Jump to content

User talk:MER-C/archives/25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Directory
User space: Home | Talk (archives) | Sandboxes: General 1 · General 2 | Smart questions · Cluebat
Software: Test account | Wiki.java | Servlets
Links: WikiProject Spam · Spam blacklist: local · global · XLinkBot | Copyvios | Contributor copyright

Timeline Thanks

Hi, the error or bug in the timeline software is gone. Now the data on the graphic appear without problem. I put the graphic in this articles: Monterrey and Plantilla:Demografía/Monterrey. Thanks and I hope you had a good vacation.--Eliasjorge4 (talk) 22:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Galib is wishing you a Happy New Year. This card promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day much better. Best Wishes and Happy Editing!

Best To Reply At My Talk Page. Thanks.

Just Stopping by. Yours Truly, M.H.True Romance iS Dead 15:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC) .[reply]

VPC procedure

Resolved
 – ... before I returned. MER-C 11:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick question: is it correct to recreate or simply create an image page in order to place a VP or Fp template on it? We've discussed this at Wikipedia talk:Valued picture candidates, and are unsure. It appears to be fine, as I've seen it done (and done it myself) at FPC often enough. I just thought I'd check and see. See our discussion at Wikipedia talk: Valued picture candidates#Question. Thanks for your time. Elucidate (light up) 17:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FPC closing wizard

If the wizard still functions with the Image/File changeover, would you mind sharing it? I've been trying, but failing, to keep up ending noms. Without the wizard a successful close takes me 10–15 minutes, and I don't have that kind of time to devote to FPC every day. Welcome back! Wronkiew (talk) 06:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know how annoying it is to do it manually (what I did to minimize the time taken was to promote two or three in parallel to take advantage of copy/paste synergies). The wizard still works, in fact I am doing a large closing run at the moment. I was going to say "email me" but my email account is most easily accessed from the computer with the broken graphics card. MER-C 07:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
... and it just died due to a server error. That's a quarter of the backlog gone. MER-C 07:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

a question

Hi MER-C,
May I please ask you how many support votes are required to promote an image to FP status? Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Four, though I might increase that at my discretion. MER-C 03:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!--Mbz1 (talk) 07:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say that the correct tag for images which have only a description page here but the image itself is on Commons is {{db-f2}} rather than {{db-f8}}. The latter tag is used when the image is uploaded both here and on Commons. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 14:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me about that, I wasn't aware the policy had changed back. MER-C 03:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Apophysis fractal flame

I don't understand how this closed as no consensus. There were five supports and only three opposes (all of which were weak). Could you please elaborate?  GARDEN  11:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The three opposes were for the same reason and as such I wasn't satisfied that the images satisfied criterion 3. Generally speaking, pictures rarely get promoted with less than two thirds in support. MER-C 12:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's annoying. Oh well, thanks for closing and the explanation.  GARDEN  19:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well deserved barnstar

The Working Man's Barnstar
Having now spent a number of enjoyable months over at FPC, I've come to realize that the place only runs so smoothly due to your expertise and tireless upkeep within the project. In appreciation, here is a well-deserved barnstar and a hearty thank you. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 04:41, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. MER-C 11:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

For [1] :)  Doulos Christos ♥ talk  12:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for the removing the nominations I withdrawn so promptly. Sorry for the extra work. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Java library

Hi MER-C,

I use your Java library. I meet a bug in function  : 

  public String[] imageUsage(String image, int namespace) throws IOException

I replace this old line 

  next = line.substring( line.indexOf("iucontinue") + 12, begin+line.indexOf("\" />"));

with the new line 

   int begin = line.indexOf("iucontinue") + 12;
   next = line.substring(begin, begin+line.indexOf("\" />"));

Thanks for your libray,

Blr199300929 (talk) 10:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It should read:
int a = line.indexOf("iucontinue") + 12;
next = line.substring(a, line.indexOf("\" />", a));
 Fixed MER-C 11:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, have you a repository SVN for your libray ? Blr199300929 (talk) 20:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Just fix it in your copy. Besides, there are a number of other bugfixes to be pushed out, so the next release might be a while yet. MER-C 01:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Silver Starr Art Studios LLC UP

What the hell is going on there? LOL. I left them a note on there saying to read about what shouldn't go on someone's user page and then they keep on adding more blatant adverts. I did look it up on Google though, and they do exist. In fact they have quite the repertoire or specialities. Am I wrong in being appalled at the balls some of these people have? xD --AmaraielSend Message 07:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have even bothered with the warning. And yes, that is about par for the course. MER-C 08:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amble

I've noticed that you have twice reverted an external link on the Amble page to Northumberland Coast - Amble and am somewhat puzzled. (It was not me that inserted the link, by the way). I have checked Wikipedia:External links and cannot see any obvious reason why this link infringes Wikipedia policy. There is another link on the page to Northumberland Yoga that seems to infringe a whole host of policies, but that has been left untouched. Can you have another look and see whether you still feel the link should have been removed (I suspect you may have seen the advert for Property For Sale and Rent on The Northumberland Coast and considered that this was the sole purpose for the page. However, I think such a view is questionable as the page includes quite a well written tourist summary for the town with useful external links, and gives equal prominence to an advert for the North East Regional Development Organisation ONE North East). Skinsmoke (talk) 11:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about WP:SPAM (see WT:WPSPAM#http://spam.northumberland-coast.co.uk)? MER-C 11:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That'll do for me. However, I do think the Yoga link should go as well.Skinsmoke (talk) 12:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{sofixit}} :) MER-C 09:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Whenever your ready. 211.30.98.227 (talk) 06:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy MER-C's Day!

MER-C has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as MER-C's day!
For your great work with images,
enjoy being the Star of the day, MER-C!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac15
01:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks. MER-C 08:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closes

Can you close the old noms at FPC? I've been trying to do it, but it takes me ~25 minutes a nom to close, and I don't have the time to do it. Thanks, SpencerT♦C 22:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion tag on File:Ty Cobb sliding2.jpg

Why did you tag File:Ty Cobb sliding2.jpg for speedy deletion? It seems like a good photo and is used in the Ty Cobb article. Rlendog (talk) 04:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I guess the article uses the Commons version. Rlendog (talk) 04:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FPs

I've promoted a few in the last couple days. Tell me if I'm doing anything wrong, though I don't think I am - I've been carefully following the instructions and double-checking. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For reference:
The comments:
I think that's it. MER-C 08:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Sorry! I can't remove the tag from File:Grus antigone Luc viatour.jpg - the page is edit protected, I think due to a did you know. Also, the suggestion for Quartz, Tibet makes sense, and I'll move it there. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 09:15, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'd forgotten about that. Maybe tomorrow, if anyone remembers. MER-C 09:30, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a few more:

Have I gotten them more-or-less alright this time? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have failed Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Port Vell, Barcelona but it could have gone either way. Oh, and you forgot to update the FP count. (I have done this for you. It's accurate to 1% as far as I can tell). MER-C 07:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
5 supports v. two weak opposes is a fail? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, but having a major element of the image cut off probably is. MER-C 08:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just happened to stumble across this. While I'm certainly not asking either of you to change your minds (I agree it could have gone either way), I'd like to say that the building in the foreground isn't a major element of the subject IMO. It isn't actually part of the Port at all, and as I mentioned in the FPC, is it pretty difficult to avoid given publically available viewpoints. In ignoring consensus (and the detailed discussion), aren't you using a bit too much discretion? ;-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 08:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was definitely a fail if Wronkiew hadn't changed. And you'd better get used to me using a bit more discretion - there are some current nominations that need it. MER-C 09:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But Wronkiew did change his opinion, so you can't use "what ifs" to justify your position. If, when closing, you're going to use discretion based on your own opinion of the image itself, then you are no longer an independent third party.. I thought that closer discretion was supposed to be aimed at interpreting the arguments of the voters as being legitimate or illegitimate, rather than judging the image itself? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Usually it is, but sometimes (less than 0.25%) the results need to be sanity checked. MER-C 11:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Objections dealt with

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Tom_Cobb_(2) - Do as you see fit =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unsuspended. I'll probably close it on Saturday, given a favourable reaction. MER-C 12:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closing FPCs

I just did my first FPC closing today (QE2 Bridge) and want to take part in it more. That said, I wanted to know about the time limit. If an image is close to the 7 days, and has very clear consensus, can it be closed early or should it still wait until the 7 day min (such as this)? I just wanted to know what you think about the judgement call. ~ ωαdεstεr16♣kiss mei'm Irish♣ 21:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You never do this. Ever. As to your question, has it been open for "about seven days"? MER-C 02:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, that's a fair point; I won't do that again. But does that mean you prefer to no longer vote in FPCs since you close most of them? Or do you just not toss in the final vote? ~ ωαdεstεr16♣kiss mei'm Irish♣ 07:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What I do is use the consensus in the debate and if necessary my own appraisal to determine whether an image meets WP:FP?. And yes, that is the reason why I rarely vote. MER-C 09:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sooooooooooo sorry

Please forgive me for removing the *Whole* article about the IRA thing. I am sooooooooo sorry. I am triumph, really, I am. Believe me. I swear to God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.203.47.130 (talk • contribs)

You don't have to be sorry, just don't do it again. :) MER-C 11:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


92.238.168.136

This user is really getting on wick now, he's abused both of us and is the most persistant vandal I've seen since joing in 2007. Could you please help me and keep an eye on him? Reported to WP:AIV but he's still active. Cheers! cf38talk 12:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to have stopped, I'm outta here (sleep). MER-C 12:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Q

Hi MER-C,

Just a quick question - why is this in the suspend noms section? --Fir0002 21:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of species ID. MER-C 00:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply at "Please be more rigourous in reviewing images"

I made a reply here. Thanks for discussing. ZooFari 03:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

Yo MER-C, Sup? It has been 4 days sience we last talked. back then, I removed the whole IRA page, and later on appologized for that. You told me not to do it again, and boy - I won't! No, really. Just wanted to check if everything is still OK with you? Have there been much vandalizem around sience then? Cheerz, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.203.47.130 (talk • contribs)

Yes. It's business as usual. MER-C 10:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ceriagrion glabrum.jpg

Hey MER-C, shouldn't edit 3 have been promoted here? It had two definite supports and had only a minor change made to it compared to edit 2 which was also supported by 2 users earlier on in the nomination. --Muhammad(talk) 12:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't make a convincing case for promotion, and if there was consensus it was very weak. Closing these things is very hard when you have as many supports as candidate images, especially when you can't trust your reviewers as much as you used to. MER-C 09:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Virtual Collection of Masterpieces

Hi Merc,

I just discovered the Possible copyright infringement on the The Virtual Collection of Masterpieces article. My professor of anthropology Laurence Caillet wrote the first version of this article that I found really relevant for Wikipedia. I would like to know if I can restore her version even if the press release of the VCM uses her words with her agreement?

Thank you for your answer.

83.84.40.58 (talk) 15:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)talk[reply]

You (and Prof Caillet) should know that an encyclopedia should not contain press releases pretending to be articles. MER-C 09:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more background

One of the things I have been working to do, along with a group of other volunteers, is to gain access to more image archives. The Library of Congress has a dearth of material about my own local area, even though it's the oldest city in California. And although the local historical society has 2.5 million images they are--to say the least--not cooperative.[2] It is doubtful whether their claim of blanket copyright over the entire collection is valid, but the attempt to assert control via contract law might hold up in court. So what to do about this?

The first step is to scour for material elsewhere, and restore it, and to interface locally so that other people come to understand how important open access is, and what its benefits are. After a year of searching I have so far located one--and only one--FP-worthy restoration from my own county: a panorama of the Hotel del Coronado. It's so difficult to find this type of thing that even the hotel's own staff was unaware that the image existed (and as a national historic landmark they are keenly aware of their institution's history). The hotel management are grateful and impressed, and they would be glad to get more restored material if they could. With more examples from other local landmarks we could gain allies from the business community and civic leaders in persuading the historical society to open access to its public domain content. The challenge is to reach any kind of critical mass while so little high quality source material is available through other means.

Thus far unable to find anything more from my own county, I located a rare historic photochrom over a century old for a very famous location one county away. It is unlikely that any other comparable photograph from the period exists in open archives--and if it does exist in closed archives, then erecting additional barriers to promotion on a featured content nomination that already had clear support is just the way to keep those archives closed. Featured content candidacy closers are supposed to be impartial, and I'm a little concerned by your comments to the FPC talk page in reference to this nomination. Perhaps three-quarters of a year of frustrating behavior from one reviewer colors that impression. Just wanted to set things out for you, though. Best, DurovaCharge! 16:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I read the debate and weighed the arguments in an attempt (on the 15th) to close it, I found the opposers made a very good point. Given the recent drop in standards, clear support does not necessarily mean the image meets WP:FP? (hence my plea on the talk page), I was uncertain whether the image met enc standards so I left it. PLW can be disruptive - he was a major contributor to the December drama - but he is thorough in reviewing images.
That said I appreciate your efforts to secure for Wikipedia and hope to feature many fruits of your labour. And standards are rising again. MER-C 10:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Java bot

Hello MER-C,

I see you programmed a bot in java. I am programming myself a bot with JWBF framework. Could you tell me how I could get more information to list the subcategories from a category with this java framework? Thanks. --Pixeltoo (talk) 17:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

String[] subcats = enwiki.getCategoryMembers("Category:Example", Wiki.CATEGORY_NAMESPACE); MER-C 09:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks. --Pixeltoo (talk) 03:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:HMSPinafore2.png

I made a couple minor edits to this after being told it was about to go up on POTD (It's an old nom, and I'd never leave it that... yellow now). Do I need to have this reconfirmed, or are minor levels and saturation adjustments sufficiently uncontroversial? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 03:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not while it's on the main page. After that, it's your call - I can't really review two 6 MB images because internet connectivity in my country is a (inter)national disgrace (and so is the attempts by the government to do something about it). I do note the delist section is effectively dead at the moment.
P.S. any news on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Japanese river boat 2? MER-C 09:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to do a swap with Durova over the John Paul Jones pic, but neither of us have gotten around to our respective tasks yet. Howcheng has already delayed the Commodore Perry Ukiyo-e on my behalf, so I thought I'd best get that done first. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD

When (on which day) will this image File:Thamarai-Namam2.png(promoted as a Featured picture today) be shown as POTD?- Vaikunda Raja (talk) 12:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD is not my responsibility, though the length of the POTD queue is, by my count, 367 - almost exactly one year. MER-C 01:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know all these things. But yesterday, when I feel, late to hear from you I browsed across many ways and finally nominated it here that falls on the date March 4th 2010, some 17 days earlier to your days count. I chose the date because it was the 172th Ayya Vaikunda Avataram, the most important festival of Ayyavazhi. Will there arise any problem with this 17 days? - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 09:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, you'll find the POTD guy is very accommodating. However it's best to ask at the appropriate time (in 10 months), as POTDs are scheduled rarely a week in advance. Tthis would be an exception, but even then it's only up to two months. MER-C 11:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okey then, Thanks for the informations - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First edit

What do you think of Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Victory Monument?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see someone has already got to it before me. Essentially what Noodle snacks said. MER-C 07:22, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deftly halting disruption, spam, and vandalism

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You recently counteracted spam and disruption against a page belonging to the Cornell University WikiProject, and I see you have a history of hunting down and fixing such bad-faith edits. With this barnstar, I wish to acknowledge your efforts and thank you for your actions. --Notyourbroom (talk) 16:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Football links.

The football links added were completely justified. -- Preceding comment by 82.17.160.158 on 16:21, 25 March 2009. --Notyourbroom (talk) 17:19, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because... ? MER-C 07:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because they provided extra information not included in the original article and also had references to events that are in the article and that have no citation. i.e Lewis Guy which has NO citation at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.160.158 (talk • contribs)

But if you were really adding references to various articles, you would select the most appropriate ones from all the internet instead of systematically adding links to one site only. MER-C 03:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are not SPAM, please help.

Good Afternoon.

Recently I have added a link to the free service USspecbook.com to each city providing Wikipedia users a link to necessary municipal information that is often difficult to find. There is no profit from a visit, USspecbook does not charge to use this information, it is an online reference site for contractors, engineers, and thousands of individuals in the construction industry.

I notice that MER-C has taken down the links I have provided. Is there a problem? Was this not done correctly?

Please assist.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beauishere (talk • contribs) 21:52, 25 March 2009

Yes. The manner you were adding them strongly suggests spam, as do the ignored warnings on your talk page. MER-C 07:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you understand the purpose of the link.

Standards and specifications are used by all cities, needed by all members of the construction industry, and very difficult to find. USspecbook does not charge, it is completely unrestrictive, and it provides links and necessary public information. It is no different that DIG HERE, or any other link to a city site for the information. While providing the links I did not list the company name on the Wiki page, in an effort to avoid any commercialism.

I would like to continue putting this information on the wiki site. What needs to happen to get you to stop deleting them?

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.114.74 (talk • contribs)

I have no objection to the content of the site. What I do object to are your systemmatic addition of links and your (perhaps unintentional) use of multiple accounts to evade scrutiny. All of these behaviours are strong indications of spamming. I won't remove the links if they aren't added in a spammy way. MER-C 07:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Windmills D1-D4 (Thornton Bank) edit1.jpg

Hi. Could you explain why you promoted Image:Windmills D1-D4 (Thornton Bank) edit1.jpg and not the original Image:Windmills D1-D4 (Thornton Bank).jpg, as the former had only a single specific support and had washed out details in the waves? Lycaon (talk) 20:14, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The original had noise in the sky. MER-C 04:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand. So then you decide by yourself, and the people who stated their support for the original are ignored? Lycaon (talk) 08:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a discretionary decision. For an example, I failed this image despite a 7/0 result because the quality wasn't up to scratch. (And nobody explicitly stated support for the original, the assumption is that they don't mind).
That said, there isn't much in it. I'd be willing to go with the original or a combination edit. MER-C 11:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then please do. I removed the 'noise' in the original ánd the stains in the upper right part (which were actually there and still in the edit). Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 20:53, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. Oh, and while I've got your attention, could you have a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sept 11 monument in NYC - August 2004.jpg? I've got five suspended noms on the books and the reviewers aren't patient enough to wait 11 months... MER-C 12:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Settled. Lycaon (talk) 18:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

multiple reverts of 70.247.24.249

Hi. I noticed you reverted all the edits added by this anon user that linked to an external Duran Duran fan site. I was watching to see if someone would come along and do that. There were two pages, Burning the Ground (diff)and Violence of Summer (diff), that already contained slightly different links to that site. In those cases, the edits just updated those links, so when you reverted them, the old links (both direct links to PDF documents) were restored. I'm wondering whether you think the PDF links be removed as well. I know linking directly to rich media is discouraged, but no one seemed to care when they were added several months ago. Just curious... UncleverOnion (talk) 14:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Often you will have one spammer who adds the link, then another who comes along later and changes it. What I do is revert all the (subsequent) spammer's edits, which allows me to see the links that warrant further investigation as to who added them. I have no opinion on whether the PDF links should remain unless they were spammed (which they weren't). MER-C 12:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for commenting. :) UncleverOnion (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you continually reverting the proper links I am inserting in the various Duran Duran wiki pages? If you would bother visiting the link(s) you will see it is not a commercial website. The rich media (pdf in this case) is not the proper link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.27.249 (talk • contribs)

Your method of adding the links is a strong indication of spamming. MER-C 08:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

White House Photos

I added a new photo to the whitehouse page, replacing the old one on commons. Do you know how I can edit the page so that I'm accredited as the photographer and the author?

Also - for some reason images on image pages now appear in full size when I view them, rather than more convienient viewing sizes. Do you know how I can fix this? HiraV (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I answered this question here. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 02:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FPC Closing Wizard Approval Request

I've done a number of closings over at FPC and would like to request approval to use your FPC Closing Wizard. This request is only valid if it runs on Mac OS X though (but since it's a JAR file, I presume it does). I've closed 18 legitimate FPCs and just closed 3 april fools noms. I don't see the april fool's ones counting, but I have closed 19 additional VPC noms, so I'm getting even more experience in deciding consensus in other places. Here is a full list of all the nominations I've closed. A lot more than 5 passed. Let me know what you think. Thanks. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 02:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No wonder you're really enthusiastic in getting to those noms before me. Let's see:
That said, all the outcomes are correct (I haven't looked at the pics yet, and probably won't). Not bad. My intuition says not yet. (As an aside, how are you going to cope when volume at VP approaches FP levels?) MER-C 14:24, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Depend on others for help over there as well. I'm not the only one that closes. And we'll see if it ever gets to FPC levels any time soon. I have my doubts. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 15:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You say my performance is "not bad" and that all the outcomes have been correct (and "not bad" coming from you is pretty complimentary). You also have seen that in a contentious nom, I will explain my reasons for why I made the decision I did. I'm also open to a second opinion if someone is unhappy enough about the outcome. I know when to request more input and I've been here a good length of time (in Wikipedia terms) and have a good grasp on consensus and making the judgement call. I don't think it would hurt the project by giving me this tool. Plus, you have to realize that closing enough noms is pretty difficult when one must compete with you and your wizard. Don't know how many times on my watchlist I'll see an edit summary of (-10 using FPC Wizard) and I think "Damn!" he beat me again! Anyway, thanks for the consideration. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 15:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That brings me around to the point: if I get queried and am unable to resolve it here then I need to be confident in deferring to you. I don't think you're at this stage yet.
That reminds me - we haven't done enough to spam VP to the masses. (I don't think canvassing is an issue at VPC like it is at FPC. Any serious article writer can assess a picture's enc. And once they learn how to review properly they can branch out to FP.) Would you like to collaborate on a Dispatch about VP? I've put together a quick sketch at User talk:MER-C/Sandbox#valued pictures. MER-C 08:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. And sure, I'll get back to you on that later in the day. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 11:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replacing!

Thanks for replacing the steroidogenesis image with the featured version! Just sat down with this little job in mind, but discovered that it was already done. Mikael Häggström (talk) 11:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's all part of the FP service. I will add this to my wizard one day, just need to come up with a decent user interface. MER-C 11:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure but I think you have removed some external links I have been putting up on wikipedia. All of the external links I put up, although from the same website, would have been incredibly useful for any person interested in the subject. Every single one of the external links were extremely relevant and not off-subject.

Is there any way they can go back?

Rob —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrTradescant (talk • contribs)

I'm sure if an established editor agrees with you then he/she will readd the links. If I were you, I wouldn't readd them myself because it would look like I was spamming. MER-C 13:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dublin Rail Network3.svg

New version

Hi I've uploaded a new version but Still don't think that its right. (Had to add the new Luas stops and various other things.) Can't seem to get fonts right at all!!

Stabilo boss (talk) 08:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about editing SVGs, but you can ask the graphics lab for help. Beware MediaWiki's crappy SVG rasterer. Once you're done, please file a delist and replace nomination so we can move the FP designation over to the new file. MER-C 09:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will try and get some advice over there... Cheers Stabilo boss (talk) 13:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disney Theme Park images

I believe you because this is something Disney would do. On that note though, wouldn't that mean that every Disney theme park-related image would have to be hosted here under a term of fair use? Has this been discussed before? Just looking at a few, they are licensed under GFDL and CC, some of which are tagged with {{movetocommons}} if they're not already there. Has Disney ever complained? It wouldn't be the first time. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 07:09, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anything taken within the theme park is fair use. Unfortunately, these copyvios fall under the radar and I know of no attempt to get rid of them. (The images you provide are all uploaded by non-serious photographers - they are all blissfully unaware...) No, Disney haven't complained but as I said, we don't want to mess with the mafiaa on Wikipedia.
Also concerning is a recent proliferation of shonky reviews at FPC. I'd be very wary of promoting anything in the near future. MER-C 11:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've taken notice. And is "shonky" an Australian term I've never heard of? hehe ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 15:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. MER-C 03:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More shonkiness

Hi MER-C,

Just thought I'd drop you a note. I haven't done any extensive poking around, but just stumbled across a few FPC closing errors a week or so back: see [3], [4], [5], and [6]. Nothing major, but perhaps just keep an extra eye out for aberrations in things you haven't closed when you're doing new ones for the time being.

BTW, like your new userpage (and thought Wadester may like the subject line on this)  :-). --jjron (talk) 17:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's that word again... ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 17:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, a number of those seem to be noob mistakes on my part; my earlier promotions. I apologize for the errors. My bad. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 17:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kronheim's Illustrations to Foxe's Book of Martyrs

I hope this isn't tempting fate, given there's a day to go, but this looks like it's going to pass, so I suppose we should discuss how you want to handle it. I'm happy to try and make a single image that contains all 8, but I don't think said image should go in any actual article, since the images need some explanation attached to them, and I'm not sure how to make it visually attractive. I suppose we could list the images in FP individually, but that might set a bad precedent. Just let me know what you want to do, and I'll try to do whatever's necessary. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coming to think about it I probably was going to close it, leave it there then ask for suggestions. MER-C 14:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh - do these featured sets do anything but cause trouble? --jjron (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish. I'll help make whatever's necessary work. (Be warned that I do plan a couple more sets - the Wyeth Treasure Island illustrations being a big one, if I can pull it off. =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I placed the nom in the Older than 7 days section... don't feel up to tackling this one quite yet. I'll leave it MER-C. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 19:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I agree with you jjron. Ideally featured picture/media sets should be handled by a different process. MER-C 09:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I didn't realise this would be such a problem =/ With the next one, I may run it as several simultaneous FPCs, instead of a set. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 10:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...Okay, now I'm rather upset, because leaving this open for so long with attacks on the very idea of featured sets here just under a direct link seems to have led to my nom becoming a lightning rod for opposing votes. Nor is this the first time that set closures of mine have been handled oddly: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Gilbert and Sullivan in the Entr'acte. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See here. MER-C 11:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Just not interested or dont have the time? 211.30.24.244 (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Goings on

MER-C, just a note, FYI: User_talk:Wadester16#Goings-on. Please add pictures to the bottom of the list, not the top, per long-established convention at that page. It makes archiving easier (Gimme and I are the only ones who ever do the archiving -- no other featured process has ever helped maintain that page). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:49, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was on the verge of warning you of this myself. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 02:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I ceased editing that page manually last year. The reason why I put things in the wrong order is because it's a lot easier to program. MER-C 13:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FPCresult

I have requested for the category you suggested, but apparently an administrator claims it is used by a bot that I'm not aware of. Perhaps you can join the discussion at the template's discussion page. ZooFari 19:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try #2

So I've broken 50 FPCs (and 30 VPCs, if that's important to you). Do you think I'm ready for FPC closing wizard access? ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 05:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Once I verify that my solution to the above complaint works (may take a week or so). In the meantime, you can find out whether your email client supports UUE (that way, I can send it through Special:Emailuser). One small gripe, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Easter Monday should have been left - four questionable supports and one trusted oppose. MER-C 09:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Read that article but not too sure what I was reading, admittedly. I use gmail and read thru Apple Mail. And are you referencing the order at WP:GO? ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 15:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UUE is a way of translating binary files (such as a JAR) into something I can paste here without any breakage whatsoever. (I just found out there is a UUEncoder in the Java runtime - it's just in the category of "don't use these APIs as we may remove them without warning.)
That is the reason for the delay. MER-C 04:14, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Barnstar

100,000 Edits
I, Bugboy52.4, award you for reaching 100,000 edits according to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits generated 11:45 pm, 24 February 2009. Keep up the good work!________________________________________________________________

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Le Cid: Act 3, Scene 6

Sorry, could you have another look at this? Thanks =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FPC close

Please don't see this as a complaint. I have no problem with closing this FPC because there was no input in the specified time period, but I am unsure what to do now. For FLCs, candidates without enough input are simply restarted (might be an option worth considering at FPC). As there wasn't actually an oppose on this FPC could it just be listed again (i.e. effectively restarted)? Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Featured pictures must stand out from ordinary images (criterion 3). Lack of interest means that it doesn't. MER-C 03:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MER-C/archives/25&oldid=1252116792"