one of the things they are notable for) and a summary of almost 200 product updates/releases over the last year or two here (request edit is almost two months old) A few minor updates to the Yelp page here from about a month ago to incorporate some of the sources that have been published after it attained GA status I didn't know what you meant by "labeling" the external link, so I just marked it off as done. Marking why it's worth a visit. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:22, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Oh you know what, I got my wires crossed; this one is an interview with the author of a documentary, which has a less prominent amount of space in the article and is less significant than the lawsuits. Probably best to leave it out anyway. CorporateM (Talk) 16:29, 16 July 2015 (UTC) Agree. In an article on the documentary, okay. Not in an article on the company. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC) There is actually an article on the documentary at Billion Dollar Bully. My recommendations to them was not to get involved in it though. CorporateM (Talk) 16:23, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Agree. Yelp shouldn't get anywhere near the article on the documentary. Just saying the link itself would presumably work better in that article. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC) There's a lot of primary sources about MarkMonitor page (see discussion[6] ), but nobody took them off the CCI page. You can expect the same editor to defend the primary sources again, so if you don't want to deal with it, I'd understand. I just posted some updates here on the Sig Mejdal article, should be pretty non-controversial Suggested a new external link here Seems to be an agreement to make some trims here. That particular editor would prefer I edit article-space, but WP:COI doesn't allow me to Done the first one. I've been swamped in RL, so I'll work at those as time permits. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC) Done two. Not too sure of the CCI page's use of primary sources (at least their official website). Most of it seems, more or less, in line with WP:SPS. — Chris Woodrich (talk ) 01:08, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Oh that's strange. An IP already removed the content on the CCI page I was referring to recently. Sorry I'm so disorganized at times and thanks for all your help! CorporateM (Talk) 16:26, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Turmeric Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Curcuma longa roots.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 05:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 5, 2015 FWIW, I prefer your way, and there's more support for it in copyedited text. But one endpoint in the range, "c. 1068", includes a space. WP:MOSNUM is clearer on this point: "If at least one of the items on either side of the en dash is in a "mixed" format (containing two or more of day, month, year); carries a modifier such as c.; or otherwise contains a space; then a spaced en dash ... is used". - Dank (push to talk ) 11:27, 19 July 2015 (UTC) Sigh. Personally I'd just leave it, but we should be following the MOS to the letter. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC) Fairy Hello Mr Allthingsimagey; can you see the original size version of this? My browsers say it has an error but that could just be because I live in an internet blackspot; we're so behind the times that we still have rationing and white fivers. If it is broken how do I (that means "we"; that means "you") fix it? Belle (talk) 00:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC) 350 mb? Damn. It should be possible, but just the download will take my connection two hours. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC) It says 15.24MB doesn't it?!? Am I being a dumbelle? Belle (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Yes I am; I meant the uploaded version on Commons; you mean the TIFF at LoC. Belle (talk) 01:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC) (ec) No, I am. When you said "original version", I thought you meant the LOC source file. Which is 350 mb. Yeah, the JPG on Commons opens perfectly. Wish someone hadn't cropped out the border though. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Have they? That's a pity; I was thinking of nominating it for FP. The humongous LoC file is available only on site; c'est la vie; I shall pour myself one and forget all about it. Belle (talk) 01:29, 17 July 2015 (UTC) It would be trivial to recreate for myself or Adam. But I've been really, really busy. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:56, 17 July 2015 (UTC) On it! Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC) File:Privat-Livemont - Absinthe Robette - 1896 - Original.tif - Apparently, the original is about four times the size of the JPEG. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:21, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks (I'll almost forgive you for frightening me with that devil goat). Do you think it would make an FP like that? The other version was restored (though only partially); this version is a bit shabby; I doesn't bother me as I think it lends a bit of character, but I would think it would get objections at FPC. You're the experts though; I just do "Pretty!". Belle (talk) 07:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC) I'll probably do a restoration. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2015 (UTC) I'll let you off the monkeys if you do. Belle (talk) 20:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/George Clinton Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:George Clinton by Ezra Ames (full portrait).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC) Peaches and Wine Glass I've been trying to find a date for a painting I have on my user page, "Peaches and Wine Glass", so I looked on the Cincinnati Art Museum's website (Google Art Project) [7] and I didn't even see the painting. However, I did enjoy looking at the art work there. I was surprised that I had never even heard of Frank Duveneck or his wife, both good painters. I saw a lot of things I liked. I wonder if I can use any of those images on my user page. How would I download them? (I didn't look at the museum's official website yet.) Also, could you help me find a date for the "Peaches and Wine Glass" painting? talk ) 17:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC) I believe I've previously failed at finding the date. Duveneck's work would be uploadable, but it's not easy to get the Google files. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC) Oh, I'm sorry. I had forgotten that I had already asked you about the date. Thanks for your reply. talk ) 03:47, 20 July 2015 (UTC) I could probably get Duveneck's paintings, but I can't guarantee when. I've had a very full schedule this past month. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:08, 20 July 2015 (UTC) Diaries, again Many thanks for your excellent comments on the recent Hitler Diaries PR; the article has now moved on to FAC, should you wish to comment further. Thanks again – SchroCat (talk) 11:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC) I'll have to see. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC) No probs if you're struggling for time. If you can suggest a ringer to take your place in the image review I'll gove you a free pass on this one! ;) Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:20, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Nikki would probably be able to do it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Many thanks for that – I always forget about Nikki's skill on images as I ask her constantly on source matters. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 06:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC) Reference errors on 20 July Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows: On the Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 7, 2015 page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help) Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator . Thanks, talk ) 00:22, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Sukarno Gedung Proklamasi Hartini Sukarno with Norodom Sihanouk and wife John F. Kennedy greeting Sukarno Sang Saka Merah Putih being flown for the first time Soldiers marching around Sukarno Sukarno and cabinet at press conference (1945) Sukarno and Cindy Adams Sukarno and council in front of Bandung Court Sukarno inspecting scouts Sukarno and family Sukarno and Fatmawati making radio contact with Bukittinggi Sukarno in exile in Flores Sukarno and Mohammad Hatta before exile (1948) Sukarno and his father Sukarno as HBS student (1916) Sukarno as university student Sukarno at Istana Merdeka (1949) Sukarno at Maguwo airfield (1949) Sukarno being made President of RIS Sukarno dancing with Megawati Sukarnoputri Sukarno dancing with Moluccans Sukarno gardening Sukarno giving a speech Sukarno in exile in Bengkulu Sukarno in line to vote (1955) Sukarno in Palembang Sukarno on the hajj Sukarno reading the proclamation Sukarno receiving adat honor Sukarno receiving honorary PHD Sukarno riding horse at Army celebration (1946) Sukarno riding litter in Bali Sukarno speaking at Grand Indonesia Conference Sukarno speaking to romusha Sukarno talking with TB Simatupang Sukarno visiting family in Blitar Sukarno with adat people in West Kalimantan Sukarno with Agus Salim in Prapat (1948) Sukarno with cakalele dancers Sukarno with dancers in Ende, Flores Sukarno with Eleanor Roosevelt Sukarno with Guntur at Disneyland Sukarno greeting dancers in Waingapu, Ambon Sukarno with his mother Sukarno with Mao Zedong Sukarno with Papuan leaders (1963) Interesting collection of pictures. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC) thanks, I guess I wait almost a month to see my DYK for Neepaulakating Creek get to the mainpage...get your talk page bot notice...and then sadness. My hook was gutted by whoever put it in the queue. Sad. My hook is now banal and ignorable, a hollow eviscerated she'll of itself. :-(. talk ) 03:49, 21 July 2015 (UTC) That wasn't me, and I don't appreciate the implication that it was. The change was made by Gatoclass. If you disagree with his rewording of the hook, please take it up with him. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC) I didn't imply anything...hence my writing "whoever put it in the queue". Thanks for letting me know who. Although, to expand upon it. I was thankful to receive your bot's update. If not for that, i wouldnt have known. Although, the bot though doesn't give the final mainpage text, it gives the proposed DYK template text...the only implication I'm willing to cast is that it got my hopes up seeing my work appreciated only to lead me to the mainpage to see Gatoclass' cleaverwork. talk ) 13:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC) JackTheVicar, I put the article in the queue. "Whoever put it in the queue" =/= the person who changed the hook. Gatoclass changed the hook when it was already on the main page. Look at the diff, and the one in my first reply. That is why the bot notification used your original hook. Again, your choice of phrasing suggests that you blame me for the changes. Yes, I put the hook in the queue. No, I didn't change the text, nor was the text changed while the hook was in the queue. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:03, 21 July 2015 (UTC) I apologize. I thought someone named cwmhireth put it in. I do thank you for clarifying that for me. Nevertheless, how this was handled by Gatoclass is rather upsetting. BTW, love your work on Indonesian poets. talk ) 14:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Cwmhiraeth added the hook to the preps, which are unprotected and are not used by the bot. The queues are different waiting areas, which are protected and are used by the bot. I understand how they may all seem like queues, however. Thanks for the comment on the Indonesian poet articles I've written. Just wish I had more RL time to write about them or their work. I recently purchased a (newish) printing of Amir Hamzah's Setanggi Timur. Would be nice to have an article on that. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2015 (UTC) TFA schedule on talk page? Hello Crisco! Is there a reason that you never do this? I think it's important to do as one has to know that it's not already appeared or else someone else might think to renominate without knowing that it already has appeared. -- Frankie talk 15:50, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Can't say I realized that it wasn't automated (like the page protection is). Thanks for the heads up; I'll note start including the main date parameter. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Agnolo Bronzino - Cosimo I de' Medici in armour - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC) DYK for Tan Khoen Swie Chinese Indonesian publisher Tan Khoen Swie has been described as a form of anti-colonial resistance? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tan Khoen Swie. 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. Gatoclass (talk) 02:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC) William Wright Beling II I've just finished reading and copyediting the article on talk ) 02:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ai-jen Poo File:Poo 2014 hi-res-download 1.jpg Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Poo 2014 hi-res-download 1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Culture of Sri Lanka I've just begun reading and copyediting talk ) 02:51, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Syed Kirmani Cris, Have a look at my new contribution, Syed Kirmani. I have changed the background since the background was very much distracting, if any correction, please do, if you this would be up to FP quality, I would love to nominate since the EV is awesome. I think, you will be able to help in case of any correction, especially about one of the eye. DreamSparrow Chat 17:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC) It's kinda okay, but the red-eye correction and way he's looking out the corner of his eyes are both problematic. What's worse, they can't be fixed — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC) Cool, lemme try nominating, let us see what our friends think. DreamSparrow Chat 05:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC) TFA Sorry I got behind, I'm getting caught up now. I'm not sure where we are with the image debate, so for the time being, I won't make calls on what or where the caption should be, or on "(pictured)". - Dank (push to talk) 12:02, 23 July 2015 (UTC) No worries about that. Just worried that people seemed to be thinking we were going to run those un-edited leads as blurbs. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Amplang An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Amplang from Kotabaru, South Kalimantan 2015-05-23 01.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 02:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Art monkeys That silk painting is awesome. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Mwah! Belle (talk) 08:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Valentin Wolfenstein A day or two ago, I copy-edited Valentin Wolfenstein. I wonder if you would mind looking at the images in the article. I wonder if (a) there are too many similar images in the Valentin Wolfenstein#Photography work, (b) whether "Photography work" is a appropriate section heading, and (c) if the arrangement of images in talk ) 03:00, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Why not try a gallery like what I have above?  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC) ( Wolfenstein (series). Armbrust The Homunculus 12:11, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lettering guide Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Standardgraph 2522 2.5–7 mm lettering guides.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:13, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Featured articles/By length Crisco, kok di talk ) 12:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Daftar tersebut tidak diisi secara automatis, tapi secara manual. Nah, kalau tidak diberi informasi mutakhir, tentu akan ada kekurangan. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC) File:Custard.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Custard.png ?Hafspajen (talk) 12:42, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Maybe when I'm done working on The Kiss. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Forget it, it's bad pic anyway. Change it instead. --Hafspajen (talk) 13:26, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Well, I hope the article's up to par at least. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:29, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Oh, article is fine. The image was the problem. Just try to update those links I add to Sign, since they might be clicked on soon. Request I've just learned that Viva-Verdi has died. Would you be willing to grab me a copy of http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/21439302?printThumbnails=no&action=jp2resize&op=j&imagesize=2400&pvHeight=1200&pvWidth=1200&n=5&rotation=0&bbx1=0&bby1=0&bbx2=130&bby2=99&jp2Res=0.5&pres=.25&jp2x=-1&jp2y=-1&maximum.x=9&maximum.y=11 and http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/19768888?printThumbnails=no&action=jp2zoomin&imagesize=1200&jp2x=451&jp2y=194&jp2Res=1.0&rotation=0&n=5&op=j&bbx1=28&bby1=12&bbx2=102&bby2=86&zoomin.x=12&zoomin.y=7 and http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/17749925?printThumbnails=no&action=jp2zoomin&imagesize=1200&jp2x=450&jp2y=195&jp2Res=1.0&rotation=0&n=5&op=j&bbx1=28&bby1=12&bbx2=102&bby2=84&zoomin.x=19&zoomin.y=6 and http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/23072127?printThumbnails=no&action=jp2pan&imagesize=1200&x=72&y=1448&jp2Res=1.0&rotation=0&n=3&op=j&thumbnail.x=49&thumbnail.y=75 ? There's probably others, but that's a good start. Think a few FPs would be a fitting tribute. (Pinging @Tim riley: to this conversation) I should warn: They seem a little more awkward than the normal images to get, but shouldn't be impossible. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:04, 2 June 2015 (UTC) I do believe I can get those, yes. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC) Thanks! Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:15, 2 June 2015 (UTC) K, I've got them all on my harddrive, and just need to upload them. I'll post a gallery below. The average is about 3800 * 2500 pixels. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC) FIRST SET COMPLETELY DONE AND FEATURED! YAY! Lombardi alla prima crociata  Done Giovanna d'Arco  Done Rigoletto  Done Ballo in maschera  Done Adam, they're all up. The pages may need some TLC, though, from someone who knows the subject. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:30, 2 June 2015 (UTC) Will do! Thanks a lot! The Ballo in maschera is a bit annoying - a not-quite-legible signature and a label, neither of which googles successfully. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC) Very pleased to see Viva-Verdi acknowledged. A funnny, wise and much-missed colleague. Happy to do anything I can to help. Tim riley talk 12:33, 3 June 2015 (UTC) Working on fixing that awkward paper cutting at the bottom of the Un ballo one; just need to finish constructing the text that was cut off. After that, the rest is pretty standard, and I'm probably not going to keep the wide, wide margins. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:21, 4 June 2015 (UTC) Indeed! Shame... but at least it's fairly legible. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC) Just finished Un ballo. Uploading now.. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:46, 5 June 2015 (UTC) Thoughts? Pinging @Voceditenore and Tim riley: as well. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:39, 5 June 2015 (UTC) Oh, and can we add http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/2710309 to the set? May as well try and get as many of the major Verdi operas as possible, right? And I do like that cover. http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/47483202?n=6&printThumbnails=no would also be good. http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/3704597?n=5&printThumbnails=true is another good one, though that's going to be fun: The text at the bottom's illegible... Ooh, and here's a Trovatore: http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/2820656?n=5&s=4&printThumbnails=no and a Macbeth: http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/2820652?n=7&s=4&printThumbnails=no Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC) Anyway! Back to work. Lombardi shouldn't be too bad; Rigoletto not much worse, the Joan of Arc one will be rather nastier. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC) Adam, only this appears to have a higher resolution than is normally available. Haven't found anything for the others. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC) File:Mme Stoltz and M Duprez in La Favorite (4th act).jpg — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:07, 6 June 2015 (UTC) How unfortunate. They're still probably useful, but it's a pity they're not high-res. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:09, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Last few (maybe): http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45067921?n=5&printThumbnails=no http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45067923?n=7&imagesize=1200&jp2Res=.25&printThumbnails=no http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45067922?n=9&imagesize=1200&jp2Res=.25&printThumbnails=no http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/46468045?n=9&printThumbnails=no and both of the very similar http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45067923?n=5&printThumbnails=no http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45067922?n=7&printThumbnails=no (Might be useful) Thanks for all the help. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC) SECOND SET COMPLETELY DONE AND FEATURED La Favorite  Done from a different source file Les Troyens  Done L'Éclair  Done´ Les Troyens à Carthage  Done La Prise de Troie  Done Béatrice et Bénédict  Done Alright Adam Cuerden — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:32, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Thanks! Should have Rigoletto done soon, by the way. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Think I need to tweak it slightly more, but nearly there. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2015 (UTC) What HAPPENED to File:Giuseppe_Verdi,_Giovanna_d'Arco,_Vocal_Score.jpg, anyway? That's a lot of weirdly-coloured stains. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC) Water? That was my impression. That or mildew. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:44, 7 June 2015 (UTC) Anyway, I Lombardi's today's project. Want to get that out before people get too used to the big flashy ones. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:26, 7 June 2015 (UTC) I Lombardi Could you get http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/18271600?n=1&imagesize=1200&jp2Res=.25&printThumbnails=no ? and http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/14738049?n=1&imagesize=2400&jp2Res=1&printThumbnails=no and http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/14738049?n=5&imagesize=2400&jp2Res=1&printThumbnails=no and http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/15169461?n=5&imagesize=1200&jp2Res=1.0&printThumbnails=no ? I've actually found a bunch, but this'll do for a first batch, no? Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC) Also http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/14506244?n=7&printThumbnails=no I'm about half-way through Giovanni d'Arco. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:25, 9 June 2015 (UTC) I'll do it, but perhaps Saturday. I'm going to be out of town for a couple of days. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC) No rush: I have enough to tide me over, after all. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:54, 9 June 2015 (UTC) Progress continues! Time for the next one! Think only the first Aida is more difficult than this one. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2015 (UTC) File:Sands Hotel and Casino in the early 1960s.jpg Hi, can you remove the mark at the top? Only in commons though as we've been having upload trouble on here!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:12, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Which mark, Dr. B? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 26 July 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker) I think he means the "Greetings from Las Vegas" text. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC) I could do that, but I'd upload it separately. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC) Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Tectarius coronatus Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Tectarius coronatus 01.JPG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC) ? How about - The Kiss (Edvard Munch) Hafspajen (talk) 00:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC) The Kiss (Munch), I'd expect. But I don't know if I'll be able to write. I've got a conference coming up and I want to prep my paper. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC) MM.Hafspajen (talk) 00:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Kinda dark story. This Munch is hopeless, he can make the best, merriest moments into a depressing thing. Hafspajen (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Kinda like this guy. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:01, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Yes. See, Jealousy (painting), The Scream and so on- compare "The Raven" and "The Haunted Palace". Hafspajen (talk ) 14:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Haven't read "The Haunted Palace". I'll have to look for it. I read several of his short stories, though, and saw a dramatic reading of "The Black Cat" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC) By the way, I think that pure descriptions doesn't necessary need a reference. As far as I know. Hafspajen (talk) 15:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Problem being the "sinister" atmosphere (POV), then attributing it to "dark coloring and the lack of the peoples identity." OR. The painting is dark. Yes, we've got that already. Referenced. The rest is not purely descriptive. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2015 (UTC) OK; How about: The painting is symbolist painting, representing one of Munch primary motifs, painted with fluid brushstokes, almost entirely held in dark colors, except for the small silvery triangle of the window. [of/with a dreamy quality (?)] - or something like that. description is a bit short. Read these? Munch was “a sponge” and a very peripatetic one. (hehe) "Each gallery is almost a self-sufficient exhibition. The first features a display of self-portraits that establish the power of Munch’s personality and something of his self-infatuation. In the large 1895 self-portrait he stares beyond us like a conjuring magician. In an unusual woodcut he shrinks under the weight of a large room, like a Giacometti figure. Elsewhere Munch’s painting “Kiss by the Window,” of 1892, with its powerful sweep of shadow, form and feeling, is compared with nearly identical motifs by Klinger and the French painter Albert Besnard, as well as a bronze of Rodin’s sculpture, “The Kiss.” Again and again you realize that the best way to explain a work of art is with another one. .... Several artists here — Klinger for example — vacillate all over the dial from academic to radical. Munch simply broke the dial. His disdain for normal technique and finish, his love of long, somewhat slurpy brush strokes that were more stained than painted, made all the difference. They enable him to give new voice to the rawest emotions, to be dramatic without sentimentality, and to fuse process, subject and content. Revealing the context of the outer Munch, this extraordinary show only intensifies our appreciation of the inner one, by making his emotional honesty and his radical approach to painting all the more obvious and undeniable." And these? [8] [9] - [10] [11] Hafspajen (talk) 15:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC) If you want to use the Wall Street Journal and NGA sources for a short biographical paragraph on the artist, that would be good. But we can't specifically apply it to The Kiss without any of the sources doing that (i.e. It's fine to say "Munch favored 'long, somewhat slurpy brush strokes that were more stained than painted'" but not "Munch used 'long, somewhat slurpy brush strokes that were more stained than painted' on The Kiss). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC) OK.Hafspajen (talk) 16:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Check it. Hafspajen (talk) 17:24, 25 July 2015 (UTC) The writer August Strindberg gave a similar opinion, writing that the couple becomes "a fusion of two beings, of which the smaller, in the form of a carp, seems ready to devour the larger. August was avery sick man. Hated women. Hafspajen (talk) 12:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC) Booo! That portrait of Queen Victoria is... garish. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 26 July 2015 (UTC) FP?? ::))Hafspajen (talk) 12:42, 26 July 2015 (UTC) Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crisco_1492/Archive_60&oldid=1144366218"