User talk:Jjron/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

FPC Result template

I believe that is controlled by AllyUnion's bot. You should contact that user regarding the function of the template. — BRIAN0918 • 2009-01-08 21:41Z

Re: Closing check

I've fixed those little errors, I've been fairly ill and bed-ridden for the last two weeks with glandular fever unfortunately so a few mistakes might have happened. Let me know if you pick up any more. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mazda6

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:2003 Mazda6 GG Classic Hatch, McMillans Lookout, Vic, 21.12.2008.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! Wronkiew (talk) 06:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --jjron (talk) 14:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Valued pictures

I'm so sorry. I never knew that the discussion was in the candidates page (the discussion belongs in the main page's discussion page, am I right?) Anyways, thanks for the advise and have made an opinion on the discussion. ZooFari 21:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 10:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Congrats - VPC

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, Image:Jeff-Hardy-IC-Champ,-Entrance,-RLA-Melb-10.11.2007 filtered.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Intothewoods29 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, thanks for all your help at WP:VPC!! It's been greatly appreciated! Intothewoods29 (talk) 20:15, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --jjron (talk) 11:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Darwin dates

You were enquiring about the dates for File:Charles Darwin 01.jpg. Darwin went on holiday to the Isle of Wight on July 16 1868, and rented a cottage from the photographer Julia Margaret Cameron who took Darwin's portrait – they returned home on 21 August 1868. Browne says Cameron took three portraits of Darwin during that period, the most successful being three quarters view, so that suggests they're both from 1868. No indication I've found of any Darwin portraits by her in 1869. Sources: Browne Power of Place p. 301, Desmond & Moore, Darwin's journal 47 recto and timeline. . dave souza, talk 22:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 06:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, see Desmond & Moore pp. 558–9 for the mention. It's a really good history of his life, shows the sequence and the timing well, but Moore seems to me to exaggerate Darwin's fear of exposure and claimed delay in publishing his evolution theory: it's worth reading van Wyhe, John (27 March 2007), Mind the gap: Did Darwin avoid publishing his theory for many years? for what to my mind is a convincing explanation. Anyway, excellent portrait which I came across when looking at comments on the current FPC, I've added it to Charles Darwin in place of the profile by Cameron. . . dave souza, talk 09:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Port Arthur Church

G'day, I couldn't sleep last night so I left for the Tessellated pavement at Eaglehawk Neck at about 3.30 am, the aim being to catch the sunrise. Fortunately I was really lucky. After waiting around a few hours for Port Arthur to open I dropped in with the view to doing a panorama of the church. The morning sun wasn't at a particularly good angle, with much of it in shadow. I had a snooze on the grass having not been to bed yet, but it turns out that the high summer sun follows a path which isn't so good, leaving much of the building in shadow. I'll have to try again in autumn I think. Noodle snacks (talk) 12:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 07:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I have a 2 year pass with about 1.5 years left on it for Port Arthur so the over-the-top entry fees aren't really such an issue. I've found the right spot for the church (up on the hill), but the path of the summer sun isn't so good to get the whole thing lit. I will leave it a month or two then try again. I *think* the hotel near the pavement is called the Lufra, or something like that. The actual sunrise that day was 6.07am but that shot was at 5:53am according to the exif (no clue how accurate it is). Noodle snacks (talk) 08:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd say the shot was about 10-15 minutes before sunrise, the big cloud in the foreground actually went dull before the sun came up. File:Tessellated Pavement Sunrise.jpg was taken at 6:08 camera time vs. 5:53 for the one in the article. The lighting on the pavement and overall in the sky was far inferior by this point, so I just switched to a telephoto for the cliché sunrise shot. IMO too much is charged for Port Arthur, but being on the itinerary of many visitors to the state they can get away with a fairly heavy entrance fee. I think the upgrade to a two year ticket is only $7 though. Having been 3-4 times I prefer to spend my holidays diving on Bruny Island or visiting one of the national parks. I went to Freycinet Peninsula yesterday for the night actually (ultra budget style, slept in the car at Honeymoon Bay and cooked dinner on a Tragia), I have some photos to upload, but not that many since most of them are more aesthetic than informative. I didn't walk to wineglass bay this time, but I'll have to go to the top of Mt Amos sometime to get a good photograph of it as wikipedia is surprisingly lacking. I didn't get very lucky for a sunset or sunrise on the hazards (clouds in the wrong places), but I got something quite nice for Honeymoon bay. I reckon the best shots of the area would actually be from the air, but I can't really justify the $210 or so. Noodle snacks (talk) 13:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I have a bit of a photo backlog being on dialup at the moment thanks to Telstra. Noodle snacks (talk) 13:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Again the passes for the national parks are expensive for a day ($50ish for a family), but quite cheap for a long period of time ($90 per family for two ears). Regarding VPC, I'll have a squizz at that discussion shortly. I haven't nominated anything so recently since I have a bunch of things waiting to get over the timer. I have images of many bird species that I must go through, but most of them are fairly crap quality wise. I'll probably save File:Trodden on Chewing Gum.jpg or a higher quality reshoot for April fools day. I may nominate some waterfalls shortly too, last time I tried one a few people were bitching about neutral density filters (despite the fact that a number of existing waterfall FPs have long exposures). Noodle snacks (talk) 13:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely worth the money

Congrats!

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, Image:Brown-Falcon,-Vic,-3.1.2008.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --jjron (talk) 07:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

VPC in the Wikipedia Signpost

Hey there! I had a thought - why not write an article about VPC and get it in an issue of the Wikipedia Signpost to draw more attention to the project!? So, if it's possible, could you answer a few questions with as many details as possible (I think I might have some of the facts wrong)?

So you were involved in a previous effort to create an en:Wikipedia valued pictures project. Could you detail your efforts?
I’d say it was more a previous ‘proposal’ than a previous ‘effort’. The idea had come up from time to time from a number of editors at FPC based on the concern that some images that have very high encyclopaedic value for Wikipedia can fail to gain Featured Picture status as they don’t have the right ‘technical’ aspects. FP reviewers can tend to focus overly on technical aspects of a picture, often at the expense of encyclopaedic merit. I came up with a detailed proposal for this Valued Picture system that would recognise pictures of high encyclopaedic value that didn’t necessarily have the technical side that would see them succeed at FPC. After extensive discussion at FPC talk and other places I eventually came up with a functional prototype so people so could see what the system would be like. However at the same time an entirely independent Valued Images project was being launched at Commons, which many people wanted to operate either in conjunction with EN:VP or in its place. I didn’t agree with this suggestion, but I did eventually decide not to push ahead with VP, at least until VI on Commons got well established. To a fair degree my prototype is what the current project is based on, but I claim no credit for actually making it happen.

What do you think of the current Valued Pictures system?
It’s not bad, but it’s still finding its legs. I think the criteria are a bit light on, but this type of thing has to build from somewhere. For example I originally proposed that the technical requirements should be lower than at FP, but in my opinion quite a number of people have taken it to mean that there are NO technical requirements for VPs. It still needs to find some way to attract firstly more reviewers, but ultimately also more contributors. It may need some time to establish itself so that people see it as viable before it really becomes accepted and draws more users.

What were your thoughts upon seeing VPC created?
I thought it was good and was quite happy to see the project get under way, but expressed some concerns to the user that was establishing it at the time. For example I personally would have left it for longer after the launch of VI on Commons, as it was it was probably less than six months. I was also concerned that I thought he had left out or changed some of the good parts of my proposal, such as failing to really mention technical requirements in the criteria. There was also a feeling of it being a bit unfinished or rushed upon launch, such as not having a clearly established method for archiving promoted candidates or a logo/insignia for the project. Those types of things were covered or at least discussed in my original proposal, but are still being ironed out in the current project. We’re getting there though!

What do you see the main purpose of VPC to be?
For mine the main purpose is to identify, recognise, and acknowledge images that very valuable to the Wikipedia project, but that wouldn’t succeed at FPC for perhaps minor reasons. It’s also a way to recognise and encourage users that are uploading very useful images that again perhaps may not have what it takes to pass at FPC due to technical issues. For example in modern photo terms FPC is now almost exclusively the domain of DSLR images due to the technical requirements and the gradually increasing expectations in general for user created images. Well many people may not have the interest or finances to buy a DSLR and associated gear, but are still putting up valuable images taken with their digicams. If we can encourage them to keep doing so, and to hopefully gradually improve on their work, then isn’t that a good thing for the project overall? For many of these people FPC can be a very harsh place, and is simply a frustration and a deterrent. I would like VPC to help correct for that.

Are you happy with the success that VPC has experienced so far?
As I said above I think it is still finding its legs. I think there’s still areas to be improved and I personally don’t feel yet that there’s a shared vision of what it should be, even amongst the ‘regulars’. On the other hand I don’t think there’s an entirely shared vision at FPC either, but then I guess that’s why we end up needing majority consensus to make decisions. For mine, promotion is showing to be perhaps a little too easy atm in many cases. FPC obviously used to also have the same issues, as when you look at early promotions, only a small percentage would pass on today’s standards. Overall I’d say it’s a fairly good start.

Where do you see VPC in 6 months? 1 year? 5 years?
Over the next 6 months I think VPC has to get the main issues sorted out and start to draw a larger crowd. If we can’t get more people I doubt it will survive long-term. Hopefully those things will happen and in a year it will be a busier place with a clear direction. In five years it may draw as many or more contributors than FPC, and will almost certainly have a larger gallery of images, but the distinction between VP and FP, and the value of both projects will hopefully be clear to all.

Any more thoughts/tidbits/ideas?
I’d like to acknowledge those users that got the project up and running, especially Elucidate, and those that are keeping it going. Despite it being my ‘original’ proposal, due to other commitments I know I wasn’t really involved in starting it up or helping when it first got going (and I’m really only quite peripheral now). Other than that I think I’ve said enough :-). --jjron (talk) 12:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch! Intothewoods29 (talk) 10:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

VP Candidates

Hello, Just to give notice, I've added 4 options for the insignia. You may give notice to Noodle Snacks that I have done so if you have already let him know. I'm kind of busy right now with some work ;) ZooFari 17:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. --jjron (talk) 12:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/W. G. Grace

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, File:WGGrace.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. jjron (talk) 13:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Red Sand Garden

An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status Your image, File:RedSandGarden-Pano-RBG-CranbourneVIC.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 13:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:DERM

I recently started the Dermatology task force and want to create a subpage for the taskforce that addresses dermatologic photos, giving guidelines/recommendations for good images. On that page I was simply going to link over to Wikipedia_talk:Featured_picture_criteria, but also wanted to added a few comments specifically geared towards dermatologic photos (like something about always having a ruler, etc in the picture to keep size in perspective, etc.). I also found a paper online (see [1]) and thought I could integrate some of its pointers into the page. However, I am a dermatologist, not professional photographer, and therefore wanted to know if you, or any of your friends, would help me develop this page? kilbad (talk) 17:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 10:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

GIMP

GIMP seems to only provide 90 degree rotation.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't use it, but I find that hard to believe. In Photoshop you can select an image (or part of it) and perform an operation called Free Transform, and then rotate it using the mouse. Another option is called Rotate Canvas which rotates the whole image by fixed amounts (90 or 180 degrees) but also provides an Arbitrary option where you can specify the rotation to decimal places of degrees. Try looking for something like that as I'm sure GIMP wouldn't stooge on such a basic function (heck things like Word can rotate images by arbitrary amounts). --jjron (talk) 11:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I see a rotate function now. You have not been commenting on my noms at PPR or the one you told me to take to VPC. Do you see anything else that should go straight to VPC? I am going to try to tinker with GIMP.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:09, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

As I suggested last week you're nominating far too many, which is a misuse of the process. I'll comment about it at PPR in the near future. --jjron (talk) 15:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I cut back from five or six a day to three. I am trying to figure some editing stuff out. A guy like me can get lost in some of the lingo in WP articles like Image_editing.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I am debating about just going straight to VPC with Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Victory Monument. The streets are going to disappear behind the monument no matter what kind of perspective correction I make. Also, is there any way to overlay a grid to deterimine if you are correcting toward straight vertical and horizontal lines.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:33, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I have made my first attempt at perspective correction at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Victory Monument?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't use GIMP so can't offer much advice. There is a grid in Photoshop that you can turn on, or you can use guides that you drag in off the ruler. I would guess GIMP would have similar. Re that image, it still looks to have a slight tilt, and I've already commented that I think it needs to be taken in better light to be anything near VP standard. --jjron (talk) 12:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Brighton Beach, Vic Pano, 10.01.2009.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! ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 03:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --jjron (talk) 07:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi John,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Zizina labradus-Butterfly-on-Rose SC,-EG-Vic,-23.2.2008.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 2, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-04-02. howcheng {chat} 20:33, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 07:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Well-deserved barnstar

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	For keeping Picture Peer Review under control and not allowing it to overflow (indeed a laborious and repetative task), I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 16:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Advice

Hello, Jjron. You have new messages at Wadester16's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

So I changed everything from "Image:" to "File:" on the instructions at VPC. All the templates work fine with the change (I checked). Seems you already got this. Might I just be bold and do it over at FPC as well? ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 22:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Did this too. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 03:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Decided to just do FPC too. No real reason not to. [2] [3] [4] ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 03:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, I just stumbled upon this and left my 2¢. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 00:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi John,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Aust.-Synchrotron-Interior-Panorama,-14.06.2007.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 25, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-04-25. howcheng {chat} 05:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Looks good. --jjron (talk) 13:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Kaaba

Hey John, I came across an interesting video about the kaaba and though you may enjoy watching it. --Muhammad(talk) 21:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 15:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The video is large, abt 100mb so it you'll probably need a download manager and www.clipnabber.com. Sadly, the albino trade is real. There have been several reports in the local media as well, of acts of violence such as legs chopped down of young albinos. The acts have been fueled by witch doctors who claim that albino body parts can cure incurable diseases and make riches. There have been acts to stop this horror, with the president speaking about it and various dramas being set up to explain to the public. These violent acts usually take place is rural areas with little media exposure, medical facilities and police force so its quite a difficulty tackling the problem. --Muhammad(talk) 18:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It is quite ironic but even in TZ, those kids whose parents are well off and who are sent to good schools usually end up with lousy grades and pay little attention to studies whilst those who go to government schools with few facilities are high achievers. I think there are moves to take the cases to court and hopefully once that's done the problem should decline. --Muhammad(talk) 07:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

See this]. Trials have started and there have been no reported killings in 2months. --Muhammad(talk) 16:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Synchrotron,-Quadrupole-Focusing-Magnet,-14.06.2007

I am an editor with Taylor & Francis and one of our authors would like to reproduce this image in his text book on particle physics but has been unable to contact you to seek permission. Can you get back to me on <address removed>.

Thanks John 65.89.84.2 (talk) 16:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Replied via email. --jjron (talk) 13:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Sikh pilgrim pic

hey, thanks for the FPC nom. i was waiting for some time to pass to nominate it myself (i'm paulrudd as well, got a bit confused between wikipedia and commons...) from your user page i see you're quite the photographer, so your nomination is well appreciated. --Alllexxxis (talk) 15:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sikh pilgrim at Harmandir Sahib

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Sikh pilgrim at the Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) in Amritsar, India.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. MER-C 03:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Re use picture

Hi John, I am starting up a web site on Japanese Gardens and was wondering if I can please use your Nowra image. Thank you Julia Mitchell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.211.225.190 (talk) 10:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I assume you mean Cowra. My images on Wikipedia are generally licensed as GFDL so you'd need to follow those usage and licensing requirements. If you require something else please drop me an email (you can use this link). I'm usually happy to allow free use of my images for non-profit or educational uses, as long as I'm attributed as original creator. --jjron (talk) 07:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

FPC Format selector

FYI:

• Panoramas have a height of 200px and are aligned center. This is probably how they would appear in articles.
• Portrait images have a width of 260px.
• Square images have a width of 300px.
• Landscape images have a height of 260px.
• Not specified => width = 250px. MER-C 13:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

• Reply here. --jjron (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can tell you selected landscape, because the image always had a height of 260px. Judging from the rest of the noms and the lack of complaints, it appears to be working correctly. MER-C 02:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Lima Lima.jpg

Thanks for moving it to Featured nominations. I couldn't figure out how to move it there. I am still trying to figure out things on commons, if nothing else I may learn something from this nomination. Thanks again. --JMSchneid (talk) 02:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem. BTW you can't just 'move' it there, you have to create a new nomination, it's different from the PPR nom. Good luck. --jjron (talk) 12:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

World Heavyweight Champion

You're pic Jeff-Hardy-&-Triple-H,-RLA-Melb-10.11.2007.jpg says that Randy Orton was the reigning world Heavyweight Champion whereas he was the WWE Champion, I am editing it out. --ShanRaj 10 (talk) 05:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, just correct them if they're wrong. I did get the belts mixed up on some other pics - fixed some (possibly those showing Orton), but maybe not all. --jjron (talk) 07:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review Feedback Please?

Hey Jjron, I added an image to the Peer Review section of Wikipedia, I was wondering if you'd look over it/provide some feedback for me? The submission to Peer Review hasn't got much attention, I noticed you contributed there recently.. Anyway, 'nuff said. Cheers, Ard0 ^{(Talk - Contribs)} 22:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

No worries, done, but I think NS had beaten me too it. --jjron (talk) 08:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi John,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Arborists-3,-Kallista,-VIC,-09.07.2008.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 19, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-06-19. howcheng {chat} 23:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, looks OK to me. Thanks Howcheng. --jjron (talk) 08:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Eritrean Railway - Tivedshambo 2008-11-04-edit1.jpg

Hi - I am hoping to change the licensing on my photographs from GFDL-1.2 to multilicence GFDL-1.2 and CC-BY-SA-3.0 in the near future. As you made changes to this image, would you be happy for this to be licensed in the same way? —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 11:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 13:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Judy Garland Main Image Quality

Hi, as an apparent photo expert, might you have a view that you would like to express in the discussion at [5] and [6] as to the quality of the Judy Garland main image? Feel free, if so, to leave your thoughts there, whatever they may be. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Opinion offered. --jjron (talk) 13:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Gov Davey's proclamation-edit2.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. wadester16 18:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheers. Was looking a close call there for a while. --jjron (talk) 08:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice find, by the way. I found that laughably simple, but damn did it make the point. Too bad they didn't stick to that mantra, but at least they made the effort (for the longest time, we didn't). wadester16 06:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the Brits were well ahead of their American brethren at the time re those sorts of issues (no offence, I'm from Irish stock myself and as you'd know there was no love lost there with the Brits at the time!). Australia really was at the furthest reaches of empire though, and Van Diemen's Land at the outposts of that. Beyond being a dumping ground for convicts, even free settlers tended to be at the lower ends of the social or moral spectrums in most cases. So the good intentions of those setting the thing up didn't really translate that well to those out in the bush frontiers doing the actual leg work - and despite the claimed intentions 'civilisation' was seen as more important, and we still haven't got that stuff right either even now. --jjron (talk) 10:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

On that note I'd be unhappy if the Bay of Fires ends up under control of the Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council. The ecosystems, landscapes and Aboriginal heritage would be better managed and protected if that land became a national park. Most of the aboriginal land I've visited ends up either covered in rubbish or the general public is blocked from use. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Sad but true, locking those places up seems to have questionable success. Then someone finds mineral riches there and all bets are off anyway. As I say above we still haven't got it right, but it can be hard to know what is right now. --jjron (talk) 12:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/File:Leucanthemum_vulgare_'Filigran'_Flower_2200px_edit1.jpg

Check the signatures: You're counting Kaldari twice. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No, wait, you're right. Dagnabbed indentation. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Mind closing this?

I asked MER-C the other day, but alas, no response. Would you mind closing this? wadester16 03:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

That one's a bit awkward atm. Have left a message on it at this stage. To be honest I aren't particularly inclined to be involved in noms by some editors based on previous behaviour. --jjron (talk) 15:34, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, fair enough. wadester16 08:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Picture peer review/JCBridge.JPG

Do you mean to say that a picture like File:Champlain Bridge.JPG is closer to what they're looking for at WP:FP? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 20:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Not really, the first big problem being that it's badly cutoff. Lighting on the bridge is better, though I think the photo's a bit bright overall. Here's some existing bridge FPs to compare to: File:Queen Elizabeth II Bridge, Dartford, England - Feb 2009.jpg, File:Richmond Bridge Panorama Restitch.jpg, File:Tower bridge London Twilight - November 2006.jpg, File:Sydney Harbour Bridge night.jpg, and File:New River Gorge Bridge.jpg. Drop me a note or put it on PPR if you think you've got any other potentials. --jjron (talk) 07:23, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. On an unrelated note, I found that much of the work involved in taking pictures of bridges is finding the right spot for the camera. Now I took the picture File:Île aux Tourtes Bridge.JPG, and I uploaded it even though I am totally dissatisfied with it. The problem is that, if you look at the Google Earth location of this bridge, it won't take a genius to figure that getting to a suitable location without trespassing is next to impossible. (That picture was shot at maximum zoom from right under the bridge pictured at File:CP bridge Ottawa River East Channel.JPG.) Since I'm not a fan of pictures taken from the passenger seat of a moving car (such as File:Quebec - Pont Pierre-Laporte.JPG), do you have any suggestions? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

We sometimes say a FPC that we just have to accept there's certain things it is probably not possible to get an FP quality image of - this bridge could be one example. Having said which File:Queen Elizabeth II Bridge, Dartford, England - Feb 2009.jpg is probably taken from a similar distance (2.5km away the nominator says) but is obviously higher quality. However, and this is a significant point, you are also limited by your equipment. Diliff (the guy that took the QUII one) is shooting with a Canon 5D DSLR and pro quality lenses, many thousands of dollars worth of camera gear, and the image is created by stitching together multiple individual images of sections of the bridge into an extended panorama. I'm guessing yours is a single photo from a compact digital camera, so we're talking entirely different things in terms of what you can expect of the image. While I'm not saying a photo has to be up to the standard of what Diliff puts together to be featured, the problem is it does set a bit of a standard which makes it hard for the ordinary snappers to compete. That's part of the reason we tried to get the Wikipedia:Valued pictures project going, so that people with just standard equipment but who are contributing good images could get some recognition. So I guess to answer your question, you're limited in what you can do, as I'm assuming you're probably not that keen on spending thousands on equipment. The only other thing I can think of is to take a boat ride to nearer the bridge and perhaps even cobble together a panorama from there, but again, that's really beyond the call of duty, especially if you're talking about multiple images, not just this one particular bridge. --jjron (talk) 06:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

!Vote

Hello Jjron, would you take a small portion of your time and !vote on this nomination? If promoted, this will actually be the first VP to be acknowledged by a portal. Thanks, ZooFari 04:05, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. --jjron (talk) 13:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi John,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Nelligen, NSW Early Morning Mist, Panorama, 25.9.2008.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 1, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-08-01. howcheng {chat} 03:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheers Howcheng, looks good. --jjron (talk) 07:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

FPC closures

Heya jjorn. Thanx for the reminder, I just added them :) I also added a couple of recent others that hadnt been added there as well. I was thinking that it might be worthwhile seeing if someone could create a script for closing FPC's. It could be made a much faster process and not require so many edits to close an FPC. Seddσn ^talk|^WikimediaUK 09:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Silent Valley bridge

Hi John,

Thanks for your comment, agree that this image is bit dark. This was taken during overcast day on my trip to this rain forest. If possible Could you please edit this image to overcome the underexposure?

--Cj.samson (talk) 18:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply here. --jjron (talk) 13:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Australian Parliament House

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Parliament House, Canberra, Pano jjron 25.9.2008-edit1.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! Shoemaker's Holiday Over 200 FCs served 14:53, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry this took a bit - just wanted to spend those couple extra days getting the decision right. =) Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 200 FCs served} 14:53, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the mistakes: Honestly, I'm doing this all by hand, and that was part of a six-part promotion which took over an hour, so you can see how some things slip through on occasion. Also, would you rather be credited (on the FP page) as jjron or John O'Neill (as per image description page). I'll try to remember which. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 200 FCs served} 13:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

aye. I usually start by making a big list in a word processor, then working from that. Unfortunately, it's a little hard to work in the unusual things like alternatives. I'll try dealing with all issues related to that before setting up my lists, and see if it works out better. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 200 FCs served} 13:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Crediting

Actually, you had about 30 credited under jjron. Since I feel everyone has the right to be credited in the manner of their choosing, I fixed them all.

You may know that I don't like being credited under this nick, so I've gotten in the habit of checking every FP as it gets promoted, then (inevitably) quietly fixing it to my preferred means of accreditation. It's not a bad habit to be in. =) Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 200 FCs served} 15:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Long story short, my surname's very rare, and I edit controversial articles on en-wiki. It's not worth having the drama connected to my name. There was also this arbcom case - which you'll notice is fairly unique in having been withdrawn with an apology to me - in which I was basically harassed off the site over a single sort-of-bad block that had already been lifted for a month by the time the case was started. Evidently, not pandering to a certain person's ego was a dangerous move, leading to him deciding to cause as many problems for me as he could, and, as he was a sitting Arbcom member at the time.... Well, anyway, suffice it to say I'm one of the few "lucky" people to have a sitting Arbcom member open a case against them, then have said Arbcom member spew vitriol, hatred, and extreme personal attacks against me and other admins, and the Arbcom of the time went along with it. Utter. Fucking. Bastards. Pretty much all of them got voted out next election. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 200 FCs served} 16:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not worried it's traceable; but if Arbcom tries that shit again, I'm NOT going to have it coming up on websearches of my name, while all the while they complain about how another user with a dirt-common name acting as an SPA for creationism had a single block under his real name. While the bastards engage in a pttern of major personal attacks, abuses of power, and Charles Fucking Matthews does his utter damnedest to punish me for not stroking his massive ego. They caused me so much stress I had to drop out of university for a couple years, you know? Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 200 FCs served} 10:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jjron. You have new messages at Makeemlighter's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wasn't sure if you had my talk watched. Also, I asked Zoofari here. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

FPC closures

Hey, I saw that you're active, so I thought you might do a quick check for me. I closed a few noms earlier, all non-promotes, and I was wondering if I used that {{db-fpcfail}} right. Adding it actually created a page where none existed before, so now there's a page that I created just to tag for speedy deletion, right? Or am I missing something completely? Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The main use for that was to kill the image page that had been created on Wikipedia for Commons images in order to host the FPC template. However that template has just been killed, so no need to create the image page just to be deleted! :-) We probably should remove that from the instructions now (as others will get caught by it too) but it was relevant up to about a day ago. --jjron (talk) 06:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha, I thought something smelled fishy. Oh well, I guess some poor admin will just have to deal with the four more speedy deletions I gave them to do. Thanks for your quick reply. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Lol - you even added it to the alt version on one of them. --jjron (talk) 06:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

At least I was consistent in doing something completely unnecessary! Sorta funny, too, that I mess up the non-promotes, which are supposedly easier, but I was flawless in promoting an image a week or so ago. Anyway, if there are any that you or Shoemaker's can't get to (because of involvement or whatever), just let me know and I'll knock them out. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a big batch of non-promotes coming up in the next few days, so you can help yourself to them. And most of the others for a few days are borderline (the two in and the two just above 'Decision time'), so if you've got an opinion either way, add it in. Those are the ones that can end up being controversial as they stand. --jjron (talk) 07:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for your various little bits of help in working on this Ty Cobb FPC! Staxringold talkcontribs 14:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Actually thought I may have been becoming more of an annoyance than a help. :-) Thanks. --jjron (talk) 14:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

oops!

I forgot that you wanted to test your promoting tool and accidentally promoted this. Sorry! Makeemlighter (talk) 03:15, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I actually want a bit of a batch anyway so one doesn't matter much. There should be a few groups coming through in the next few days. Was thinking of grabbing the next few anyway later on today, even though a couple will be closed a bit early, but there's so much up top they're not drawing much attention. --jjron (talk) 05:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

VPC

Hey John, would you mind looking over VPC? There are several nominations which have yet to be archived. ceranthor 14:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ceranthor. I saw Wade say somewhere in the last couple of days he was going to close off the VPCs, but can't remember where. To be honest I've done a bit of a User:Fir0002 on VPC...am not seeing a lot of point in it... --jjron (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe I asked him the other day, because there are a bunch of stagnant noms there. Alright, thanks anyway. ceranthor 14:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

True. But also with FPC so busy ATM, am spending my image time there as I'm trialling a new closing technique. Maybe MER-C would do a cameo since he's not closing at FPC atm. --jjron (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I just closed two over at VPC. The rest are pretty old too, so I might close them later tonight or tomorrow. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

VPC closings, even the promotions, are pretty lightweight, so perhaps even more of a worry if no one will do them. Yes, there is a lot of old stuff there - not sure how sustainable that is. --jjron (talk) 06:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind closing them, but I didn't want to leave the page bare. Most of them haven't received many votes. I don't mind leaving noms open until they have enough votes to develop some sort of consensus. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

That's correct. Back sometime, Feb or March probably, I closed a batch 'no quorum' after giving them several weeks. It was about then that I went off the project as, amongst some other issues, it just didn't seem to be able to generate enough interest. --jjron (talk) 06:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey!

I was actually about to add that credit! Do you think this might be a better category for it? It's sorta a portrait and sorta not. Maybe we need a sports category. Makeemlighter (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

• Oh yeah, I saw you were in the process of closing, but thought you'd moved on from there - just happened to be lurking :-). Possibly, I tend to put images in 'People' if it's clearly a portrait. Since this has failed one nom as an image of Cobb, and since several people again said EV for Cobb himself is limited, then I'd say that other one probably would be a better classification. Agree, have thought we need a sports category for some time but not sure where to put it, perhaps a sub-cat of Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle? Am also going to create a Vehicles sub-cat at some stage (have been meaning to do that for months but haven't got around to it). --jjron (talk) 14:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
  • I moved it. I feel much better now! Time to relax. Makeemlighter (talk) 14:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Don't forget to update its location on Wikipedia:Featured pictures as well. --jjron (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Ugh, good point. I did forget that. Thanks for reminding me. Makeemlighter (talk) 20:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

FPC

Not been feeling that well; will be back to closing shortly. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 204 FCs served} 14:57, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

No problems. Wasn't concerned about the closing atm, but you'd been very quiet on there overall. --jjron (talk) 07:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• Speaking of FPC closures, is it common practice to close the likes of the Emu feeding video or the White Ibis, which had nothing but weak supports and supports (not enough total votes, but that was all) as "Not Promoted"? Isn't that what the "Nominations 7 days or older - Decision Time" section is for? Staxringold _talk^contribs 16:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Decision time means that the 'time is up' and they are ready to be closed when a closer comes along, it's not really a repository for noms to sit around waiting for votes. It's a bit fluid in practice, but giving different noms differing amounts of time (especially significantly different) has been a bit of a bone of contention this year, so I tend to be quite strict if I'm closing, but usually allow an extra day or so if it's got three clear supports. FWIW the ibis was given I think an extra two days for more votes (none were forthcoming), the emu just wasn't attracting attention. In this case this was a bit of unusual situation as well, as it seemed clear that Fir wanted the Meerkat to get promoted as his final FP on his retirement - since that was going through yesterday I decided to make a decision on his other ones as well regardless of which way it went. Additionally, with so much on the page at the moment, we also need to keep things moving along, almost no one's getting anywhere near the bottom to vote anyway and it's likely a few will get closed with only the nominator support. --jjron (talk) 04:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Mobile phone pictures

Do you think the Sony Ericsson K800i make a good replacement camera? And for FPC what megapixel recommended? How about the 8 megapixel Sony Ericsson c905?

By the way, I would like some advice of which settings to use and comments of how to improve the composure of my pictures. Please reply on my talk page or leave a talkback notice there. Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 17:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 08:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Tyw7

This is getting a bit silly at Peer review now, I've left a comment on his latest postings basically saying you cant have time stamps and that his camera isnt good enough. Could you leave a comment as well, hopefully he'll get the idea eventually --Childzy ¤ Talk 14:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Just to add, i've noticed your comment on his talk page which seems to have been promptly ignored --Childzy ¤ Talk 14:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

How about this picture . It seems clear and the sky is not "overexposed". --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 16:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Will reply at PPR. --jjron (talk) 08:23, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

FPC closings

Since you've been closing most of the noms, I thought I'd let you know. I went ahead and moved about 93 million noms to the "older than 7 days" section. Quite a few of them have not made quorum. I'm going to go through and close all the obvious non-promotes. I'll leave the promotes to you and I guess we can leave some that have nearly, but not quite, made quorum up. I hope that tool you were testing can handle all of this!! Makeemlighter (talk) 03:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

• Okay, I ended up closing 12 non-promotes. I left a few where consensus wasn't entirely clear. Maybe with less noms to look at, they'll get a bit of attention today. Everything else is yours (or whoever wants to close it) unless you want me to help out. Enjoy mass promoting. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:27, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

• I thought this was going to be the big test, but on a quick look through last night I came up with something like 6 promotes, 24 non-promotes (including any well below quorum), and 12 I was going to give an extra day or so as they were close. Of course there could have been some more votes since then making some more close ones, and hopefully a few more promotes, as six isn't that much anyway. --jjron (talk) 05:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

• Eh, Wade's seen them in there and beaten me to it anyway - looks like he's only come up with four promotes, and closed the rest. --jjron (talk) 08:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Black power salute

This was an interesting idea, but, surely, every non-free image we use should be valuable? In each case, due to our non-free content criteria, the image would be both irreplaceable and would add significantly to the article. How would we make a judgement about which to nominate? For instance, surely every album cover is extremely valuable in our article about the album? Just interested in your thoughts. J Milburn (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

And, on a different subject, I've closed Tyw7's FPC and VPC noms, and left him a note basically echoing what you said. I'm chatting with him now- I think, if he's interested in FPs, he would do best to hang around FPC for a little while. J Milburn (talk) 10:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 13:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I can see what you mean, in a way, but I think I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't be showing off our non-free content. There may be potential with the idea, I'll have a ponder. I did move the noms to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/September-2009, but I didn't realise there was also a recently closed section. It's strange, considering how I do spend a good bit of time at FAC, that I've never closed one before... I've seen this kind of behaviour from Tyw7 before; he's someone who does need to be told the same things over and over, but I don't think we really need to clog our FPC with his nominations, when there are legitimate nominations that require feedback... J Milburn (talk) 13:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I've bumped into Tyw7 mostly on various IRC channels. I think he's been banned from most of the major channels now for abusing stalkwords and the like. I have no doubt he means well, but he does create a few problems. I've dealt with editors very much like him in the past, and they always follow a similar pattern. I just hope Ty calms down a little before he exhausts everyone's patience. J Milburn (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

You're the high school teacher, you know how kids behave better than me :) These were Wikipedia IRC channels, so he only joined them to help others/get help with Wikipedia, so it makes sense that he would stick with the same username. Also, he's eager to become an admin (which is, again, very typical) and so the more edits he can get under the same name, the better, as he sees it. The most harmful thing I've seen him done are misguided attempts to help new users, other than that, it's mostly just time wasting. Of course, there are some legitimate positive contributions in there, and I do feel that, in a little while (perhaps a few months, but probably a little longer) he could become a very constructive contributor. J Milburn (talk) 14:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I uploaded two images to VPC because you said in the other picture's comment that they aren't too "fussy" with technical specs and problems. Plus, the other two pictures that I have asked for review has been "digitally" edited to improve color balance, etc. Therefore, they are "different" from the other images that I asked to be reviewed. Secondly, about the IRC, read my comments at User:J Milburn's talk page. Rest assured, I'm not here to "vandalise" Wikipedia :-). --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 17:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

FPC note

Thanks for the note, it's been fun digging through the Keith Allison shots and finding the gems. You forgot to let me know that Andy Pettitte got promoted also though! :) Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

• Nevermind, I'm just an idiot! :p Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Eritrean Railway POTD

See notification on my talk page. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 07:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 08:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

FP!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Sandsculpting, Frankston, Vic jjron, 21.01.2009.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. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 206 FCs served 01:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Congrats! Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 206 FCs served} 01:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 05:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Bullet

Thanks, I will put the bullets there.  Franklin.vp  15:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Albinos

Just informing you as you had requested, three people have been sentenced to death for killing albinos for witchcraft. Hopefully the murders will stop and all those guilty apprehended --Muhammad(talk) 08:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow up. It's all pretty unappealing business. --jjron (talk) 14:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Hello, and take this barnstar that I hereby give to you in recognition for your good humour. ☩Damërung ☩. -- 05:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 13:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Jjron. You have new messages at Damërung's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FPC delist noms

Hi. I haven't seen you over at FPC in a while, but I was hoping you'd be able to do me a favor and close this and this. I participated in both of them, so I don't feel comfortable closing them. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• Maybe you can answer a question for me too. I just delisted one that was on Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs 01. Am I supposed to shift one picture from every page back a page so they each have 100 pictures again?! I hope the answer is no, but if it's not, I'll do that later. Thanks again. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply. --jjron (talk) 13:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I forgot to say...Thanks!!! Makeemlighter (talk) 05:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries. --jjron (talk) 05:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/I Did Not Raise My Girl To Be A Voter

I hate to be a pain, but could you reopen this? I was talking with Durova and had literally just made an edit that fixed many of the problems when you closed. It would, naturally, be disruptive to renom just after closing, even with an edit. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 213 FCs served} 07:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Shouldn't be a problem, closed less than an hour. It's like the issue of how long after you drop some food on the floor is it still OK to pick it up and eat it? --jjron (talk) 07:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

My Sig

Another editor helped me with the signature earlier today. It is now 1/3 of the size. The problem is that it had SUBST tags in the colors, leading to a massive expansion upon wikification. It was only about 60 characters of code in the My preferences, but that turned into over 600 with the SUBSTs. As you will see, no more SUBST tags. Thanks.   Nezzadar ☎   03:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm no fan of fancy sigs - I tend to think the simpler the better - but at least the character length in the edit window is now a definite improvement. --jjron (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm a very visual person. That, and the fastest way for me to find conversations I am involved in is to scroll down until I start seeing green boxes.   Nezzadar ☎   17:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but it's off-putting for everyone else. Especially on a page like FPC, where it's a visual distraction from the images that we're evaluating. --jjron (talk) 12:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Mentorship?

Hi there. I have, after careful consideration, decided to make the FP section my home here at Wikipedia. You all are nice people, and really, I love the work being done there. I have an interest in becoming more actively involved. Any guidence you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Please feel free to post on my talk page. Also, I am interested in learning the closing procedure, as that seems to be the key (unless you can edit or take great photos) to becoming a power player in the FP section.   Nezzadar ☎   17:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Replied at Nezzadar's talk. --jjron (talk) 13:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

PPR

What do you think of the update? upstateNYer 19:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks better, but it's all moved ahead now anyway...:-) --jjron (talk) 06:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Update on WP:FPC

Endomembrane system diagram and Animal Mitochondrion have been fixed by the wonderful ZooFari. Please have a look and see if you can spot anything else that needs to be changed.   Nezzadar ☎   03:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lucy Merriam

I'm not certain if I've correctly followed what you're saying. Do you still feel there is an issue? What do you feel needs to be added/clarified? If not, could you possibly strike your comment? J Milburn (talk) 15:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

My main issue is to do with the morality of correctly attributing creators, but I don't think many care about that type of thing. For the record I have added a further comment to try to clarify at the nom, but also hidden the discussion as semi-OT. --jjron (talk) 06:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Continuation of ethics conversation re Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lucy Merriam

Rather than clog up the talk page any more than I/we already have, I figured I'd bring it here. Yes I have, in a round-about way, said what you suggested I said regarding attribution, but that's not being up in arms, it's only requiring that they follow the terms of the license because that's what it was licensed as, which is a pretty fair request - hardly millitant. My motivation for requiring them to follow the terms of the license is mainly, as I said, wishing to restrict commercial exploitation of my images and I think that's a pretty fair motivation. As Fir0002 and many other photographers have clearly stated, we have no issues with our photos being used for educational purposes on Wikipedia (and other organisations with similar non-commercial goals), but it seems so far removed from the ideals of Wikipedia to provide our hard work for commercial entities to use in advertisements etc that make them money and provide the person who did the real work with nothing. It's pure exploitation. It's somewhat like bringing a load of volunteers to Africa who wanted to help build the locals a well, and instead asking them to build a mine for a Western company to strip the land of valuable minerals. You'd call that exploitation, but what is fundamentally different about requiring photographers to give away photos to similar exploitive companies with minimally restrictive licensing? ;-) The only difference is that when we license with CC-BY-SA/GFDL, we are knowingly signing away our rights to restrict commercial use and the Wiki community's attitude has always been: "This is what Wikipedia is, take it or leave it" and I've had to accept these terms in order to continue contributing to Wiki. I've 'taken it' grudgingly, but that doesn't mean I can't make it as difficult as possible to be exploited without breaking any rules, does it? ;-)

Also, getting back on track with the main topic. I just don't see it being a particularly strong ethical/moral issue. The photographer (if we are to believe the mother, and I don't see why there is any reason to suspect we shouldn't) has sold the rights to the photo. He no longer owns it or has any rights to it. I don't see how there is any grey area there. Furthermore, the mother doesn't claim to be the author of the image. Our inflexible image template might suggest that she claims authorship since the details are in the 'author' field, but it is stated pretty clearly in the text that an unnamed photographer is the author, and she is the owner. You could just as easily replace the text "Work for hire taken by a family photographer" with "Work for hire taken by an unknown photographer" and the information provided would be basically identical. Less informative actually. In any case, if your own moral compass won't let you support an image with an unknown author, then fine, but I just don't think it's a big deal for everyone else. It would only be a big deal if the author had a legal right to ownership IMO but he gave it away, or more likely, sold it for a hefty price. It's hardly exploitation when it's a business transaction. If you sold your car, you wouldn't then complain that you no longer had any right to drive it. ;-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 08:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course not, but if you made the car by hand and having parted with all ownership rights saw it go on to win a design & build award, I'm fairly sure you'd want your name to be associated with it. The right of association with your work is a moral one, not legally recognised in some jurisdictions but one we should respect here, I feel. Particularly with recent captures (like celeb pics) it's no big deal to uncover the name of the photographer. My feeling is that, without high-profile recognition as a photograph many snappers would be ambivalent as to usage; it's high-profile publicity shot, they got paid, WFH was the deal, end of. But seeing your photo not only gain an accolade but appear on WPs main page attributed to someone else might conceivably upset some less-than-thick-skinned photographers. It's about respect and due consideration, basically, something we should all expect regardless of prima facie commercial arrangements. --mikaul^talk 10:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

True, I can see how you might want to have your name associated with the work and I accept that it's a moral issue, just as you accept that it is not a legal issue. I'm really not against finding the photographer's name at all, but I'd just find it extremely tiring to chase the attribution up on every occasion such as this. The real moral issue to me is the possibility that the mother of the child in the photo has not done the right thing by the photographer by not attributing it to him, not the fact that we haven't gone to great lengths to verify everything. As I said, I'm not against finding and attributing the photographer, but I don't see it as a valid reason for opposing, either, because I just don't see it as our role to correct other people's indisgretions. I just don't think it's our battle to fight. If individuals want to go beyond the call of duty, that's fine though, I applaud them for doing the right thing, but it should be done independently of the FPC nom because as you can see, Jjron's comments scared people into removing their support until 'licensing concerns' were addressed. Besides which, there is the possibility that it was actually one of the conditions of the WFH agreement that the photographer not be named and the mother to hold all rights. Not saying it's likely though, but let's not automatically assume that an evil has been committed. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:57, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned copyright laws are meaningless - IMO if you are willing to put your images on the internet then effectively you're giving them away. Yes, I slap a licensing note on my images (GFDL 1.2 only IIRC) but IMO it doesn't mean a thing. I know some of my images have been used commercially, if someone wants to 'do the right thing' and pay me for that (and some have) then that's nice, and if the licensing prompts them to do so, then good. If they don't, well that's my bad luck. Nonetheless I would at least like to be attributed for them (also my bad luck if I'm not, but I must say I'd be particularly peeved to see someone else credited as the photographer). For amateur or educational uses, attribution is all I request when asked, and don't make any specific demands as to size, location, etc and don't pursue things. I think you may have chased some up beyond that? In respect of this image, I have a sneaking feeling it's not a 'professional' photo anyway. The 'family photographer' bit, the fact it's taken with a 'Digital Rebel XT' (what pro would do portraits with a 350D in 2009?), and even your comments on composition - I would say it's by some family member or friend who's into amateur photography. Therefore they probably haven't been paid and it's possibly not technically a WFH either. They may be quite happy for their work to be used here, especially if the mother's given it away on their behalf, but we don't know any of this. However that's a bit of a digression, and as you say not really up to us to determine I suppose - though perhaps comes back to my point earlier that that's possibly what should be happening at the point of submission with these OTRS images. Yes it would be tiring to chase up, but thus my comment at FPC that I'm not sure we should be nominating these images with poorly identified authors - if someone wants to chase it up and verify it that should be done and out of the way before nomination. Anyway, as I think we've agreed it's rather a moral decision, and people will hold different standards on that. --jjron (talk) 13:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I'd echo much of that, especially as regards the value of attribution. With it, you have an audience for your work; without it, you only have consumers. Copyright's important though. Unless you release your stuff into the public domain, you release it under license of your copyright. All that might mean in practical terms is that you retain your claim on authorship, but without copyright you retain nothing. I'd also expand on your point about FPC, or featured pictures to be specific. The best thing about FPs is the example they set to the rest of our illustrative content; I'm sure I don't need to spell that out from a quality/EV angle. One of the unsung aims is that they be exemplars of the way free content is handled on the web, rather than jeopardise our chances of attracting copyright-aware, professional quality contributions. We need to get things like attribution absolutely right, especially on the front page, regardless of whether it's a professional shot or not, to save us looking like complete amateurs and our audience a bunch of mindless consumers. --mikaul^talk 22:01, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Also agree that copyright/license terms are virtually unenforcable on the internet en masse, just as piracy is. However, the bigger the fish, the bigger the fry-up. ;-) We just have to pick our fights carefully. I'm making very clear the conditions of the licensing so that if any of my images do get misused by a big company who should know better, then I will reserve the right to chase it up. I let Apple's big misuse of one of my photos slide a few years ago (if you weren't aware, they used my Colosseum photo in one of their advertisements for the then new Leopard OS without any attribution or licensing, along with a couple of other Commons images). My intention would not have been to bleed them for all they're worth (although it does sound tempting), but I was pretty pissed off that they did it and I saw it as a situation where they should have paid for the image for commercial use like that. I actually have no idea how I would have gone about persuing it legally (cheaply, that is) though, and that was the problem. I just put it in the 'too hard' basket. But to accept that any photos on the internet are effectively given away is like accepting that if you walk out your front door today, you might be murdered - c'est la vie! But surely we should do what we can to avoid it, and to encourage a system that minimises the chances of it: Enforcement of law. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Eh, if I didn't accept that I might be murdered when I left my front door I'd never leave home, if I didn't accept that I may be wiped out by a motor vehicle every time I ride my bike I wouldn't go riding, if I didn't accept that my images would get nicked I wouldn't put them on the 'pedia... :-) Yeah, you take precautions to minimise risks, but that's why I've argued before that there's precautions you can take to limit misuse to some degree, like not uploading images at huge resolutions. To enter into a different debate (!), and I've also said this before, IMO in the digital age copyright is a relic of the past, a three hundred year blip of history that we now need to move beyond. The only thing keeping it alive atm is the big moribund corporations whose business model relies on sustaining antiquated copyright laws, and the puppets in government who are in their pockets. Innovative businesses have already moved on. --jjron (talk) 12:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There is a difference between accepting that there is a possibility of being murdered, and a certainty that you'd be murdered! The only thing separating those two concepts is law and the subsequent enforcement of that law. Even if I did downsample, it would only, as you say, reduce the incidence slightly. It would still happen if there were no way to enforce the license. I'm not sure how any content creator could expect to survive (financially speaking) in this "digital age" if they couldn't protect their work from being exploited in some way. I know that (for example) stock photography sites like iStockphoto has clever ways of letting you zoom in on the images without being able to screen capture them, but ultimately, they too can be ripped off if you purchase the image and then decide to ignore the terms of the purchase, like reselling it. It still comes down to enforcement of laws. Whether they be so-called antiquated Copyright law, or some other form of protection of content, it still needs to be enforceable. If not, then we have digital anarchy. :-) I'm all for free distribution of content that has no inherent value to the author/contributor, but when that content is also a source of income, then it's only fair that they'd want to protect it. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 13:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I tend to think that most people have moral rather than legal reasons for not committing murder or similar, which is kind of back to the original debate about moral standards. Similarly I think most people pursuing use of your images are probably doing so for moral rather than legal reasons. If you think copyright laws are there to protect you or other artists then you're fooling yourself. That may have been their original intent, but as you yourself say you don't know how you could even reasonably pursue it. Realistically it's restricted to the big corporations to pursue copyright violations, and they don't do it to protect the artists, but to protect their profits. Yes you could pursue on an individual level if you wanted to go to immense trouble, but probably with less return than what you'd have to put in. At one stage I was putting up images here as copyright free, expressly stating there were no restrictions on their use. I still got a number of requests by people wanting to use them outside Wiki. Why? The images clearly said they could be used by anyone for any purpose, but obviously people still felt making a request was the right thing to do. As you suggest above there's ways around almost any technical restrictions, yet most people who want to use these things are willing to pay if they know that's the expectation. In most cases legal concerns might deter just a small percentage of the population. You may been spending too much time reading the Murdoch press. ;-) --jjron (talk) 12:20, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Just a semi-related note- although I was a little exasperated in the Lucy Merriam nom, I did take your comments to heart, and before the upload of my latest FPC, I replied to Shea's email, asking for a clarification of the actual author of the image, which he provided. Hopefully, that nomination will be able to run its course with discussions of the merits of the actual image only. J Milburn (talk) 23:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, good work on that. I'm not sure how workable you believe that is as a solution, but as I've said above, and I think Mick has similar thoughts, that's the right thing to do IMO, especially for images that will be put up as FPs. If it turns out you don't get info on the photographer, then you'd have to decide what to do, but at least you could say you'd tried to acquire it. --jjron (talk) 07:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Sets

I know the individual images are tagged as FPs, so I assume each one is individually counted as such. But I really don't know. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

• All I can say is look at File:Lewis Carroll - Henry Holiday - Hunting of the Snark - Plate 1.jpg, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. It's what I used as a starting point. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lucy Merriam 2

Thanks for the promotion. I thought it may get a little messy... J Milburn (talk) 12:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Replied on user's talkpage. --jjron (talk) 13:31, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree- the licensing issue was more an "administrative" discussion anyway. J Milburn (talk) 13:41, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Category Invite

Please add the category [[Category:Wikipedia Featured Picture contributors]] to your userpage. The category is for ease of access to a list of serial FP contributors, and will not be used for spam. Thanks,   Nezzadar ☎   17:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you would approve...

...of this shirt Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 19:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I kind of like how they are happy to name their directory www.jinx.com/men/shirts/geek/... --jjron (talk) 11:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

They are a company that makes clothing exclusively for nerds and geeks. Most of my shirts come from them. If you are interested, I can refer you (which means I get a bonus), or you can just get the shirts without the referral (which has no impact on you). Hurray for marketing... Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 15:49, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Might have a browse of their website at some point to see if they've got anything I like, but delivery costs are usually a killer (I assume they're US based). --jjron (talk) 06:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

California, so about as far for you as for me, assuming you are in Aussie. Its low for me though. Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 06:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't actually know where you're from, but most companies charge a packet for international postage. --jjron (talk) 11:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Japan photos of people

Hi, by any chance do you know where to find in Wikipeida (or where to ask) what rules apply to photographs of people to be allowed to be published in Wikipedia. Specifically I am interested in the case of Japan. Thanks  Franklin.vp  20:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Franklin. Commons is usually a better place to look for that type of info being the file repository, though Wikipedia sometimes has slightly different rules (usually a little more liberal). Two useful pages to have a look at might be Photographs of identifiable people and Freedom of panorama (that one is really more about buildings and the like, but it can relate to people being visible in your photos). Cheers, --jjron (talk) 06:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, that's exactly what I was looking for.  Franklin.vp  13:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Sacred kingfisher

Hi I am a designer for Norfolk Island philatelic. I am enquiring about using the Sacred Kingfisher photo taken by John O'Neill in a page of the island's stamp yearbook. There are only about 250 copies of the yearbook printed. Would it be possible to use the photo? Thank you very much, Please contact me at stampdesign@yahoo.com Mary Pavicich ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stampdesign (talk • contribs) 06:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Will send an email later tonight. --jjron (talk) 06:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Recently closed Black Panther nom

I was under the impression that I had cast my support for the nom, but when I saw that it did not pass, I also saw that I forgot to support. Would it make a difference now? Is it too late? Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 18:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

It probably wouldn't be a good idea to allow people to go back and cast retrospective 'votes', it could set a dangerous precedent, so yes, I'd say it's too late. The image can always be renommed at some point. I'd also be inclined to say this really needs two more supports anyway to be convincing (the oppose votes give quite strong reasons, the same can't be said for some of the supports). --jjron (talk) 04:22, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Minimum supports on FPC

Yeah, I haven't been able to participate as much as I've been liking; thanks for the message...I've been playing football (soccer, if you wish) for a local club, and life's been busy. I'll go check it out. Spencer^{T♦Nominate!} 23:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

My FPC

Thank you for 'deborking' my FPC. It's my first one :) Jujutacular ^T · C 08:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. The main issue was that it was interfering with the next nom down the page. Good luck - it can be a trial by fire. --jjron (talk) 12:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Photography page

Since this picture was recently promoted to featured you increased the size of its thumbnail on the Photography page (from 175px to 250px). However, at least for me, the new size causes the picture to overlap the table to the left of it, so I (without any malicious intent) reverted your edit. Did you notice anything similar? Basically, all the thumbnails above it are 175px across, so increasing the size of that particular one will cause misalignment in any case. Thanks for having a look! Tomatoman (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 14:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

useage of brighton beach boxes photo.

Hello there John, great photos.

One in particular has our interest. We would like to know if we can use your Brighton Beach boxes photo for a shop front window in Hampton Street, Hampton, VIC.

We are unclear of the license in regards to this image, although a section out of 'GNU Free Documentation License' led us to consider it may be possible to use without your permission.

'2. VERBATIM COPYING

You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License.'

We'd rather know what you feel about us using your work on a window, Cheers

Roger Essig, 0401170196 Black Rock Signs

If need be i'll remove this message from this talk page. Roger Anthony Essig (talk) 00:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC) Roger Essig

Replied via email. --jjron (talk) 23:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

No quorum?

Referring to my FP nomination, I understand that three votes are a bit too few to represent the community, but could you point me to the guideline that says such nominations are to be rejected after one week and not, say, extended? Thanks. — Yerpo ^Eh? 14:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 22:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I take the same issue with this closure. The only votes were support, this is the definition of something moved to the "7 days, time to make a decision" section. This wasn't conflicting votes, just not enough votes. Staxringold _talk^contribs 15:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 15:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

• That's the whole point of that "time to make a decision" section. And the whole point of the template up top for candidates needing votes. Closing this 1 day after the minimum simply because of not enough votes (not any kind of unresolved conflict) just forces me to wait and renominate something that doesn't show any sign of not passing. What purpose does closing it serve? Staxringold _talk^contribs 15:52, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

• Perhaps would be nice if you'd read my reply to Yerpo's question, which you added onto, rather than attacking, as I've already discussed this stuff with him. --jjron (talk) 14:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

FP delist templates

Hi! You reverted two changes I made to FPdel templates [7] and [8]. Maybe you haven't noticed that there was a clear reason and consensus on these changes here and here. Elekhh (talk) 21:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply! I will reinstate the changes to the templates, based on previous reasoning: a key criteria for listing/delisting is often discussed in terms of EV, and in order to be able to properly judge that is good to have handy the links to the articles in which the image appears. In terms of consensus: indeed there was one support by upstateNYer on the FP talk page (while no oppose) but I also provided link to a discussion on a particular delist nomination, where there was general support for the same proposal from another two users: Papa Lima Whiskey and Maedin, while again no oppose. Hence I called it consensus.

Eh, even counting all them, you'd have four supports, which wouldn't be enough to get an FPC promotion ;-). And as I said on your page, we wouldn't usually count comments made during a nomination. Yes, it can be relevant (though the links are easy enough to find), though for delists it's often not relevant at all - nonetheless if the nominator deems it not to matter I guess they can just say so ("irrelevant" or "NA" or something) rather than listing the articles. --jjron (talk) 13:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

• Regarding your comment to the other proposal (c), could you leave a short note of your support on the FP talk page? Elekhh (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Done. --jjron (talk) 13:43, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Jigging off Queenscliff Pier

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Jigging off Queenscliff Pier, Vic, jjron 5.12.2009.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! Makeemlighter (talk) 05:47, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --jjron (talk) 16:02, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

Happy and fruitful New Year, both in real life and here. Brand[t] 14:02, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

FP closure rules

Hi John, may I please ask you if English Wilipedia FP follows any rules of the time of the nomination? Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pinnacles National Monument should have been closed a week or more ago. It had enoug votes to pass, or I am missing something? Thank you, and a Happy New Year!--Mbz1 (talk) 02:38, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied here. --jjron (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10