Last modified on 1 September 2013, at 21:38

User talk:Omegatron

Return to "Omegatron" page.

Welcome to my talk page.

I will respond much more quickly if you talk to me on en:User talk:Omegatron. I am leaving this page open for comments as some think it's important, but I do not check it as often.

Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.

Start a new talk topic.

Commons:Babel
en
fr-1

AdminEdit

You are now an admin here on Commons. Congratulations! villy 20:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Hooray! — Omegatron 14:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

GalleryEdit

Please stop adding images to my gallery that I did not create. — Omegatron 21:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I just had to orphanize those pictures (since they're redundant to the SVG versions), and I didn't actually look at the contents of your gallery page. Please note that those images are going to be deleted anyway. --Emc² (Contact Me Nuvola apps email.png) 12:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
They're not redundant yet. The SVG replacements are inferior as small thumbnails, there are no SVG replacements for the other images in the series, and both BJT symbol NPN.svg and BJT symbol PNP.svg are broken at anything other than full size (there should be an arrowhead on both). This fanatical replacement of PNG images is getting annoying. — Omegatron 15:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps they're not, but I found them on the Redundant category. Actually, me and Red devil 666 are trying to delete as many PNG versions as possible, and since you're an admin you may easily understand that deleting redundant images is fully compliant with commons policy. --Emc² (Contact Me Nuvola apps email.png) 19:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't like the sound of that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with PNG images, and there's no reason they should be replaced without actually checking to see if you're improving the articles. Obviously, if the SVG is superior in a given instance, the PNG should be replaced with it, but there's no reason to replace "as many as possible". They should be handled on a case-by-case basis by the people who work with them and put them in articles. Instead of rampant deletion of PNGs, why don't you notify image authors and users on talk pages that the SVGs are now available for their use? They can decide if the replacements are actually better. — Omegatron 23:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I think you ignored that bit about SVGs being superior for printing. Ayacop 17:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Wrong. SVGs are not inherently better than PNGs. If you replace a beautifully-drawn 1600x1600 PNG with a crappily-drawn SVG, you've degraded the quality of the image. If you replace a decent PNG with an SVG that looks identical on your computer but the renders wrong on the site (For instance, the above transistor diagrams used to use an SVG arrow which didn't render at all, images that use the Symbol font for Greek characters, etc.), you've degraded the quality of the image. PNGs should only be replaced with SVGs if they are actually an improvement. SVGs can be better, but they aren't better just because they're SVG. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp, yet I continue to see people replacing decent PNGs with crappy SVGs. It needs to stop. — Omegatron 16:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
No problem if you argue quality. BTW, if you see SVGs not doing on WP what they do in a browser, please add a tag Category:Pictures showing a librsvg bug. -- Ayacop 17:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
That's a good category to have. — Omegatron 16:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

png and svgEdit

I answered in Pfctdayelise's talk. Please, read here. --RED DEVIL 666 05:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Checker backgroundEdit

Yes, I'm responsible ;-). You can see the story at Commons:Village_pump_archive-26#Coloured_"Image"_namespace. Sanbec 08:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)Sanbec 08:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Category TagsEdit

I have chaged the category tags from Category:Electrical symbols to Category:Power Supplies as it is much easier to find the symbols that way (especially as the controlled and uncontrolled versions of the voltage source are so far apart). I have also put SVG versions in that category. Jjbeard 23:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

They should remain in the electrical symbols category, too. There is no reason to remove that. — Omegatron 01:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
But the Power Supplies category is a subcategory in the Electrical Symbols category. Jjbeard 00:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
It shouldn't be. Such a category would have to be called Category:Power supply symbols. Where would photographs of power supply components or things like Image:Battery.svg go? Also, none of those objects is really a power supply. A voltage source connected to nothing is not supplying power, for instance. Ground is not a "supply". — Omegatron 02:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough, I'll concede this one - it makes sense to change the name of the category to Category:Power supply symbols. However, I still think that grounds and things should go in there, as it makes the most sense for then to be in there. (Besides, a PSU that is not plugged in is not supplying power...but it is still a power supply). Just having them floating around in a category that will get filled with every other miscellaneous electrical symbol is not going to help anyone find them. Perhaps we should call the new category "Voltage and current supply symbols" or something like that to take account of the fact that some of them are references...
I'll get on moving these symbols to a new category if you think that is a good idea. Sorry about this,Jjbeard 02:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

ogg FLACEdit

Can you explain how to create and upload ogg FLAC? I am used to .FLAC files. — Omegatron 01:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Given an uncompressed file, you can encode it as Ogg FLAC with the --ogg option to the flac command, i.e. "flac --ogg". (I'm assuming you're using the command line to run the "flac" command. If you use a GUI, you're on your own.) User:dbenbenn 13:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
If you use Audacity, you can encode a FLAC file as OGG by importing the .flac file using File > Import > Audio. Then you can export it as .ogg using File > Export > Ogg Vorbis. Sorry, I don't even know what ogg FLAC is.

doggitydogs 00:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, Ogg is just a wrapper, and you can put various file types inside it. The most popular is Ogg Vorbis, but you can also put FLAC inside it for lossless compression. This would be good for uploading a high-quality FLAC version of a sound recording, for instance, and then a low-quality Vorbis version for listening as a separate upload. — Omegatron 03:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Different types of cannon balls Vasa.jpgEdit

What are the non-round shapes used for? — Omegatron 00:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly sure, but I believe they are used to increase the "width" of the flight path to damage rigging, mast, and sails. -- Chris 73 08:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Commons-l subscriptionEdit

Hello Omegatron,

as per Commons talk:Administrators, I am asking all admins to subscribe to commons-l, a mailing list for Wikimedia Commons policy and project discussion. Since many admins are only on Commons infrequently, this is a good way to alert people about important happenings. The mailing list is nominally multilingual, but predominantly English.

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 23:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I hate mailing lists. Why can't we have a normal discussion forum or just a "Village Pump for Admins" to put on our watchlists? — Omegatron 18:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
The problem with Commons in general is that admins tend to have a "home project" where they spend most of their time, and visit Commons less frequently (there are exceptions, of course). This means that it's very hard to reach people when an important policy change takes place. Is there a particular reason you hate mailing lists?--Eloquence 22:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I do that too on en. But I definitely check my Commons watchlist "at least every few weeks". Keeping people up-to-date on policy changes would be accomplished much better with an Admin noticeboard that shows major events chronologicallywith links to policy pages, online archives of discussions, etc. — Omegatron 02:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
That's probably a good idea as well -- not sure how well it will work in multiple languages. I'll put that on my to-do list.--Eloquence 10:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Commons:Featured pictures candidates/Image:Ferrofluid large spikes.jpg 2Edit

Resubmitted. Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 16:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: No licenseEdit

we admins can't wait several hours. The person who uploads the picture must make himself sure that he has chosen the right license and written the description. In Commons many images are uploaded every minute. I can't wait several hours and run after pictures. The user is obliged to choose a license and I am forced to put that tag if he doesnt' choose a license. --ßøuñçêNuvola apps email.pngY2K 23:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The licenses were being added as you added the template. You shouldn't be tagging such images at all. Leave such tasks for bots, which can wait for several hours. I'm an admin, too, and we have a lot more important, human tasks to do than tagging unlicensed images. — Omegatron 23:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Omegatron. Bouncey doesn't have to wait forever, but tagging an image after four minutes is somewhat overstrung IMO. Torvindus 02:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
These were tagged within two minutes of being uploaded. Maybe a few hours is too long, and you should get the attention of the uploader while they're still around, but c'mon. This job should be done by a bot, and we admins can use our brains and our admin powers to do something a bot can't do, like categorize images, delete files, etc. — Omegatron 04:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You have a fanEdit

See How_to_take_pictures_for_Wikipedia. I'm not sure what should be done with this page... Thoughts? --Gmaxwell 21:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Hehe. Not really. That's from an old discussion that I started. The page should be expanded and shouldn't have my name on it. I'll do a little, but I am supposed to be learning from the page, not teaching.  :-) — Omegatron 23:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Omegatron_modular_SVG_Example.svgEdit

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/− 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 04:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Admin newsEdit

Hello,

If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) P.S.: Pardon if this is a repeat (bot debugging...)

'images should be categorized'Edit

Discussion moved to Commons talk:First steps/SortingOmegatron 16:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

OptocoupleEdit

i want to find some informations about optocouple circuit and i want to build a circuit about count which use led 7 but i don't know how to do

Check Optocouple, Seven-segment display, and Counter. — Omegatron 15:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

New TC schematicsEdit

I like the drawings. Reddi 19:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. — Omegatron 00:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Administrative noticeEdit

Deutsch

Hi. This message is sent out to you because you are an administrator on Commons, and you made little use (or no use) of the admin tools lately: less than 5 times in the last five months.

Commons has a new policy on admin activity, Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, taken into use on June 13, 2007 (after a poll among users). According to that policy, admins who use their tools infrequently will be asked whether they still need their adminship, and if they do not respond or require them the removal of the tools will be requested.

If you feel you still need your admin tools, please sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days from the date this message was sent out. However, if you then don't make 5 admin actions in the following 5 months, you will lose the adminship without any notice.

This is not a comment on the considerable help you have given to the project in the past but reflects the wish of the community to see active administrators and to ensure that possible security breaches are minimized.

This message is sent out by bot. If you want to give feedback on it, you can do so here — 08:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

De-admin policyEdit

Hi - I noticed your comments and thought I'd respond. Concerns was shown about the number of inactive admins in both March & April on a number of pages. At the start of May the policy page was in place and amendmentss were made and discussed. This was advertised on both the Admin board and the Village pump. A vote was then started with a closing time (quite normal in conventional voting - an open ended arrangement would be unusual). Again this was advertised on both the Admin board and the Village pump more than once if I recall correctly.

As you have responded to say that you still require your rights then nothing changes for now. I hope this clarifies matters but let me know if I can help --Herby talk thyme 09:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

BabelEdit

Hmm... looks like we have a little in common. :) doggitydogs 00:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki:addsectionEdit

The new version looks a little bit...clunky and less eye-catching than it was before, since the edit tab is so small. I am restoring the plus sign unless there is consensus at the big house to use "add comment". I know Wikinews likes clarifying things to users (talk is "collaboration", move is "rename", and so on), but using "add comment" when Commons still uses traditional wording is a bit out of line, isn't it? —O () 20:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

"Clunky and less eye-catching"? The whole point of changing it is to make it more eye-catching for newcomers who don't know about the "new section" functionality.
What do you mean by Commons using "traditional wording"? — Omegatron 23:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, traditional wording means that we use the default terms like "+", "edit", "move" and so on. "Add comment" is definitely suitable for Wikinews, as their community presumably loves to clarify on the spot, however Commons and all of the other Wikimedia projects are not so, and use traditional wording. News format (which is exactly what Wikinews is) is informal, and every other Wikimedia wiki contrasts that. I saw the discussion on en.wikipedia, and Andre has hit the nail on the head about these changes. Even more, all proposals that may have objections from others across Wikimedia work on a consensus system, not a majority system, and certainly not a plurality system. (Andre's original comment was tailored for Wikipedia, but seeing that it has spread to here with no consensus, you get the idea) —O () 02:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Forgot to say, Commons is also multilingual, so users who don't understand English all that well would not know what "add comment" means, but would know what "+" means in their native language. —O () 02:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, traditional wording means that we use the default terms like "+", "edit", "move" and so on.

So we should not even consider changing them from the system defaults? That would be a bit silly, don't you think? They're editable for a reason.

"Add comment" is definitely suitable for Wikinews, as their community presumably loves to clarify on the spot, however Commons and all of the other Wikimedia projects are not so, and use traditional wording.

The only other difference I see on Wikinews is "collaboration" instead of "discussion". But I'd say that's not really as appropriate here, where we're usually discussing images, not "collaborating" on them. (We're doing both, but I think "discussion" is more appropriate here in the general case.)

I saw the discussion on en.wikipedia, and Andre has hit the nail on the head about these changes. ... (Andre's original comment was tailored for Wikipedia, but seeing that it has spread to here with no consensus, you get the idea)

Hmm?

Even more, all proposals that may have objections from others across Wikimedia work on a consensus system, not a majority system, and certainly not a plurality system.

So where are the objections? Consensus is based on a system of good reasons. You change things if there's a good reason to do so. I've explained my good reasons for making this (minor) change.
Similarly, consensus doesn't mean that you oppose things just because they change the status quo; you oppose things because there's a good reason to oppose them.
You seem to be arguing that this shouldn't be changed just on the principle of not changing things. But why? I haven't seen any actual reasons. Do you have any actual objection to this change? Does it cause an actual problem?

Commons is also multilingual, so users who don't understand English all that well would not know what "add comment" means, but would know what "+" means in their native language.

So we should change all the links on the site to symbols for people who don't understand English? All the tabs and navigation links, "Village pump", "Log out", and "Contact us"? — Omegatron 17:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

GalleriesEdit

Yes - it was unnecessary. PM 17:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


Image:BJT_symbol_PNP.pngEdit

Image deletion warning Image:BJT_symbol_PNP.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zedh 17:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


Image:JFET_N-Channel.svgEdit

Image deletion warning Image:JFET_N-Channel.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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zedh 19:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


Image:JFET_P-Channel.svgEdit

Image deletion warning Image:JFET_P-Channel.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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zedh 19:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


Image:BJT_symbol_NPN.pngEdit

Image deletion warning Image:BJT_symbol_NPN.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zedh 20:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Your voteEdit

It appears you voted on something that closed in June of this year --Herby talk thyme 20:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I did, yes. Did you read it? — Omegatron 05:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes but
  1. The poll is over
  2. This is not en wp but a separate wiki community with its own views
If you want to start up a new debate that is just fine and I look forward to seeing it and joing in, thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikimedia Commons does not make decisions by consensus? — Omegatron 00:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Sure - the active community had scattered conversations about the subject in early spring, this came together is a discussion on a policy (announced), announced a vote a couple of times at least (every vote must have an ending or nothing would happen anywhere) and the active community agreed by consensus that they wished to take the approach that is now policy. I think if you wish to look at this further you should probably post it on a community page somewhere so that the active community can have their say too - thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

TransistorEdit

Image normalization? What do you mean? Can you please group all the deletion requests in a single section if they are all for the same reasons? — Omegatron 20:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello ! I though it would be better to replace all the different symbols present here and there and in the sub categories (and for some of them in other places), by one normalized library for bipolar, for JFET, etc. The normalization is done following Image:Electrical symbols library.svg, and the recommandations present on english wikipedia, and recently on french wikipedia. It would be great to give me your comments on this operation. Thanks ! --Zedh 20:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Can you link directly to discussion? — Omegatron 05:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, here's the link for interested people .. --Zedh 00:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Administrative noticeEdit

Deutsch

Dear Omegatron. 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)

InactivityEdit

Hi Omegatron. 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)

Why? — Omegatron 14:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


MacroEdit

Hello, notice the page Commons:Macro where I also encourage to use some « MacroStudio » using Image:Macro A4.svg. You can also see my first such macro on my user page. Yug (talk) 17:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Nice photos! — Omegatron (talk) 00:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Administrative noticeEdit

Deutsch

Dear Omegatron. 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 16:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I am writing to let you know that as you did not sign the page mentioned above within the permitted 30 day period your admin rights have been removed for inactivity, as required by our policy. We very much appreciate the work you have done here, and hope you will feel free to re-apply for admin rights if at some time in the future you feel able to contribute again. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing imagesEdit

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Omegatron!

Tip: Add categories to your images

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:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

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 22:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Soldering a 0805.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Soldering a 0402.jpg, which was produced or nominated 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.

Notification about possible deletionEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, such as a copyright issue.
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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Leyo 15:09, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Spectrogram_-_Aphex_Twin_-_Windowlicker.pngEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Spectrogram_-_Aphex_Twin_-_Windowlicker.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 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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Wrapped in Grey (talk) 15:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Seriously? — Omegatron (talk) 23:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Operational transconductance amplifier symbol.svgEdit

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Operational transconductance amplifier symbol.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

JuTa 22:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

It was deleted here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Operational_transconductance_amplifier_symbol.svg&diff=next&oldid=35011228Omegatron (talk) 23:06, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Gnuplot_diagramsEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Gnuplot_diagrams has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Pyfisch (talk) 07:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Gschem.pngEdit

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Gschem.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

JuTa 21:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Fdisk showing 160 GB disk.pngEdit

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Fdisk showing 160 GB disk.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

JuTa 21:38, 1 September 2013 (UTC)