User talk:Dcoetzee/Archive 2009-02-15

NOAA chart

Hi. MrSID is a raster graphics format, so conversion to SVG wouldn't make sense, as I understand it. For maps and charts, SVG is generally better, of course, but these charts are only available as raster scans of the original paper charts, not in vector format. Regarding the resolution: I tried briefly but couldn't find a way to extract higher resolutions using free MrSID plugin I used (from Lizardtech), and what I got fit my needs for an article on en:... I hope I've left enough information in the image description page that someone with better tools could upgrade. Cdc 05:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. If it were in a vector graphic format in the first place conversion to SVG might be feasible, but if it's raster then there's way too much detail in it to hope to convert it all. Deco 06:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

Hello. I think you know me well enough from the deletion requests... haha. Do you have any suggestions on any proofs that might be helpful? I realize I should be the one thinking, but yeah... Thank you, -- WB 06:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Flags into SVG

Hello,

I've seen you have put a "convert into SVG" message on some nautical signal flags. Well, most of them have been converted into SVG and are in the Category:Nautical Signal Flags (not the page Nautical Signal Flags, though), except for the last ones, but I have asked the French "Atelier graphique" to do it.

So if you want to get the old ones deleted, feel free to do so !

Cheers, le Korrigan ^bla 19:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know. That's great. I'll try to take care of orphaning them and marking them redundant. Deco 08:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Duplicate flags

Well, the flags I created are more vibrant, bordered, and are of the correct aspect ratio (square). Also, they include the answer and substitute flags. Please leave them alone. Denelson83 04:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't planning on doing anything to them. Just making sure you knew. Deco 05:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Lilypond Convert to SVG

I tried this and it only converts the notes to SVG as characters (at least on the Windows platform). Unless one has the fonts installed on their system, this is essentially useless for us. Do you know of a workaround? Bas ^parler _voir 16:52, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure. You can convert the font to an SVG font and embed it in the SVG file, possibly removing characters you don't use. See for example TTF2SVG. Once you've run the tool you just need to copy some XML from one file to the other - ask me if you need more help with this. Another alternative is to take the paths from the SVG file generated by the tool and transform them using transformations, but that's probably too difficult. Deco 18:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and good information. As I have Illustrator, I usually make outlines from fonts I have. Here's the thing, Deco... I don't have the fonts. They didn't get installed on my system as TTFs, and don't appear to be in the program subdirectories. The program embeds the font in the PDF files it makes, but once you import into Illustrator, those fonts go missing again. Bas ^parler _voir 15:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm now more reluctant to experiment with this product after I received this response to my bug request:

Looking at this page
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/coords.html
and especially
translate:
"translate" wsp* "(" wsp* number ( comma-wsp number )? wsp* ")"
reveals that this is a bug in IE 6.0.  Would you please report your
bug with Microsoft instead?  I am quite reluctant to implement
workarounds for bugs in Microsoft software.  This is something that I
feel should at least be discussed.

The programmer was, for one thing, incorrect, because the page illustrated the way that IE6.0 liked, not the way that Lilypond exported. But the simple request that I ask Microsoft to fix their bug rather than suggest that Lilypond offer cross-browser support really riled me. Unfortunately, sent him a less than friendly response via email, so I probably won't be getting any more help from them. Anyway, just my thoughts.

The program is interesting. I'll still look out for product upgrades, as he's obviously not the only one involved in the program. Bas ^parler _voir 02:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

.

I sympathise with your experience - a developer who places no value on compatibility can be very frustrating. Since you have Illustrator though, you can open the SVG file there, select the text elements, and choose Convert to Outlines. This isn't exactly automatable, but should do the trick. Deco 05:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Except... I still don't have the appropriate fonts. So it still doesn't work. *sigh* Bas ^parler _voir 13:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Hrm, the fonts should've been included. I'll try this out later. Deco 21:50, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

French tip

Feel free to correct mon français... except my user page. It's supposed to be bad there. Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 04:07, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images

Hi Dcoetzee. You may be interested in this: Commons:Village pump/Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images. pfctdayelise (translate?) 00:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Deco 06:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Wallpaper group diagrams to SVG

Hi! I read your notices for the images of Category:Wallpaper group diagrams and uploaded the SVG versions. I anways wanted to do so in the first place, but I only had an ISDN link back then and never got a bulk upload account. Anyway, they are available now, but unfortunately don't get rendered correctly. I found a workaround for MediaWiki bugs #4388 and #5108. I also filed bugs #5109 and #5110 about problems I could not easily work around. Until those issues are resolved, the SVG versions of my images are still inferior to the PNGs. Once this is done, I'll happily help relinking. Although there is still the limitation that "What links here" does not seem to work across wiki projects... -- Martin von Gagern 01:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cleaning up Fourier screenshot 1.png

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Cleaning up Fourier screenshot 1.png has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

Image:Cleaning up Fourier screenshot 2.png

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Cleaning up Fourier screenshot 2.png has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

Cleaning up noise

Hello, I've seen you wrote Commons:Cleaning up interference with Fourier analysis, so I wondered if you could help me figure out how to clean up these images I took (Image:IMG_0487_-_a_tree_at_night,_experiment.jpg, Image:IMG_0492_-_a_tree_at_night,_experiment.jpg). I wonder if FFA will help (I played a little with it but didn't figure it out) or I should use some other method. Please, write on my talk page as I might not notice you reply here. Thank you. ~~helix84 01:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi helix. I'm afraid that only systematic interference can really be cleaned up in the manner described in my article. Noise such as in your images is essentially random and represents irrecoverable information loss. I'm sorry. Deco 07:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wikipe-tan-in-seasidewhiteball.png

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Orgullomoore 15:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Nice!

`Just a little Thank you! note to let you know I appreciate your work on the watermark removal. You're creating me a busy watchlist, which is a good thing :) Siebrand 18:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your thank you! Glad to see someone noticing and appreciating my rather taxing work. :-) Deco 02:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

yes. Rest assured that I at least value your effort tremendously. I do not know which other activities you are involved in, as there can be so many... Siebrand 08:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Ditto :-) Thanks from me too!
Just as a little addition: Could you keep an eye on the actual information given on an image information page when you remove a watermark, so that the information that were on the image itself go to the written part then? I noticed this on several images made by Sten who used to store his name and the date, sometimes also the location, only within the image itself. See [1] for an example what has to be done. This is important to fix, because not all users know about the authorship of Sten's images, especially not after the watermark is removed. And sometimes such images without a clear note about source/author were tagged for deletion …
Greetings --Überraschungsbilder 19:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I'm sorry. I am accustomed to doing this, but I assumed this info would be on the image description page already. I'll be more careful in the future. Deco 02:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Great! :-) --Überraschungsbilder 15:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm going back through my images and noting any watermark text in the image description, even where it's redundant, just to be safe. Will be done soon. Thanks for the reminder. :-) Deco 15:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Microsoft sign closeup.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Microsoft sign closeup.jpg 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!

This is an automated message from BryanBot. 14:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mont Saint Michel bordercropped.jpg

hi. that image still has the watermark. Maybe you uploaded the wrong version...? Bogdan 13:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - I usually carefully verify these things. Apparently I encountered some kind of software bug. I did remove the watermark, I did upload the correct version, as you can see from the filesizes, but the file previously in the cache was not removed. I should file a bug at Mediawiki Bugzilla. Deco 11:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Watermarks on train images.

Hi, on Image:Paprikatåg.jpg you've said you removed the watermark, but no new file was uploaded. Also on Image:Vagnhärad station Trosa.jpg a new file was uploaded but it still seams to contain the watermark though. The latter is most likely due to a cach problem though. Good work on the watermark removals btw. /Lokal_Profil 12:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The same thing seems to have occured in Image:Nynäshamns station och kyrka.jpg] and Image:Nynäshamns hamn och station.jpg /Lokal_Profil 12:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was interrupted while working on a batch of images. I'm still working on those four images. Please give me a little while. Dcoetzee 13:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

All seem to be fixed now, except Image:Paprikatåg.jpg which seems to have escaped =) /Lokal_Profil 14:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops, my mistake. I got that one now, thanks! Dcoetzee 00:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks and good work. Which program do you use for this? /Lokal_Profil 11:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Watermark removal

Hi; I noticed you'd done a great job removing the watermark from Image:Red Auerbach Lipofsky.jpg; could you possibly do the same for Image:Jordan_by_Lipofsky_16577.jpg? Robth 04:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment! I've done so. Please feel free to ask me for anything in the future. :-) Dcoetzee 09:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

superceding png with jpg

(This discussion regards the superceding of Image:Létain.png by Image:Létain.jpg).

This seems like the wrong way round, and extraneous administrative load.

• JPG is always lower quality than PNG
• Why keep two images if you can keep only the high quality?
• never supercede a high quality image with a lower quality one.

I suggest deleting the .jpg version. I see you also do watermark removal: great thing, but please upload the final result as PNG, to avoid loss of quality in successive recompressions. Regards. Zanaq 06:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

You're correct that the PNG is higher quality; however, this is not the reason for the change. The thumbnails in the articles ranged in size from 90K to 120K, much too large for modem users. They now range from 7K to 12K. If the engine had a way of rendering JPG thumbnails for PNG images, I would fervently support not storing a JPG version, but this is not the case. This is explained at Commons:Images for cleanup. Although the JPEG that I uploaded is lossy, the quality is set very high, and loss is minimal, and the PNG can remain as an original source. Dcoetzee 06:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

As you see, this superceding practice is very dangerous. Now the PNG has been removed. Zanaq 11:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

You did not respond to my argument at all, only asserted that this is "very dangerous". I assert that generational decay is less of an issue here than thumbnail size. I've added the superseded tag back. This has long been standing practice as described on the Commons:Images for cleanup page. Please do not remove it again. Dcoetzee 17:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me: I did not touch the image description page.

In my experience, images with the superceded tag which are not used anywhere are likely to be deleted, hence dangerous. I just was a little annoyed because again I had to complain about perfect images being replaced with inferior ones. Initially I was satisfied with your assurance that it would remain, and still pondering if I would agree with the cleanup thing: remember that commons serves the projects and not the other way round; it's ultimately up to the projects to decide how they use the available images. Server load is apparently no issue. The user experience is something I hadn't considered yet. Zanaq 17:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, I assumed that was you editing anonymously - more likely it's some user from one of the Wikipedias who disagrees with the change. In light of the danger of the image being deleted, and considering that projects have the option of using the PNG version if they want, I've created a new tag called {{PNG with JPEG version}} and a corresponding {{JPEG version of PNG}}. I would rather see a software feature allowing thumbnails in different formats to deal away with this whole issue, but meanwhile this will allow both to be retained and used correctly, and updated the Images for cleanup to recommend using it.

I'm not concerned about server load - I'm mainly concerned about the download times for dial-up users, who in the case of Image:Létain.png needed at least 15 seconds to download each thumbnail and now at most 2. Dcoetzee 01:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I like the updates you made: good night. Zanaq 02:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I just realised that I misread your earlier comment. I thought you said the JPEG has been removed, implying that you had requested its deletion. I should have looked more carefully. Sorry about that! Dcoetzee 03:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Zanaq 07:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Image in use

Sorry, but the image you would like to delete is linked to a lot of artciles. Only because of a quality-difference I would never get the idea to delete it! Would you like to replace all the images? I would'nt to be honest Skiltz

Hi - I thought you were referring to the above image, but it appears not. Please provide some context and tell me which image you are referring to, as I've tagged hundreds. I wouldn't mind replacing uses of an image as necessary and have done so before. Thanks. Dcoetzee 19:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Using an IJG JPEG "quality" setting higher than 95% is stupid

Using a setting higher than 95% does not preserve any additional significant actual image quality, and bloats the filesize immensely. Often, turning off chroma downsampling will bring great improvements in image quality which cannot be matched by turning up the quality setting to 100% without turning off chroma downsampling. See http://www.faqs.org/faqs/jpeg-faq/part1/section-5.html -- Churchh 15:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice on chroma downsampling. The document you cited says "Adobe Photoshop, for example, automatically switches off downsampling at its higher quality settings," so it's apparently already off. In this case I was trying to preserve the image as near to losslessly as possible, and the thumbnails are still very small, so I'm not sure if there's an issue. As you can see above, despite the obscenely high quality setting that I used someone is still complaining about the conversion to JPEG. Dcoetzee 17:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Since the PNG version is being kept, it is no longer necessary to upload the JPEG version at maximum quality. I am uploading a new version at normal quality. Dcoetzee 03:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Watermark copyright removal

Has there been any discussion about the legal implications of removing embedded copyright notices from images? Both the GFDL and CC-BY contain provisions requiring the preservation of copyright notices. I find the language to be ambiguous, but I think one could legitimately argue that removing an embedded copyright notice from an image may violate the requirements of those licenses (particular the GFDL wording, maybe less so with the CC-BY). Obviously you are trying to be helpful, but I am just trying to figure out if there has ever been a serious discussion about this. Dragons flight 16:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

But both GFDL and CC-BY specifically allow derivative works. And removing the embedded copyright notice (but stil crediting the original image and maintaining a copy of it in the version history) is an example of a derivative image is it not? /Lokal_Profil 18:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Both the embedded metadata and the accompanying image description page credit the author, so I think the Attribution requirement is fulfilled, but I'm not aware of community consensus regarding this. Dcoetzee 19:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

To use just the GFDL as an example, the issue is that there are specific requirements that modified versions must fulfill. One of which is to "Preserve all the copyright notices" (empahsis mine) and to "Add an appropriate copyright notice for your modifications adjacent to the other copyright notices". Such restrictions may suggest that removing or relocating any copyright notice (even one embedded awkwardly in the image itself) may constitute a breach of the license. In reality, it probably turns on what legal meaning is attached to the term "preserve". If to "preserve" means to leave entirely unchanged, then modifying any notice may be forbidden. On the other hand, if "preserve" means merely to keep present with the image, then one could presumably get away with relocating the message. I suspect that the kind of people who add embedded copyright notices are more likely to strongly argue for the first interpretation. Dragons flight 01:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a valid concern to address, but keep in mind that some visible watermarks are translucent and cover a large proportion of the image. A restriction protecting it from interference would effectively turn "attribution" into "no derivatives". In any case I think it's best that prior to any policy change from the de facto status quo at least a couple real IP lawyers are involved in the discussion. Dcoetzee 07:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, which could mean some watermarked images are better off deleted. While we try to find more sound advice on this issue, you may want to stop removing such marks. If it is a problem, you personally would have considerable potential liability as the derivative creator. Dragons flight 10:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

See follow-up discussion at en:Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Overprinted_copyright_notices_on_GFDL_and_CC-BY_images.

In my experience, artists whose copyright is violated by removal of embedded watermarks are not especially concerned by the practice if it were confined within Wikipedia, where the artist's accreditation is listed elsewhere on the page. The problem arises when images from Wikipedia are downloaded for use elsewhere, where scrupulous attention to ethical conduct is often given scant attention. In this way the work of artists who have freely permitted their work to be used for the common good, is stolen by unscrupulous people, aided and abetted by editors on Wikipedia who remove embedded watermarks. And where will a gallery be permitted to remove parts of a Rembrandt, because the work conflicted with an obscure part of the gallery's policy? That these Wikipedia illustrations are less exalted than the work of Rembrandt is of no consequence. They represent the knowledge, the research, and the intellectual effort of the producers.

Dragons flight rightly alludes to the laws, civil and criminal, to prevent the theft of an artist's property. That Dcoetzee and others have so far escaped the attention of the law is probably down to their anonymous status and the artist's powerlessness. Ethical behaviour it isn't.

Dcoetzee would do well to acknowledge that artists permit their work to be used freely on Wikipedia. The copyright of the full, unadulterated work remains with the artist. Modified copies are fraudulent fakes. Dcoetzee is of course free to propose that works with embedded copyright are deleted. What he is not entitled to do is steal the artists copyright. Be in no doubt, that is what at stake here, and why so many will now no longer permit their work to be used here. Everyone is then a loser. 81.156.94.70 17:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks about the 'inline' keyword in the language templates

Hi,
I just want to thank you warmly about the great job you did to add the 'inline' parameter to all the language templates!
Best regards from France,
-- AlNo (talk: fr/en/es/pt) 09:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem - unfortunately I was not able to update the protected Template:De, but it looks like someone else did, so great. Dcoetzee 10:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Urothoe brevicornis.png and others

Hi. I don't mind if you convert my photographs from png (which used to be preferred at one time) to jpg, but please do not ommit the information that was originaly there. (e.g. place and date of capture). Thanks. Lycaon 10:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but I'm not deleting the old version - so the info will not be erased. I'm not copying the complete description because it would then always have to be updated in two places. If you feel strongly about this, I will copy the complete description, it's up to you. Dcoetzee 10:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I hadn't read the whole story about the conversions. I was planning to update those pictures with hires ones (in jpg format, 95%) anyhow. Do those lowres png's then become obsolete? I would think so, but what is your opinion? Lycaon 10:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

That all depends. I'm assuming these are processed photos with the background erased. Providing you saved a copy in a lossless format, you may wish to upload both a high-res PNG and JPEG, especially if the original photos were raw photos. But if you only upload a high-res JPEG, then yes, the PNG would be deleted as redundant. What filesize would high-res PNGs be in this case? Dcoetzee 10:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, my source files at the moment are JPG (low compression), de original unprocessed files are TIFF (Axiocam, microscope camera output). The PNGs I posted were reduced resolution files from the hires JPGs, so I guess we can just keep the hires JPGs. I will post those hires JPGs today (the PNG are actually the last ones from a larger batch that have been converted already, all other files on my gallery are JPG). Thanks for your advice. Lycaon 10:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good. :-) Dcoetzee 18:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Heya

Hey, I joined! Illyria05 02:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You did! Dcoetzee 02:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, testing Sig.. Anyway, I think I'm going to love Wikimedia commons :P Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 02:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, about the picture I was going to take and upload, scratch that-at least for today-my sister has the camera somewhere in her room.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 02:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

No deadlines here - let me know when it's up! Dcoetzee 05:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Most likely I'll do it over the weekend.. Anyway, I need to buy a digital camera so I will not have to borrow one.. Also, I will be in Arizona this summer, and I look forward to taking lots of pictures there! :) Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 06:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, also, I do not have a desktop computer at home with internet, so I will not be on the internet as much.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 18:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Igreja Matriz de Guararema

I upload new Image:Igreja Matriz de Guararema.jpg, please erase ‎Image:Igreja Matriz de Guararema.png <--Watermark ‎Tanks.---- OS2Warp ^discussão 04:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I switched the usages of the png version to the jpeg and deleted it, as well as rotating your jpeg slightly. Cheers, -- Editor at Large • talk 18:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

Dcoetzee, congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and Commons:Deletion requests), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net. You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references....
EugeneZelenko 14:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Urartu images

Hi, Derrick, what’s the story with Urartu images (~DSC01254eg.jpg etc.)? Why do I have to rename them??

FYI: I used original images posted by somebody else already named like DSC01254.jpg etc., cleaned them up and cropped objects of interest from them, so they became illustrations for specific urartian items, not just museum display photos. I deliberately kept reference to original filename for convenience and I would very much like to keep it that way. These images are used in articles on Urartu (mainly in ru-wiki).

Please, remove those scary templates, and let me work on something truly useful. I am not really looking forward to performing such renaming. I understand that there is always room for improvement, but I ask you to let me improve something else. Please. EvgenyGenkin 15:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't get the wrong impression, I'm not making you do anything. I would be happy to rename them for you, along with the originals to match. I'm just marking them for my own future reference. It's important to have filenames that actually describe the content of the image and aren't just a random number. Dcoetzee 08:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a relief :). Again I just kept connection with those original filenames. EvgenyGenkin 20:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the image Graph_isomorphism.svg

I appreciate the contribution to the Isomorphism entry on wikipedia. The diagram is very good but I believe that the top graph's vertices are labeled incorrectly. I believe that Vertex 3 and Vertex 4 need to be switched to match the adjacency matrix. If I had an ounce of artisitic ability, I might attempt to fix it myself, but I know my limits.

You are correct (the same problem existed in the bottom graph). Thank you! Dcoetzee 06:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Prison Break

Salut, J'ai vu que tu avais supprimer l'image "Image:Affiche PB 1.jpg" que j'avais importée. J'avoue que j'avais un gros doute sur son autorisation donnée par FlickReviewer. Du coup, je ne l'utilisais pas encore.

Pourrais-tu vérifier les images suivantes également trouvées sur Flickr.com : Image:Affiche PB 2.jpg et Image:Scofield 1.jpg ? Sont-elles libres ou bien faudrait-il les supprimer comme l'autre ?

Merci.

(ps : J'espère que tu comprends le français sinon je peux répondre en anglais)

--Heynoun 15:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Salut, Heynoun. Cette image était supprimée parce que, bien que l'auteur de l'image a donné autorisation pour l'utiliser, l'auteur de l'affiche dans l'image ne l'en a donné pas, et les lois de "freedom of panorama" qui pourrait permettre cette utilité dans un autre pays n'existent pas en Belgique. Quelqu'un sur IRC m'a montré l'image originairement. Peut-être je devais l'offre pour supprimer par Commons:Deletion requests. J'espère que mes actions sont plus clairs. Dcoetzee 09:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tabby_kitten_profile_standing_facing_right.jpg

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you. Siebrand 08:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Image:Tabby_kitten_sitting.jpg

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you. Siebrand 08:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Image:Brasão de Jundiaí 1..jpg

Hi. Would you please be more specific about the location of the watermark you mentioned in this edit? Thanks!

I was mistaken - I accidentally tagged it while tagging a large number of Reynaldo's images. Dcoetzee 01:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Administrative notice

Deutsch

Dear Dcoetzee/Archive 2009-02-15. I am writing to you to inform you that because of inactivity, you may lose your adminship on Commons.

Commons has a new policy on admin activity, Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, taken into use on June 13, 2007 (after a two-week poll on the proposed policy's talk page).

If you want to keep your adminship, you have to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days. Note that if you don't make 5 admin actions in the following 5 months, you will then lose the adminship anyways.

Thank you,
abf /talk to me/ 18:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Inactivity

Hi Dcoetzee/Archive 2009-02-15. Thanks for signing at this page. Please note that your sysop-rights will be removed the next time we run an inactivity-section without any new notice, if you do not do 5 admin-actions till then.
Thank you for your long and helpfull work on Commons! abf /talk to me/ 12:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused - I already have done at least 5 admin actions since signing that page. How are these actions determined, so that I can check the count for myself? Thanks. Dcoetzee 03:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Uck kla logo.svg

Hi,

Could you restore the version of the file so that i can import it on the french Wikipedia ? We could also import it on the english wikipedia who uses a photo instead of the svg file. Tieum512

Sure, I wasn't aware that the French Wikipedia permits fair use images (and I had some trouble navigating their upload interface myself, alors meme que je peux lire francais). I've uploaded it to the English Wikipedia at en:Image:Uck kla logo.svg and you can grab a copy from there. Dcoetzee 20:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. French wikipedia does not allow Fair use but we have an exception for coat of arms and some other things like logos. Tieum512 20:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted image request

Hey there,

I see you are the closing admin on those images from the Jokela school shooting. It would have been nice if my request could have been honoured, or at least responded to, but as it was ignored completely I must now ask you if you could view, recover and e-mail me the deleted pics, so that I can upload them locally to Wikinews under fair use rationales. (I don't think the first one of the three was used there, but have to check.) Thanks a lot in advance, Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 06:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I forgot. :-( I'll get them to you. Dcoetzee 18:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I've tried again, via Commons this time. I suspect your anit-spam gear is to blame here. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 12:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, you're right, was spam filtering and I didn't spot it. I've sent you the images now. :-) Dcoetzee 02:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

pancake sorting

Your diagram for pancake sorting has been used on a very popular website! Check it out! Cool, huh? -63.80.111.2 18:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:1933_Silver_Arrow_body.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:1933_Silver_Arrow_body.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The user you want to inform is User:Dschwen for this image. Dcoetzee 05:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. Apparently the javascript hits the last contributor instead of the first. Oh well. I tagged 20 similar images - so I'm sure he got the point. Thanks for the heads up. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 06:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

Hey Jmabel, just wanted to say hi, met you at the Seattle meetup and I really admire your photograph work. You suggested that a lot of articles might benefit from existing photos, so I hope to put some effort into matching more photos to articles. I've also been exploring the city more recently and I'll keep on the look out for good photo opportunities. :-) Take care. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I went through the articles specifically on individual buildings today. There were about 8 photos I could add. But glad to hear you are interested in taking this on, I won't go through the restest of the Seattle en-wiki topics. - Jmabel ! talk 06:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Flip bot

Request such a bot please Pharrar (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Um, I have no idea what you're talking about. What's a flip bot and why should I request one? Dcoetzee (talk) 21:06, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Nary_to_binary_tree_conversion.png

Hi! I've added an SVG version of Image:Nary_to_binary_tree_conversion.png: Image:N-ary_to_binary.svg. I've also fixed two problems with the image – one edge was accidentally black, and it had two nodes named G. I've replaced your image on w:Binary tree, and updated the LISP example accordingly. A number of other language wikipedias have also used your image, but I can not update them all.--Cyhawk (talk) 19:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Theraphosa_blondii.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Theraphosa_blondii.jpg 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

dave pape (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

File:Mother_cat_lying_with_tan_kitten.jpg 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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

69.112.61.79 01:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Dcoetzee!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Yuri Gurevich.jpg is uncategorized since 23 January 2009. BotMultichillT 05:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Yuri Gurevich bust.jpg is uncategorized since 23 January 2009. BotMultichillT 05:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Administrative notice

Deutsch

Dear Dcoetzee/Archive 2009-02-15. I am writing to you to inform you that because of inactivity, you may lose your adminship on Commons.

Commons has a new policy on admin activity, Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, taken into use on June 13, 2007 (after a two-week poll on the proposed policy's talk page).

If you want to keep your adminship, you have to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days. Note that if you don't make 5 admin actions in the following 5 months, you will then lose the adminship anyways.

Thank you — Mike.lifeguard 16:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)