User talk:Alvesgaspar/archive1

Re: Cyclone tracks

Tropical cyclones have killed tens of thousands of people and caused hundreds of billions of damage in the past ten years. So I think the correct answer is a LOT of human suffering unfortunately...--Nilfanion 21:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Please Help

Hi there, You recently supported the FIC for my image Image:F--18.jpg.This image has been met with criticisms so I improved it (twice).I was hoping that since you vote the first version with Support you would do the same for the improved version.I would be extremely thankful and personally thank you.Thank You Blind14 07:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank-you

I really like the Image:Sextant.png. Thanks --Digon3 15:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I thank you so dearly for supporting my image's FIC.In return here's a kitten. Blind14 21:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

A matter of education

There's some people that should read "Guidelines of Education" before write here, but they'll not do it so next time just try to ignore them. :-) Francisco M. Marzoa 02:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Strongly oppose to...

I agree and also think the opposite "Strongly support" has not useful meaning as "Strongly" or not each vote weights the same. Neutral votes also seems to be awful since they no count in no way. First I though that neutral votes counts for the total votes to calculate the support radio, but It seems this is not the case, so a neutral vote is the same of a no vote and for adding comments without supporting or opposing to a image you can use the "comment" template.

Anyway I think this is not so important to change it and it'll not solve the matter of education. Even when {{Strongly oppose}} where not available, each user can still be rude on [his|her] comments, so... Francisco M. Marzoa 14:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate your feedback feel your frustration. I will explore your suggestion. Have you ever submitted to the featured pictures category in the english Wiki instead of the commons? Just a thought.

Thanks again, John

Image:Way_into_the_sea.jpg

My review of this image at QI is a little brief in my reasonings and probably a poor choice of wording. As an artistic image I like too like the composition with the way the person appears to be approaching the path into the sea. I spent a long time pondering the image before relucantly declining the reason was to do with the purpose of media uploaded to Commons from this perspective the image was more a classical/ordinary famliy type image and from there I wondered how the image could be utilised, I even spent time over on en.wikipedia looking for an article to which it would enhance the page. The only conclusion was that it would be a wonderful cover to a book/record album etc this to didnt fit within the commons purposes.

Hope this clears it up some, I'll copy then above para and move the image to consensual review. Gnangarra 12:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Quality Image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henry the Navigator.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Image:Abies spec.jpg

Hi Joaquim - thanks for the note; it is an Abies species, with male (pollen) cones. Identification to species is not so easy, unfortunately, though it could be Abies nordmanniana. Where was the photo taken, and was the tree wild or cultivated? Would you be able to get any other photos (whole tree, close-up of lower crown foliage, mature seed cones)? These would all help to get it identified. - MPF 18:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Quality image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Way into the sea new.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sentinels.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The Photographer.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Image:Fishermen - Tamandaré - Brasil.jpg

Please follow the instructions at the English Featured Image Candidates page for delisting. You've inadvertently added the image to the page for another delisting candidate. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 14:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Desert pictures

I dont quite understand what you mean. Are you saying the colours look dull and that I should increase saturation or are you asking if I have already done so? The only editing I had done so far on those pictures was adjust the brightness. --Digon3 16:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• I have uploaded the increased saturation versions Church Rock Utah.jpg and Wilson Arch.jpg. I see the problems now with the other 2, thanks for reviewing. --Digon3 21:03, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

*You have to download the large version in order to see the changes [1][2]. Why do the changes not appear on the image description page? --Digon3 21:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

• Ok, now the edited photos are uploaded as new files. Tell me if I need to increase or decrease saturation.--Digon3 01:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• I dont know how to only increase saturation in the object in first plan, only how to increase all of the picture. As for the wilson arch picture, do you want me to increase saturation even more? --Digon3 17:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Wilson arch is on a hill, it is impossible to take a level shot. --Digon3 22:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• I have uploaded the edited version [saturation] of San Francisco at Sunset and nominated it on Quality Images. Tell me what I can do to make it better. --Digon3 17:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

IMO

IMO=In My Opinion. IMO you don't look ridiculous. ;)
More acronyms can be found here.
Erina 08:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Quality image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Purity.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Seagull

• I nominated this photo [3], but it isn't my photo.  :-))) Lestat 21:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Ok, no problem  :-) Lestat 10:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ano.jpg

Why are you assuming that I am attempting to vandalize by nominating this image? I've tried to explain my reasons for doing so, yet it seems that you have immediately assumed that I am editing in bad faith. I have tried to follow all the rules and have been civil, yet you still revert me. --CommonsJoe 15:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Ano.jpg

Hi Joaquim, I agree that it appears User:Bolo77 and User:G.dallorto are the same person, but I can't see any direct evidence that User:CommonsJoe is another sock. I'm afraid I'm not an admin, so I can't block anyone (and although sockpuppetry is frowned on, it does at least appear that G.dallorto has made some useful edits). I'm inclined not to assume too much good faith on the part of CommonsJoe, however - I've reported it on the Administrators' noticeboard. --Yummifruitbat 17:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Quality images

Would you like to take a look at my comments about your pictures in Commons:Quality images candidates? - Alvesgaspar 20:19, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I tried to get a higher res picture but this was the biggest ones I could get. SOADLuver 20:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Quality image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Margaridas.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QI - reviews

Hi, I've reword and highlighted who can review on the candidates page, what I found was that when I was doing a lot of the early reviews people tended to let me do them all. That by stopping for a couple of days and letting the page grow others step up and do some. Gnangarra 23:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I responded at the con-review section, can I suggest that if you review an image that doesnt meet a criteria but you think is worthy of inclusion then promote and if someone wants to disagree they'll move it to the review section. Incidentally if the description had said some significant feature of the image could not be retaken, then the image takes on historical value above that of the other criteria. :Incidentally once an image goes to CR I assess as to whether factors/features can be retaken based on what criteria that is being challenged. If you take the couple of fire truck images I put forward recently the opportunity for me to get new images is highly unlikely, if a similar image was nominated but was put to CR due to resolution I would support promotion Gnangarra 11:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Old path

Hello! I uploaded a new version of the photo "Rudy - Stara ścieżka" ("Rudy - Old path"). In new one I deleted chromatic aberration and I thing that now it is a Quality image. Please see and review if you can  :-) Lestat 13:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

• OK, tomorrow I'll try fight it better. Lestat 22:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Image Size for FP and QI

I have started a discussion article on what should be the size requirements for images being promoted to COM:QI and COM:FP. The discussion is Commons talk:Discussion on Image size please participate, from this discusion a proposal for specific requirements can be developed. Gnangarra 07:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Yep at VP, FP, QI, POTD, i just dropped you a personal invite because of our recent discussions which prompted me. Gnangarra 12:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

About SVG

Have you given it a try? What you can read somewhere on the net is usually fairly distorting since people tend to complain very loud but are less vocal when everything is working fine. And what about using a standards compliant browser like Firefox? --Dschwen 09:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest. I used Firefox for some time but it didn't work very well, maybe because I was not patient enough to install all the necessary plug-ins. Now I'm tempted to try the new MS Explorer. Very recentely I installed a small utilitary to convert from bitmap to svg, that is the one I used for my image. But I can't find a similar one to convert from svg to bitmap... That's why I still can't read svg. Can you please help? - Alvesgaspar 09:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Have you checked out en:Inkscape? It is a free SVG editor, which also has a bitmap export version. Anyway tomorrow Firefox 2.0 comes out. Give it a shot, it would be a shame to judge those fine programs based on old versions which used to crash some time ago. --Dschwen 10:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Quality Image

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pocket stereoscope.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Sextant

Hi. I use CorelDraw to create SVG files. It took me a bit of tweeking, but now it works fine (e.g. Image:Amphipod anatomy en.svg and my other drawings). If you need any help/advice, do ask. Lycaon 21:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

BTW, the sextant looks very good. Lycaon 21:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

hi again. I've been meddling with the width, heigth and viewbox of your svg in notepad, and I uploaded a new version. But Ideally you should make your 'paper' size just marginally larger than your picture and put your units in pixels. It should then be rendering properly. Cheers Lycaon 22:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Joaquim. I did an edit of your sextant image. You can see it here. Like you can see, it even looks good at thumbnail size. I described how I did it on my user talk page. If you like it, I can send it to you via email or you just download it here at commons. After that, I will delete that copy to have just the original here on commons. Kindly, norro

Hi Joaquim, what do you think about that version here (please force browser to refresh). norro 15:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The point...

...of this edit is unclear to me. I thought it made it more clear that certain nominations are still under discussion, and if I retract I should be allowed to put a decline there. --Dschwen 10:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Liceum Mickiewicza

What do You thing about this version of my photo from QI? --> [4] Lestat 18:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for opinion

Hi! After your crushing review of my photo Image:Reelfoot Lake.jpg (don't worry—I can take the criticism) I have gone back to the negative and scanned it with a better quality scanner. I hope that you think that the new revision is an improvement. Thanks for the helpful comments. —JeremyA 20:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

You might be right that the negative has degraded. However, I think it's also likely to be my lack of experience with the negative scanner that I used—my first few attempts were truly awful. I have a really nice (photo lab produced) print from this picture, so I am determined to get a decent quality digitised version. —JeremyA 22:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Delist

I am trying to nomination to delist Image:Sailing.jpg from FP, but someone changed how it was done and now I have no idea how to do it. The reasons for delisting are artifacts in the water, water wrong hue (I think), the sky takes up most of the picture, the horizon is uneven, and the picture really doesn't show anything special. --Digon3 01:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't know you were new. Thanks for trying --Digon3 13:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Lake near Sunnig Grat summit.JPG

Thanks for your advice at your review on the Quality_images_candidates side. Didnt notice that stain. I corrected the picture and uploaded it again. Wish you a nice day. -- Simonizer 11:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:View over adirondack park.jpg

Thanks for your comment on this picture. Do you have a advice for me how to correct this picture without destroying it? I´ve tried some correction filters of GIMP but that doesnt work so far.

I have corrected the picture - Simonizer 12:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

You wanted to know how i corrected the picture. Here it is: I marked the areas with the halu effect. Then i reduced brightness, contrast and saturation until the marked area looked like the other parts of the wall. Then i made a new layer and put the orignial photo in the background and the corrected areas in front of it. That was all. -- Simonizer 12:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image:Riot police taking lunch break.jpg

I've received your comment regarding the fact that you don't like that the "vertical lines are a little tilted to the right" in this photo. Thanks for the feedback. I'm trying to correct this, but am finding it difficult without ruining other aesthetic aspects of the photo. For one thing, because of the side angle of the photo (which of course was intentional), there's no single plane of vertical lines. Straightening one set throws another set out of tilt. Secondly, any rotation necessitates a bit of cropping. The bottom, left and right of the photo can be cropped a bit without negative consequence, but in my opinion cropping anything from the top would cause some aesthetic destruction. Finally, any amount of rotation will cause the photo to blur a (tiny) bit. Therefore, I hesitate to replace my photo with a rotated version. I'd like your honest opinion, though, on my attempt. I have placed the rotated version on the web here for you to take a look at.

Thanks again for the feedback. --Pomakis 01:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:CarduelisChlorisBerry-edit.jpg

Hi,i think you put the wrong image to the featured pictures. There were 2 pictures for voting but most voted for the left. Erina said that she doesnt like the centered one (the right one) and most other voters agreed. --AngMoKio 21:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment

I took out my nasty comments. I am not interested in controversy nor creating a negative environment, which I am afraid, have caused. My intention was not to lecture you, I am sorry if that is what came accross. However, my critisism of critisism stands. --Tomascastelazo 00:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cancun Beach.jpg

This was probably an accidental oversight, but I noticed that you moved the Image:Cancun Beach.jpg nomination to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 2006 as if it was declined, even though the decision in the end was to promote it. Can you correct this? --Pomakis 00:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

Where is it stated that deleting entries by the author of the entries is vandalism or that it is incorrect or unfair? --Tomascastelazo 02:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Truce

We can go back and forth in an endless argument, but deleting entries of my creation, signed by me, does not compromise the integrity of wikipedia. Imagine that all wikipedia text must stay intact preserving the original post? And no, I am not pretending to insult your inteligence by taking out my nasty comments, if you choose to perceive it as such, well, that is your right.

I admit a certain nastiness in my comments, and I am fully responsible for them. However, please note that my comments were brought about from your comments about what you considered my personal attributes. They were not brought about your critique of my work. You too share responsibility.

I know that many of my comments are unwelcome, but I am not a stranger to controversy, and will continue to post images and comments which I consider valuable, because I know that there is someone out there that will derive value from them, and I rather please an appreciative person than piss off a multitude of "experts" that in my opinion, have the level of expertise in photography judging that I have in 16th century culinary judging. Not that either I am or want to be considered a authority in the subject, but I do have quite a few miles on the road. And one thing you can be sure of me, I am very much in contact with my own ignorance, photograhy included

If you read the support or oppose votes that I leave for others, they are based on objective criteria and not personal preference nor personal likes or dislikes of individuals. And everytime I critisize something or someone, I am open to criticism of my criticism.

Please do critisize my work, and I invite you to critisize it in a ruthless objective manner, so that I can derive knowledge from your observations.

If we want the wikipedia project to truly be one of quality, we must recognize our own shortcomings, and the worst enemy of quality is self complaciency.

So, truce?

--Tomascastelazo 15:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

judging article

Alvesgaspar, Invitation accepted. This is an interesting article on photography judging. It deals with a lot of subjective aspects. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1306/is_n7_v61/ai_17380598. --Tomascastelazo 19:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Changing of other peoples comments

You might want to take another look at these edits and restore the (albeit syntactically wrong) striking that Svon applied to his comment. --Dschwen 13:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Edyta Geppert

Are You thing about sharpness and digital noise? I know that this is minus of this photo, but I cannot do anythig with this  :-((( Lestat 17:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for your opinion and vote.  :-) Lestat 00:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Who says i'm anonymous?

Why you changed my vote in the picture candidates? Just because I haven't bothered to make a personal page doesn't mean i'm not registered!

Barao78 10:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Strongly oppose  Strong oppose

See this edit. Note the user used the Strong Oppose template. I wanted to stick to what I said and rather than fix it, I left the user a message on his en.wp talk page and he changed his icon from strong oppose to simply oppose (even though he didn't acknolwedge my note). This is how I think it's best to handle these, rather than change a user's text ourself. Anyway, I can't stand the Strong Oppose template. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 16:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

FP candidates closing

I'll be away for a couple of days, from now. Would you like to go on with the closing process? Alvesgaspar 10:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I would like to, but i´m very busy at the moment. So i don´t have really much time for that. Can you ask someone else? Or am I your last hope? ;-) -- Simonizer 13:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Nomination of your flower

Hey there; I am more than pleased to nominate a good picture whenever I see one, and yours is one for sure! Your albums are very nice, and almost make me want to come and visit!! Where are you located? Anyways, I am glad you posted the corrected version, and I have no problem with that whatsoever; thanks for letting me know anyways. Cheers, Stephen.job 01:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

thank you but...

thank you for your message about promotion of quality image. in this case, i am only the "promoter" of the image with the help (cropping) of Ikiwaner. I've replaced your message in user Pko's discussion page. better this way. And by the way: muito obrigado for all your efforts, patience and knowledge on commons!... It goes without saying but it should be said... --Diligent 12:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

thank you for nominating it

Thanks for nominating my photo (ScarpeBagnate.JPG) on Featured picture candidates, however what you wrote about it was true, but I agree with Ikiwaner's comment --Mattia Luigi Nappi 17:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Sipoo_old_church.jpg

Hey Alvesgaspar, I saw you removed that candidate because of the 7th day rule. But does this rule really match here? There were supporting votes for that pic. It is also possible that i don't understand the rule :-) --AngMoKio 22:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you are quite right, it seems it is me who doesn't understand the guidelines... It's fixed now, thank you for calling my attention :-) -- Alvesgaspar 22:47, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem...this can happen. You really do a lot of important and helpful work here on Commons. Thanks for that.--AngMoKio 22:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

image:Uppsala Cathedral two towers.jpg

Hey, you removed this image from the POTD...citing not being a featured image. It is, however, a Quality Image, and those qualify for POTD. Thanks for paying attention, however. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 00:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

FPpromotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:PortoCovoWinter1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:PortoCovoWinter1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 16:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Osteospermum ecklonis1.JPG, which was nominated by stephen.job at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Osteospermum ecklonis1.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 00:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Always ready to help, but...

but i need instruction in regards to the closing procedure which you mention on my disc.page. --Diligent 12:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

thank you. Enjoy the holiday from Commons ;-) you can rely on me. Bonne Année ! --Diligent 13:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back! Thank you for your help with Promotheus. Do you remember this picture ? You said something has to be adressed before it can hope to be featured. Do you think i could be so rude as to insist and ask for help? :-) Diligent

Digestive system diagram

i do not mind any improvement to my images, but i do not undersatand the need to create a new file or filename in commons. if you would have just updated it with the same name then there would be no need on making new links to the articles. In any case thanks for the nomination for me is enough that someone likes the image and it would seem that you do. -LadyofHats 10:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Listen i do not mind corrections to my images, i truly dont. but please if you correct it upload it over the old version. you go to the image page and on the bottom of the page. there where it says file history there is a link that is called "Upload a new version of this file".

this time you even changed the copyright status and authorship from the image. i know you mean no harm. but i would find it far more easy if you would just respect my wishes.--LadyofHats 20:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Empire State Building

Hey Alvesgaspar. I sent my picture of the empire state building yesterday, and you wrote that I would have to modify to become a quality image, particularly the perspective. I did my best, and I replaced the former photograph by the new version. Regards. Jonathan71 13:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Human skull.svg

Image deletion warning

Image:Human skull.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

-LadyofHats 21:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• you should not take me wrong either, as i said i do not have anything against people changing the content of my images. but the copyright and the authorship are a completly diferent thing. i know you maybe do not noticed when uploading it, but still is something i do care and notice.

if you notice on the image you [uploaded] the lisencing section is not changed. and even after adding the description there is room for confusion since both lisencing apears. this mistake may be clear for you and me and maybe half the users of wikipedia. but not for all. I want my work to be clear and public domain. i do not care if it is not featured picture to achieve that -LadyofHats 22:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Alvesgaspar, I must say that I admire your photography greatly. Your work is very much appreciated, you must be extremely talented. Cheers! Arjun 23:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Out of town

I'll be "out of town" for some days, starting tomorrow. Would you please take over the closing process in Commons:Featured picture candidates? I wish you the best for 2007. Alvesgaspar 13:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey Alvesgaspar, sorry that i reply so late but i was also on a holiday trip and couldn't take over the closing process. I wish you a happy year 2007. --AngMoKio 14:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

QI promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PortoCovoJan07-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PortoCovoJan07-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Alvesgaspar 18:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

QI promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PortoCovoJan07-5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Alvesgaspar 10:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your Image PortoCovoJan07-5.jpg

Dear Joaquim, I have made an Edit of your lovely picture. I think the picture profits alot of this crop. In this form, I would support it at FP.

What do you think about it? Greetings, your Simonizer 12:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

My Image Image:Corn- and weatherfront.JPG at QI Nominations

Dear Joaquim, Review Excellent composition and awesome image. I wonder if the nominator could be a little more ambitious... What do yo mean with more ambitious? Greetings from Germany, Simonizer 14:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC) -- Don't you guess? I can't believe. However some improvements might be needed... Greetings from Lisbon - Alvesgaspar 14:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Now i got you. Yeah i still have much too learn on the technical side. I have an eye for composition, balance and perspective, but i need too improve the technical quality of my pictures. I´m working on that. -- Simonizer 14:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

QI promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Girl-on-beach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Alvesgaspar 23:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

QIC closing

Hello! I would be happy to help, I'm not sure if I'm quite ready (or sure enough of what I'm doing) to take on all the work, but that could change. I do have a question about closing: the QIC page says on the subject of closing that images should be promoted two days after review, and that unassessed images should stay up for 15 days at max. Does this mean that (for example) all the images on the 7th should be removed and dealt with appropriately while all the images on the 6th should stay up until the 21st? (perhaps a bit of a foolish question, but I don't want to mess things up). Also, my apologies for nominating those FPs, I simply wasn't paying enough attention. --Pharaoh Hound 14:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the reply, that clarifies things. I'll probably start work later today or tomorrow. Regards, --Pharaoh Hound 15:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Trees in Porto Covo

Hi Alvesgaspar - thanks! They're easy to identify from the very characteristic bark; also there are still a few leaves left on the tips of some of the branches - MPF 17:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

POTY election implementation

I would suggest a period of nominations and following that a period of election. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 14:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

15-31 Jan is too soon. Maybe 22 Jan - 5 Feb. Please announce POTY on the Village pump (and also mailing list, if you are signed up). POTY is a big deal IMO and needs a lot more publicity. I don't think you need administrator's help yet though. Get more people involved to make decisions. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 07:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

See commons:mailing list. :) Also contact the people who voted for such a thing, make them get involved. Personally I am not sure it is a great idea. It is a HUGE award. A whole year! --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with pfctdayelise it is a bit too early because only few people know about it. I don't really know what ways exist to announce it in the wiki-community. Maybe it is possible to start a campaign in the wiki-world to get Commons more in the mind of the wiki-users and contributors. For such a campaign a poty-contest might be a great vehicle. I also agree with Bastique there should be a period to nominate and afterwards a period of election.--AngMoKio 11:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

If it's gonna be between 15 and 31 January I'll vote for it, and most probably usual FP users are gonna vote too. That means quality votes. But if you want a broader audience and more non-FP-regular-users voting, some more publicity is needed, so February could be a good time to vote. Would it be possible to announce this on EN (FR and others) main pages on a particular day? This is good publicity. --Andy 22:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I'd agree with the above, should maybe set a little later --Fir0002 www 22:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I also agree that a big publicity campaign needs to be ready from day 1, and placed on as many Wikis as we can (once an advert is prepared, we should seek help to get it translated for the local Wikis). --MichaelMaggs 10:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree to this think that nominations should run until 31 January, voting from 1st Feb until 14th or 28th as that give more time to get the voting formats sorted, publicise etc Gnangarra 12:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for inviting me to participate to the debate about POTY. However, as I found your message a bit too late to give my opinion, and because I'm not totally convinced that we need this kind of reward, I won't participate in the process. I wish you good luck though, and I want to congratulate you for your work on commons! -- CyrilB 18:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

POTD

Hi, I have seen you have removed a non-FP picture on the POTD. I didn't know that quality pictures were also accepted, my concern was mainly to keep diversity. We already have 7 animals in the month, I will try to find something else. Dake 18:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi

We had a discussion someplace else. I will look at the pages you mentioned. Your user page is beautiful! NinaOdell 18:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I can help. I need to look at the pages - I won't really be able to do that until tonight or very early (@5AM) tomorrow morning my time. It's 4 in the afternoon here now, so count on my doing something in the next 14 hours . If I can't be of any assistance, I'll let you know. NinaOdell 00:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

about PODY and FP

hi, you know i have my problems with the idea of a contest like PODY helping to rescue FP. Dont take me wrong, personally i would like to have that title on my user page. but one of the things that FP misses the must is not pictures but people that votes. since i first found out about feature pictures, the standar for voting have become more and more complex ( and less and less people voting), people dont seem to be searching for the best of commons but for the best of the best (specially in photos). i have this impresion that it has become almust like a close circle. even if you take other people pictures and sugest them to be promoted, at the end it is the same small group who votes. if you would get more people voting, then you would see your standars getting to more normal levels. and also more people voting means at the end more people participating. if you would like to aboid masses of low quality images, you could request for images to first be quality images and then FP. a contest like PODY would be great for people that already participate on FP, but will not bring anyone new. .. anyway just wanted to let you know my opinion -LadyofHats 02:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

• • so let me see if i get this right, you need a barnstar for the PODY2006 ,will you make a new one each year? or prefer just one that can be used once and again?. you also need 2 for second and third place? also barnstar or something like a medal or so?. and you need 10 images for the best 10? or that would be best 7 since you already have prices for the first 3. ok so what about a barnstar, 2 medallions, and 7 ribbons. would that fit? i will work on some sketches during this days. as soon as i have something i will let you know -LadyofHats 13:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
    • [barnstar] sketches (you can click for a bigger view). remember you can exchange the elements, so if you like the first star with the green leaves. just say it.i will work on the second and third place medallions on the next days.-LadyofHats 04:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hoverfly on flower.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--Ikiwaner 21:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your picture Image:Sparkler.JPG

I have posted a reply to your question/statement on my talk page here. Nzgabriel 23:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

FPpromotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Anas-strepera-001.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Anas-strepera-001.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 14:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Proposal: Picture of the Year and Picture of the Month contests

Thank you for the information, but my english is not enough good for joining the discussion! ;) I'm sorry for the late reply but i was very busy. Bye --Jacopo86 17:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture of the Year - still on?

There has been little traffic on Commons:Picture of the Year/2006 recently. Are we still going to do this? If so, we need to decide the dates of the first and second rounds of voting, and make sure everything is ready to go (by 1st Feb?) I'm happy to help, but wouldn't want to do this on my own if no-one else has much interest. --MichaelMaggs 12:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:December Fog 01.jpg

Although lighting in the original is what was actually there, I like your version a lot better. Thanks. --Digon3 20:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:PortoCovoJan07-5.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:PortoCovoJan07-5.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Tamias-rufus-001.jpg , that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tamias-rufus-001.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 23:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

QI Archiving

Hi there Alvesgaspar. Have taken on archiving the QIC and I think I've grasped the process ok. However, I'm not so sure how to approach the QIC consensual reviews. Do you allow a certain time to elapse? If so how long and from what date? When archiving, do you archive all the comments of the CR? I assume the outcome is determined by the number of comments for or against, is it straight majority? Or is it like FP 3 to 1 majority? Would appreciate your advice. Jnpet 15:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you took over QI archiving, thank you. I gave up because that was too much work taking care of both FP an QI. The rules pertaining CR closing are explained in detail in the main section, and also in the Consensual Review section. My opinion is that a pic process should be archived as soon as the 48h grace period expires (or the 15th day). Texts remaining too long in the page transmit the message that nobody cares...Everything is archived in the log pages. Also don't forget to insert the pictures in the Quality Image pages and send the messages to the nominatores. I'll be here to help if you need. Good work! - Alvesgaspar 16:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, won't be able to do it every day, but as often as I can.
Have already run into a dilema on CR. There are two images of Guatemalan girls. When I count the votes on the first one, it looks like it would be promoted, but since there is a second one there, supposedly better, do I still promote the original? Or should I just refer to the newer image? Jnpet 16:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

POTY

When we get to the final, are we just going to change the text on the main voting page? Or should we have a separate Commons:Picture of the Year/2006/final page? The latter might be better, as we could get the translations going now. What do you think? --MichaelMaggs 20:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Votação

Olá Joaquim. Sobre a Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Ramphastos toco2.jpg, tenho uma imagem de bico inteiro, mas como eu poderia propô-la? Em separado ou na mesma votação? -- Mateus Hidalgo 16:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

É outra fotografia. Veja: Image:Ramphastos toco4.jpg. Tem também uma de "corpo inteiro" do tucano (hehe): Image:Ramphastos toco5.jpg. O que acha delas? -- Mateus Hidalgo 16:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Bom, tentarei novamente :( Só recentemente comecei a tirar fotos, pelo que ainda estou aprendendo. Um dos motivos para ter feito as candidaturas foi ver em que pé de qualidade estavam minhas fotos, ver o que fiz certo ou errado, o que é bom para aprender, como você disse. Ao menos os tucanos estarão lá para tentar fotografá-los novamente. Um dia essa foto sai! hehe. Abraço e obrigado pelas opiniões. -- Mateus Hidalgo 18:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

A propósito, o que acha dessa e dessa? Prometo que é a última opinião :p -- Mateus Hidalgo 18:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

POTY again

Hi Alves.

Something that I feared is already happening: the authors putting their own pictures in the gallery. Should we do something about it? What about cleaning the gallery at exactly January 31, 2359 ? - Alvesgaspar 13:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too worried about that, as the rule actually say that voters can add as many pictures as they want, eg to bring them to public notice. So they're only doing what any voter can.

By the way, could you translate Commons:Picture of the Year/2006/final please? --MichaelMaggs 17:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I've asked quite a few people to help with translations this evening. Running out of time now. --MichaelMaggs 20:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Imagem do ano 2006

Obrigado pela informação na minha página de discussão! Participarei na eleição. Deixei informação en diversas páginas que correspondem a Commons:Esplanada en alemão, espanhol e italiano e também no portal comunitário na Wikipédia en alemão. (Vi a sua imagem do abelhão. Sou apicultor perto de Munique. Pode ver umas imagens de abelhas aqui.) Cumprimentos! --wau 18:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Spanish translation

you got me in my short foot. i can draw you wathever you want. but writing is out of borders for me :P i will ask arround if i find someone who can so it, but cant promise anything-LadyofHats 03:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Fk-040.JPG

• Pourquoi exiger que les images de qualités face 2000x1000,

alors que les ecrans d'ordinateurs ne font que 860 ou 1024 voir rarement 160O; en outre ce n'est pas parce que une image est grande qu'elle est plus belle d'autant plus qu'elle sont reduite pour s'afficher sur la premiere page à 200px voir a 150px.

--Wiki-MG**** @@@-fr Accueil fr:Accueil 10:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

• OK Merci pour votre réponse en français, Salutation--Wiki-MG**** @@@-fr Accueil fr:Accueil 08:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

subject permission

Does every image of a human being on wikicommons have written permission from the subject?

why did you block my ip

Now you decided to block my IP so I cannot gather support for my appeal? That is totally uncultured and uncivil. Graham Wellington 00:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Table

I did a small table (see the voting page) and made a simulation in my head. The conclusion is that the solution is even more ackward than the previous one, both for the voters (who can't see the table at the same time they look at the thumbnails) and for the counting updaters. The syntax of the table is not obvious and even a small mistake, like deleting one of the vertical bars, is enough to ruin it all. In either case, it is always necessary to have two windows opened at the same time to update the counting. I really think we should stick to the initial solution, that is, writing the countings in the picture captions. Alvesgaspar 23:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's fine as you've done it, except it should be on the transclused page Commons:Picture of the Year/2006/Voting phase 1/progress, rather than Commons:Picture of the Year/2006/Voting phase 1. I see what you mean about the care that has to be taken, but I expect that for the most part we'll be updating the table ourselves! We don't ask voters to do so, and anyone who does it is likely to underestand table syntax. Also it's much easier to keep a table updated when you can see that last update timestamp. Having the votes against the images means you never know when the last update was done, so there will be a lot of re-counting from scratch. --MichaelMaggs 07:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Quality image

QICpromoted|Image:Hippo zoo Lisbon.JPG --Jnpet 12:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC) Oops, my error. Confused the date. --Jnpet 13:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

My Image Image:Pilatus-Adligenswil.jpg at QI

• I have done some noise reduction. Can you please review it again?

Greetings from Germany, Simonizer 13:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• I would also try to downsample the picture, the noise is still too visible.

I did it, more reducing is difficult, I think, cause then the outlines are too much soften. -- Simonizer 15:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• For comparison here is the former version Image:Pilatus-Adligenswil.JPG. I think new version (Image:Pilatus-Adligenswil.jpg) is much better and acceptable in my opinion. But when you say its still to bad i will accept that, too.
• Thanks for your new review. For your info: I have just tried another software for denoising the picture and this one worked even better. So i didnt need to downsample anymore. I have uploaded the new version allready. (Image:Pilatus-Adligenswil.jpg Just tell me if the new version is ok. You dont need to change your review. Simonizer 09:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Yes, it is much better, the noise was gone. What software is that? I'm from the "old school" and don't even have Photoshop... Alvesgaspar I dont have photoshop neither, Im a fan of GIMP. But for the denoising i used Picture Cooler 2.45 -it is a freeware tool. Do you think one of the two nominated pictures at QI have a chance at FP? Simonizer 10:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC) I´m looking forward for your opinion! -- Simonizer 13:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:FPpromotion

Hi.

I've add an extra parameter to that template, so one can add a correct link to the voting page. See example here [5].

Best Wishes, Nux (talk··dyskusja) 14:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Interested in doing some translation work for inkscape?

Hi. I am a translator of the vector drawing tool Inkscape. We need someone who is able to translate a graphics application from english to portugese. If you are interested to help make this software more usable for millions of other portugese speaking people, then please leave a note on my discussion page. If you have no experience with translaion tools, that would be no problem, because i would help you in that part. It is easy. If you would like to take a look at the status of the translations, look here: www.inkscape.org Greetings --SvonHalenbach 00:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

QI Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alentejo 29 5 5 edit.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--Jnpet 11:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Hello Mr.Gaspar,

I just would like to ask if that you who deleted my picture 'Old lamp' from nomination page, I guess that you deleted it because of not being supported or opposed by more than 5 persons, right?!! I just want to know.

Thanks,

Photographer's eyes needed

Being a photographer, you may want to take a look at this: Commons:Village pump#Best_photographer_for_red_carpet.3F_Noon_decision_need.

Bear in mind he's looking to make a choice soon. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 18:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture of the Year

Appears to have been a last minute addition with little thought given to it. The voteing page should be as clean as posible. That means removeing cluttter.Geni 00:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Redrosedust wright f2000.jpg

Please tak a look into history of this image especially edit reverted by me - it looks like this image is (c):

Disclaimer: These images are released into the public domain for private use or for use in the promotion of the IPHAS survey. If any image or images are redisplayed or reproduced, please accompany the image or images with the following acknowledgement: "Image based on data obtained as part of the INT Photometric H-Alpha Survey of the Northern Galactic Plane, prepared by Nick Wright, University College London, on behalf of the IPHAS Collaboration"

So it's written on page pointed on NASA as source of this image :(

--WarX 02:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

a question

tell me on the featured images. i just realised that you marked Image:Human skull side suturas.svg as featured when in reality it was Image:Human skull side suturas right.svg who was selected. is this right?-LadyofHats 06:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• new section? what do you mean by that?-LadyofHats 11:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

POTY votes

Wow, quite a few. We really did need a bot to keep track. Too late now, though. --MichaelMaggs 07:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

POTY voting

It won't look good if we can't keep the table up to date, and that will be hard to do. I'll ask Dweshen if he could do a script. Otherwise, I think it best we just remove the table for now. --MichaelMaggs 08:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I've done some publicity this morning. See POTY archive page. --MichaelMaggs 08:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Please see Commons talk:Picture of the Year/2006/Voting phase 1/progress -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Voting

Please see User talk:WarX. I think he has a script to do this now. --MichaelMaggs 14:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Voting

Sorry for taking so long to get back at you about the Image of the Year. I have been busy on "english wikipedia", I have made my vote, but I think that it was one of the hardest 5 picks I have ever had to do! Cheers buddy. ~ Arjun 19:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not mean to offend you.

I'm sorry that I have offended you, it was not my intention. I did not protect the page from editing [6]. I wouldn't have even thought to do so, but now that it's done I agree it is a good idea. (It wouldn't be fair to leave some images off for a few hours, for example). I really didn't expect anyone to protest the scrambled order, and I was rather shocked when you did. I even ran the idea past some other commons folks before doing it. I'd be glad to talk to you, but you should understand that I'm not trying to push you around.--Gmaxwell 19:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Right now, even if I wanted to use a sorted list of all FP I couldn't, because the "history" of the initial gallery was deleted. Not innocently, I guess. If this is not pushing everyone around, what is it? You have to understand that what is offending me is not your opinion on the way this contest should be managed but the fact that you are forcing me and the others to accept it, as if you had the truth in your pocket. This event is being organized for a long time and these issues were considered. If you read carefully the instructions you will verify that the contest is not intended to be a strict democratic election, since the voters can modify their votes in order to facilitate the consensus (a well known rule of Wikipedia). However, you quickly (and careless) interpreted this model as sheer incompetence and clumsiness. Don't I have some reason to feel offended? - Alvesgaspar 22:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You could, but you'd have to sort it yourself.. which isn't terribly difficult. Because you began running around slinging false accusations, reverting me, and not reading my replies, I thought I had to pull the ordered versions that to avoid further disruption. If I were actually trying to push you around I could have just blocked you, and be spared your complaints and accusations. But I'm not... I'd love to talk to you, but I can't if you're going to continue to accuse me at every single turn. You speak about 'well known rules' of Wikipedia, but I really believe you misunderstand Wikipedia's approach to consensus: A consensus among people who are uninformed is worthless and uninformed is exactly what someone is whom has picked their favorite images based on the commentless selections of others without looking at all of the choices themselves. In any case.. if you want to talk about well known rules of Wikipedia, we should start with assume good faith. :( --Gmaxwell 22:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you see what I mean? When you say "I could have just blocked you, and be spared your complaints and accusations" and "I thought I had to pull the ordered versions that to avoid further disruption", you are putting yourself in a position of superiority and treating me as if I were a troll trying to disrupt your work. Though I am still a newcomer I believe that we are all equal here and that we should always try to understand the points of view of others. I’m talking to you now which also means that I consider you to be an equal, acting in good faith.

Let me now try to explain a little better what I mean by “consensus” in the present case. In the beginning of the voting period I expect everybody to vote in their preferred pictures, not giving much attention to other’s choices. But when this phase of the election approaches its end people will be changing their votes, if they are allowed to, in order to optimize its potential. For example, if two of the pictures of my first choice don’t have any chance of being among the ten best, then I may want to considerer other equally good options, but with better possibilities of promotion. Doing that, I will be using my vote the best possible way.

I hope this explanation will also convince you that I had no intention of accusing you of anything rather than stopping me of participating in the project as a full Wikipedian. I have no idea of how to sort automatically the list of pictures, so I’ll have to do it by hand. I intend to put a link in the gallery page so people can use a sorted list of pictures if they want to. Alvesgaspar 23:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not trying to intimidate you, I was stating a simple fact. If I were out to get you, I could have. I'm not. I hope we can get past that. Someday you will be able to block me too, but I know you won't because we are both here to make things better.

I understand your vision much better now. I'm not sure how well it will work, but I'm not too opposed to that. Towards the end of the process, I will help the process by changing the page to make it clear which images do not have a chance of passing. etc. But I think we should save that until the last few days. At that time I will also update the site notice to remind people to go recheck their votes. Okay? --Gmaxwell 23:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Alvesgaspar, I protected the page. I wanted to stop people vandalising it by adding or removing or changing numbers.

I didn't understand what you meant by 'consensus', but I do now. I think it will only become important in the last couple of days, right? Because until then the volume of votes will be overwhelming. So having a scrambled gallery (at least until then) is no problem. Also, people can find the images by number by doing a Ctrl+F Find using their browser. cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 23:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

It is the first time we run such a big competition, right? So we will learn as we go, make some mistakes and misjudgements, and make the next one better because of them. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Urocyon littoralis full figure.jpg

Hi, I was doing some cleanup and I noticed this - I don't think it worked quite right? cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Updating POTY voting table

I don't think that WarX is round much at the moment, and the table is now very out of date. Are you able to run Perl? He posted this on my talk page; I am not set up to use it, but perhaps you may be. --MichaelMaggs 11:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Here is my perl script User:WarX/counter.pl as input it takes votes from page and outputs part of table between hooks on progress page :)It's a bit primitive and ugly coding, but it works, I'll try to make it full automatic tomorrow :) (link it to Alvegaspar by yourself)--WarX 19:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh. Seems he was working on it while I was posting here. Please ignore. --MichaelMaggs 11:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm disappointed in your actions

When you asked to provide an ordered table, I and other folks said that it was a bad idea at this point. Rather than trying to obtain consensus you stomped your feet and yelled until the page was unprotected. While being bold is welcome, by the time you made the edit you already knew that multiple people opposed it and no one supported your position enough to comment... yet you still changed that page. Once I fully understood you I offered to help you towards the end of the process. I had worried that you would just cause a disruption, but I thought that you would not after we had talked. I see I was mistaken to do anything but ignore you. --Gmaxwell 13:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Abandoning the POTY 2006 project

I’m abandoning the project. I don’t deserve, and can’t tolerate, to be treated like an intruder or a vandal. Have fun. Alvesgaspar 13:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Eh from my experence of running elections on en that is fairly normal. The problem is that you have a fairly high profile page that doesn't have many coventions attached to it so people are not quite sure what to do. It isn't personal elections are always messy.Geni 13:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Don be kidding! You are father of this project, and you simple can't do this!--WarX 13:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This would be very bad news indeed, and I do urge you to reconsider, if only for the sake of the reputation of this project. You were the one who suggested it in the first place, proposed most of the rules, and have done much of the hard work. This is a high-profile project that aims to show off the best that Commons can offer, and will be seriously damaged if you now remove your name from it. GMaxwell has said some things that in my view he shouldn't, but you shouldn't let that get to you. Isn't the project worth more than having to ignore a couple of stray comments? Please stay. --MichaelMaggs 14:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Mixing up the images doen't seem like a bad idea to me, but I agree that the way he went about it, and the way that he expressed himself, was unnecesarily agressive. I have no strong views whether users should have access to a sorted list, and I could be persuaded either way. I certainly missed it myself when I've tried to work out which are the top 10 images so far. --MichaelMaggs 15:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• i am sad to hear that. maybe you would find time to cool down and reconsider. after all this project was your idea.-LadyofHats 16:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
• FYI, I have added the links to the odered gallery to the bottom of the page. See Commons_talk:Picture of the Year/2006 -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I hope you reconsider to come back. If there is however nothing we can do to persuade you to come back, I hope to see you back next year, and we can only hope to avoid such conflicts. Thanks for the things you have done for the POTY, -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

To Alvesgaspar: The only reasonable thing to do is to keep up your work. This discussion is not a big deal.

Fred Chess 16:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Hey Alvesgaspar, I also think it would be a great loss to lose you for this event. You did so much for it and you deserve to finish it. I think the problems came up because of lack of time before the voting - that made it impossible to discuss everything in detail before it started. No matter how you decide, you can be sure that with your work you drew attention to commons. So I also want to thank you for your work...and not just for the work on the poty. --AngMoKio 20:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oops, this comes out of the blue for me, Alves (too many personal deadlines recently). You have my full support. Lycaon 23:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with Fred. If you feel like coming back, your assistance is always appreciated. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

You know there are a lot of editors who appreciate your efforts. So why give Gmaxwell's opinions undue weight? But I'm not going to beg you to return. It's up you to decide, if helping out is more painful or enjoyable.

There is lots to do with POTY apart from the gallery. There is a link from the gallery to the ordered gallery. Those who prefer the ordered one can easily find it. cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I've seen these discussions, and expressed my feelings/thoughts towards the potential to influence the result and possibilities of deliberate errors occuring on that page. Anyhow I think that the POTY will collapse without your guidance please consider staying involved cause to quote the Australian Politician Don Chipp someones got to "Keep the Bastards Honest". Gnangarra 13:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

My telescope picture from Frankfurt

Hi Alvesgaspar, I saw you did promote my picture Image:Fernrohr Zeilgalerie Frankfurt-untilted.jpg as QI after tilt correction. I made some more changes in color saturation and contrast (=>Image:Tourist Telescope Zeilgalerie Frankfurt-col sat.jpg). I think the new version is a little better, what do you mean? Is it possible to nominate the new pic for QI and delete the promotion from the other one by success? And is it possible to delete my first awry version? --Falense 14:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hippo zoo Lisbon.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--Jnpet 02:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)