J JMesserly

Thank you for posting a note to me. -J JMesserly (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token faadade0e0fe126eb67382a741c7bd9d

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Toronto cat that observes naming convention

Consider how navigating to and from the histories of other cities such as Paris, Berlin, New York City are possible because they have a cat that observes naming convention. [placename] in the [decade]s .

Filling out the items of the template that generates this is simplicity itself, but it only works for cities that observes naming conventions for decades. For this reason I have created Category:Toronto in the 1890s please do not catredirect it.

Toronto in the 1890s need not replace historic images of Toronto cats, since not all files are images. There is an ogg movie of Teddy Roosevelt as part of the navbox for San Francisco in the 1900s.

I propose it be a subcat of Toronto of the 1890s. The historic images navigation depends on hardcoded multiple decade regions of time that make sense now, so I think that cat should not be altered at this time. Thanks. -J JMesserly (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your note to me. Sorry for the delay in responding.

You brought up two points. First, the issue of the category naming. I have no objection to the "Toronto in the x" naming format. In fact, a month ago or so, I switched over the name of the main Toronto category (Category:Toronto by decade) in anticipation that I or someone else (upon finding some block(s) of time) would switch over all the "Historic images of Toronto" subcats to the "Toronto in the x" format (primarily to conform to the "Canada in the x" parent cats). So you and I are in agreement about where we want to end up. What I don't agree with is making the switchover in a half-assed way (pardon the expression - not meaning to be offensive). I'm a firm believer that consistency in a group of categories is far preferable to an incomplete attempt at moving towards a naming convention. Either make the switch comprehensively, or wait until it can be done comprehensively. Creating one new category for the 1890s, and moving one image, and leaving it at that (not that that was necessarily your intention) doesn't really help anything. I know doing a complete switchover is not a small task, and can't be done overnight, but there should at least be one or two editors committed to seeing it through before we start. I am happy to help, and once done with Toronto, I'd also be happy to plug away at the Historical images of Ottawa and Historical images of Montreal categories. Are you familiar with any tools that might make the job easier?

Second, you suggested that the Historical images of Toronto cats could remain as subcats of the Toronto in the x cats. If you were suggesting that because you thought I was wed to the "Historical images of..." nomenclature, then it was very nice of you, but it is not necessary. If the intent is to move towards the "Toronto in the x" format, then there is no benefit to keeping the old subcats around - doing so wouldn't help the average Commons user one whit.

I hope that this has been helpful. --skeezix1000 (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)--skeezix1000 (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes- I have done these sort of bot runs in the tens of thousands of pages and unless they have broken/shut down pywikipedia then the actual mechanics of the move will be trivial. The process for consensus regarding such transformations will be the time consuming part. But that is way down the road. Current status of this project is to stabilize the generalized Template:Places by decade template, using the 1890s as a case study to ID issues. For illustration, I needed an example for Toronto, so I did a single image move before coming to the conclusion I should just subcat it. I appreciate the comment on non comprehensive approaches to problems and your flexibility on the historical images of x naming. Some folks have strong feelings regarding categories having to do with their locality and I wanted to avoid any such turf treading. When the time comes, I will contact you regarding the Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal switchover bot run details prior to executing it.

Hopefully, this will help visitors to more quickly find illustrative material without having to resort to commons' unintelligible though taxonomically proper categorization structures. Unfortunately, the fullest application of this approach is encumbered by lack of support for string functions. The wikias have been using it just fine for at least a year and a half, but the foundation wikis don't yet. Anyway, it is in bugzilla and if you care to vote on bugzilla:6455 in support, please do. Regards-J JMesserly (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

You deleted my comment

Please explain why you deleted my comment. I've reverted. Andy Mabbett (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry- Inadvertent from merge of edits. Further comments on places by decade talk page. -J JMesserly (talk) 02:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Non-granular addresses

The answer to the question you asked on the microformats-new mailing list is, for addresses which are unstructured or of unknown composition, to use hCard's "label" property. If you have any further questions about microformats, please feel free to ask them at the Microformats Project. The proposal to improve hCard markup for named lcoations also refers, but is, as yet, unadopted. Andy Mabbett (talk) 19:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. The microformats.org community is the authority on this matter. You are free to add your opinion to the discussion on the mailing list. -J JMesserly (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

That's not my opinion; that's the microformat community's consensus on the matter. It's also what's used on many thousands of articles on Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (talk) 21:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I will look forward to the conclusion from the microformats.org thread discussion. You may add your input there if you like.-J JMesserly (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

That's twice you've suggested I do that. Perhaps you've forgotten this edit summary, for which you subsequently had to apologise. Andy Mabbett (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Please don't badger or harass me. Your response is noted. -J JMesserly (talk) 21:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

"badger or harass"?!? I've helpfully provided a solution to a question you've asked and a problem you seem to be experiencing. Andy Mabbett (talk) 22:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer of assistance. I requested a response from the authorities in the microformats.org community, and I am getting the authoritative answers I require. -J JMesserly (talk) 22:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I have not made an "offer of assistance"; I have given you assistance. There are no authorities in that community, and my answer is as authoritative as any you will get there. If you have reason to doubt the veracity of the answer I have given, please state them, in order that I may put your mind at rest. Andy Mabbett (talk) 22:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the clarification. I accept the authority of the microformats.org community and will follow their guidance on this matter. I can read the hcard hcalendar specs just fine. If you have objections to approaches I favor, I will take note of them and will make adjustments if I think your POV has merit. Fair enough? -J JMesserly (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

If you don't know what level address parts are use hCard's "label" field instead - that's precisely what it's for. Andy Mabbett (talk) 22:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Really, thanks for the pointers, but as I said, I can read specs. This fact is amply discussed on microformats.org. If you are interested, see my response to this in the microformats thread. -J JMesserly (talk) 23:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

You may be able to read specs, but that's merely academic, when you appear not to be following sound advice you have been given both here and on the microformats mailing list. Andy Mabbett (talk) 11:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Anyone happening upon this note is referred to the microformats thread pointed to above to determine what is a fair representation of the facts. The current status is that the flaw in Mr. Mabbett's opinion was pointed out by Brian Suda. The current proposal suggested in Kevin's note is the plan of record.-J JMesserly (talk) 17:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Brian Suda has pointed out no such "flaw", though here he is saying "Any ADR that has no structured data is just a LABEL"; and here he says (my emboldening; for CMS read "wiki") "if your CMS can NOT add the fine grained support for different ADR sub-properties then it should be class="label" instead of class="adr"".

Google maps and the like are quite happy to recezive unstructured, "label"-type addresses:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?&q=Bailie%27s+Bar+Christchurch+New+Zealand

I also note that you again fail to address the matter of the bogus date metadata which you are causing to be emitted. Andy Mabbett (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Not the forum for this discussion. Sorry Andy. -J JMesserly (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Your talk page is a place for people to raise issues about your editing; it is certainly the place to refute false claims which you make here. Andy Mabbett (talk) 19:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Fine. I have stated the forum where I believe such technical issues are best resolved. You have made your point. -J JMesserly (talk) 20:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Toronto cats

Per our earlier discussion, I am ready to go ahead with the bot run to do a catmove of all images in the categories following the pattern in the following example move:

Category:Historic images of Toronto, 1890s -> Category:Toronto in the 1890s

The navigation would use the format now found in Category:Toronto_in_the_1890s if you prefer the bolder format with the pictures in the french examples on my talk page, let me know.

Thanks for the note. By all means, go head with the switch (for Ottawa too). Thanks for doing that. Don't add the images -- they are an unnecessary distraction with little value for a template at the top of a page of thumbnail images. As for the template, there is unnecessary repetition between the Navigating the History of Toronto portion and the History of Toronto field in the Navigating the 1890s field. It's cumbersome. --skeezix1000 (talk) 15:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I will do the same cat move for Ottowa. Ok? -J JMesserly (talk) 21:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The images have more value if they are from subcats buried deeply under the cat where the navbox is. Since this will not be the case with either Toronto or Ottowa cats after the move, the argument is weaker. In any case, it is a matter of editorial preference. I presume from earlier remarks that you prefer minimal UI, so on that score, I created a new version eliminating the lines that can be eliminated via parameters. Have a look at Category:Toronto in the 1890s. I can probably hack it down further, and I want I minimalist flavor of this thing for who prefer it. Let me know if it is more more like what you had in mind. If not, I would like to make whatever adjustments to the template that would make it ideal from your POV. I think you understand about the template's dynamic nature and that the rows for Toronto/Ottowa will be populated with decades after the move is complete, and the Canada row will be populated with whatever provinces or major cities have decade cats for that decade. -J JMesserly (talk) 00:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

It looks far better. I think that's great to build in the flexibility - very helpful. Much thanks. Good work. --skeezix1000 (talk) 13:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Presumably you would like Montreal be cat moved too? If you prefer the Monhist templates and those corresponding to Toronto and Ottowa, then it would be a trivial operation to alter them to change the values so they could be used in place of the {{Time and place is}} templates. Which do you prefer? -J JMesserly (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

←(undent) Montreal should be moved too - I hadn't noticed that we'd omitted it earlier. As for tohist and monhist templates, how would propose altering them? There is something to be said for a simple template, even if used in conjunction (rather than in place of) the time and place template.

Thanks for all of your efforts and patience in this regard. --skeezix1000 (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't recommend it, but if I were doing it I'd would just search/replace "Historic images of Toronto," and replace with "Toronto in the". The problem is that for each city and province you need a new template, and these are only bilingual. It is straightforward to make Time and Place a multilingual template, using the same methods that User:Slomox and multichill are using on templates such as {{Information}}. Further, such templates by their nature have less breadth of scope. It is of course a decision that the people that care most about a cat should make, and I think you best represent those interests, not me. So I've said my peace. If you feel ambivalent, I will put in the form I described earlier. But it's your call- I can go along with whichever way you want. Any navigation is better than none.-J JMesserly (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for the delay in responding. Obviously, the "Historic images of Toronto," links should be replaced with "Toronto in the". That's fairly easy. As for other changes, you know I am a bif fan of simple navigational templates. I'm not opposed to change, or improving the templates, as long as at the end of the day there is a template that solely (in the case of tohist) deals with Toronto history with links to two or three other parent cats (without navigational links to other subjects or places). That's my two cents. Others may feel differently. --skeezix1000 (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

No urgency on this- no problem with delays. Simple is good, but oftentimes simple doesn't scale. Shall we have tohist type templates for all cities and all provinces of the world? Of course, the reality is we can address this scaling problem downstream- if and when it materializes. Since you care most about these cats- I can go along with your POV. As part of the move, the new cats will wind up with the corresponding templates tohist etc. (though I believe you are mistaken). Ok? My larger goal is satisfied- the new cats will follow convention so they can be a valid destination for standardized inbound links. -J JMesserly (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, J JMesserly. You have new messages at Berean Hunter's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

List of HVDC projects

The existing HVDC power line between Spain and Morocco is missing in the graphic at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HVDC_Europe_annotated.svg which appears at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HVDC_projects As reference to that power line refer to e.g. page 17 of http://www.ecn.nl/fileadmin/ecn/units/bs/ENCOURAGED/Final_Brussels/encouraged-brussel-2006_vailati.pdf

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, J JMesserly!

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.

CategorizationBot (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

• Image:Donaldson140.jpg was uncategorized on 23 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Dryer with smart load control switch.jpg

File:Dryer with smart load control switch.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Túrelio (talk) 18:57, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Aircraft categories

Hi, I worked a little on your A-3 categories and redirected for example "A3D Skywarrior 144867" to "Douglas A-3 Skywarrior (BuNo 144867)" as I think this is more logical. The A3D was re-designated A-3 in 1962 and this aircraft made it from A3D-2T, to TA-3B, to NA-3B, to NRA-3B and to N877RS. Therefore I think it is easiest to identify the aircraft with the given category, and to identify other Skywarriors. It was nice to make the category "A-3 Skywarrior warbirds and museum aircraft‎", although there are no A-3 warbirds that I know of so I removed the category "warbirds". Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Owen Barfield18.jpg

File:Owen Barfield18.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!

Pleclown (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Thury HVDC system.svg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Thury HVDC system.svg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Please do not use {{Own}} for a picture from a book, which you did not write on your own.

-- — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 18:28, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Johannes, thank you for your note and I apologize for the delay in response. I do not log on often anymore. Is there still an issue with this? I edited the page to clearly indicate that that my own minor deriviative contributions to the image (conversion and some reeditted for clarity)- that whatever ownership rights there might be for that derivative addition are are released under creative commons. The original work is linked to from that page and is public domain as you will see. This follows guidance on how to handle derivative works of public domain material as described in the article mentioned in the template you used above. . This was work I did over a decade ago so I am a little fuzzy but it was not an autotranslation because of some lack of clarity at the bottom of the image where the text got cluttered. Anyway- if there is some better tag for derivative works then feel free to apply it to the page. I certainly do not claim authorship of some of the components and clearly state authorship and source of those components. So are we good here? J JMesserly (talk)

File:Tyler Merbler-JesusMagaHatPosterAtCapitol.jpg

File:Tyler Merbler-JesusMagaHatPosterAtCapitol.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 07:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

File:At the Time of the Louisville Flood- Bourke-White photo 1937 (colorized).png

File:At the Time of the Louisville Flood- Bourke-White photo 1937 (colorized).png 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!

Yann (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)