User talk:Rocket000/Archive 8

	This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the this page.
	Archive 1 - Archive 2 - Archive 3 - Archive 4 - Archive 5 - Archive 6 - Archive 7 - Archive 8

Category:Commons_templates-sk

Category discussion notification

Category:Commons_templates-sk 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!

89.211.107.41 19:02, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

copyright infringementto report

Hello Rocket000, I would like to report a copyright infringement by the file File:Déploiement_SAS_1.jpg. The guy who uploaded it said in the template that it's personal work, but it's obviously a screenshot from a BBC TV-series called "Great SAS Missions" - you can see it on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLL-OSs3-Dg at around 3:00. Regards rob1bureau (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I deleted it. Rocket000 (talk) 19:08, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Elachista apicipunctella.jpg

Hello Rocket000, It seems that the source of the above file cannot be reached anymore. And that goes for all files taken from http://wibe.ath.cx/hyonteiset/ and there are quite a lot of them. Is that a problem? Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 18:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

That's unfortunate as it was a good source for images, but no, it shouldn't be a problem. We can't expect web pages to remain static. Rocket000 (talk) 19:10, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

It seems most of these pictures can now be found at http://www.insects.fi/insectimages/browser. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 06:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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 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!

  — Jeff G. ツ 03:56, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

• File:! 标题文字 !! 标题文字 !! 标题文字

有序列表项

• 无序列表项

rocketonavigation

Hello my friend,
I just had an idea: the problem of {{Lepidoptera}} and other templates of Category:Plant Navigation Templates is that :

• you have to create a rigid/complex template taking familia,subfamilia,tribus,genus,species parameters
• you cannot have the template recursively call another higher template.
• the template is complex to create (ok, not too complex, but much more difficult than just copy-pasting a Taxonavigation
• you have a different process for each groups (Lepidoptera species use {{Lepidoptera}}

The perfect solution would be to have an include system in {{Taxonavigation}}.
For exemple, Hieraaetus would use:

 {{Taxonavigation|
 include=Accipitridae|
 Genus|Hieraaetus|
 authority=xxx}}.

Where Template:Accipitridae would contain:

 {{TaxonavigationIncluded|
 classification=IOC|
 Regnum|Animalia|
 Phylum|Chordata|
 Classis|Aves|
 Ordo|Accipitriformes|
 Familia|Accipitridae}}

Maybe, Template:Accipitridae would use {{TaxonavigationIncluded}} that would:

• avoid the <div> in the calling category (like Hieraaetus)
• show the <div> in the calling template (like Template:Accipitridae) to have a sexy display in the template
• add a hidden cat to the template (like Category:Taxonavigation include templates)
• have parameter classification=
• have parameter include= to be able to include a higher level TaxonavigationIncluded
• not have parameter authority= (should be only in the final category)

What do you think of that ?
The Template:Accipitridae should be very simple to create, perhaps with an automatic documentation provided by {{TaxonavigationIncluded}}.
Of course we would use templates for big taxons only (Phylum,Classis, big ordro and big familia). That recommandation would be documented.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:58, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

If you want to do some testings:

• modified {{Taxonavigation}} can be tested with {{Liné1SandBoxTemplate}}
• future {{TaxonavigationIncluded}} can be tested
• future {{Accipitridae}} can be tested with {{Liné1SandBoxTemplate3}}
• modified Category:Hieraaetus can be tested with User:Liné1/sandbox

Remaining bugs visible in User:Liné1/sandbox are:

• Familia is bold (due to the fact that the Familia is last in {{Liné1SandBoxTemplate3}} )
• Genus is not bold when it should (due to the fact that a {{Taxonavigation}} or {{Liné1SandBoxTemplate}} with only 1 level has not bold)

My sandbox is your sandbox ;-)

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 15:29, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry my friend, I've been a bit busy lately. I'll have more time for Commons soon and will do some thinking/experimenting with your idea. Rocket000 (talk) 23:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

file rename request

Hi, please can you change the following 3 filenames from Cis fuscipes to Cis boleti:

• File:Cis fuscipes female.jpg
• File:Cis fuscipes on fungus.jpg
• File:Cis fuscipes aedeagus.jpg

Cheers, --Stho002 (talk) 20:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Try {{Rename|Cis boleti female.jpg|Identification}}. It is faster. Liné1 (talk) 06:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, done. --Stho002 (talk) 05:25, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:Should_be_substituted

Template:Should_be_substituted 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 template, 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. 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!

Rehman 01:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Flat list by condition

Hi Rocket000. Do you think that it can be useful a Category:Categories by condition (flat list) ? Best regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 22:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
P.S.: What do you think about this Category:Vehicles by city (flat list) ? I think that this name is not correct: this category isn't a flat list! --DenghiùComm (talk) 22:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Best wishes for the coming new year

:-) --Tony Wills (talk) 07:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Zizula hylax

Hi, Some while ago you decided to promote Zizula gaika (Trimen, 1862) above Zizula hylax (Fabricius, 1775). Thus Commons now has a Category:Zizula gaika while Category:Zizula hylax is redirected to the former page. Your justification was that gaika was a better known name, but a simple web search on Zizula hylax returns many more references. I can find no scientific paper or website that supports this action. Recently published lists of Afrotropical (Williams) and World (Savela, Funet) Polyommatini give precedence to hylax as do books published in the last 20 years on regional fauna including Thailand, West Malaysia, Sulawesi. The BMNH online cardex of taxa prefers hylax and considers gaika to be a junior synonym of hylax; see: here. Can you give me a reference to any recent paper or ruling from ICZN that suggetss that gaika should have precedence? If not, I must suggest that the Category pages are reverted to Zizula hylax, and that Z. gaika is sunk as a synonym. Regards. ACCassidy (talk) 23:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Rocket000 is in wikibreak.

But if you look closer, Rocket000 has only created Category:Zizula hylax as a redirect to already existing Category:Zizula gaika.

Their is no promotion involved.

That is the standard behavior in commons as renaming cat is difficult + which synonym is the best is not that obvious.

You should first ask en.wikipedia why they name their page en:Zizula gaika.

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 07:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Primarily to User:Liné1. The best synonym is not a matter of opinion once the ICZN has made a ruling on appeal. I have now traced the appropriate paperwork back to 1965/7, which determines that hylax should be used in preference to gaika. I have therefore done the work necessary to make Wikipedia, Commons and Wikispecies show congruency on the subject, all suitably referenced to documents that can be seen online. Hopefully, other contributors will see the validity and leave it as I have now structured it. ACCassidy (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Good work. Regards Liné1 (talk) 17:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry)

Category discussion notification

Many subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry) have been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which they should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created some of those categories, please note that the fact that they have 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. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--ŠJů (talk) 19:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Template:Will

Template:Will 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 template, 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. 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!

:| TelCoNaSpVe :| 08:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Category:Honeycomb image

Please could you add a reason and a proposed name to this our request? Do you want to change it to plural, or do you have some other objection? --ŠJů (talk) 18:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Star of David.svg

Can you please edit the file so it matches the blue from the Israeli national flag? The blues are pretty similar, but the flag blue is a little less....."florescent" if you will. It's currently protected so only admins can edit it, or else I'd do it myself, and I see you were the last one to edit it, so thought I'd ask you. Thanks. Fry1989 (talk) 18:09, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

File:428_in_red_paint.jpg

File:428_in_red_paint.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!

SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Religions of India

Hello,

Why removing this category? Category:Books about India is much too broad to be useful. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:39, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Metacat formatting bot

Hi Rocket000. Any chance of having a rerun of your metacategory template parameter reformatting bot? Best. --Foroa (talk) 11:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello.

Our common friend is in wikibreak.

Could you describe me the bot you need?

Maybe I can help.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 11:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. It concerns a bot that is probably partly manually controlled. It does things like this and converting "xxx by yyy" cats into metacats while removing the flat list categories that are autogenerated by {{Metacat}}. --Foroa (talk) 12:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, sorry then, my bot is restricted to biology pages.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you anyway, one should never mix biology with human/artificial intelligence ;) --Foroa (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hidden cat question

Any idea why Category:PD Seattle Neighborhood Atlas is a hidden category? I see that your bot marked it as such. - Jmabel ! talk 03:26, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Seal of Texas.svg

I am interested in your thoughts for this deletion request. Basically the SVG file was created by converting an EPS file from vector-images.com. I believe that the mathematical data of a vector file could be subject to copyright and I would like to know your thoughts.--Svgalbertian (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Did you take your bot with you when you left?

Don't you have a bot that removes images from category redirects? -- Queeg (talk) 02:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

That's RussBot operated by another user. It still works BTW. --  Docu  at 03:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

-- Queeg (talk) 03:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

lol. just noticed this. Rocket000 (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Ha! Yes! This is exactly the "when" I came here for your eyes. ...<something clever about "opening day" and a question about the good or poor sense in wearing/donning antlers and going into the woods on opening day and a pointer to the somewhat obvious analogy being made>.... -- Queeg (talk) 19:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

For categories about the transparency or translucency of miscellaneous enclosures. -- Queeg (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

On Wikisource

Would you be interested in making an "On Wikisource" template? WhisperToMe (talk) 19:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

My friend Rocket000 is in vacation. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 06:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

De-adminship warning

Deutsch | Español | Italian

Dear Rocket000/Archive 8. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you a×p_de^Hello! 22:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

De-adminship warning

Dear Rocket000/Archive 8. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2011 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you a×p_de^Hello! 16:44, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Please restore

Hi! You deleted File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png

• 19:28, 29 Aŭg. 2010 Rocket000 (Diskuto | kontribuoj) forigis "File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png" ‎ (Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:Gramtrans logo.png) (global usage; delinker log)

I am sorry, but File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png is needed by eo:Ŝablono:Projektoj which cannot show File:Gramtrans logo.png. eo:Ŝablono:Projektoj is included in thousand of pages in eo:WP. Thanks --Arno Lagrange ✉ 09:06, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Please restore

Hi! You deleted File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png

• 19:28, 29 Aŭg. 2010 Rocket000 (Diskuto | kontribuoj) forigis "File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png" ‎ (Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:Gramtrans logo.png) (global usage; delinker log)

I am sorry, but File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png is needed by eo:Ŝablono:Projektoj which cannot show File:Gramtrans logo.png. eo:Ŝablono:Projektoj is included in thousand of pages in eo:WP. Thanks

I re-uploaded the file. Please don't delete it again. See for example eo:Marata_lingvo#Eksteraj_ligiloj --Arno Lagrange ✉ 09:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Rocket isn't active any more (regrettably). Try COM:UNDEL if you need files to be restored. --  Docu  at 09:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Gramtrans logo 25px.png is seemingly not used anywhere! The big problem is that this file is not included in the usual manner but via CSS!! IMHO opinion we get into severe trouble when allowing to keep an downsized version of another picture just to adjust the size. Next project might want a File:Gramtrans logo 26px.png or [[File:Gramtrans logo 24px.png ... with no end in sight! a×p_de^Hello! 22:37, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Template:Synonyms

Would you please take a look at this template. Maybe I am using it wrong, but the outcome is not the best, as it does not group the names+authors. Please check Category:Vriesea sanguinolenta and you see what I mean. Uleli (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• By the way, I've made template:WSSN to refer to synonyms in Wikispecies rather than listing them in commons. As you might know, these lists tend to vary and might be easier in the future to keep Wikispecies up to date. A consensus between Commons and Wikispecies would be preferable Uleli (talk) 20:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC).

Hello, Rocket000 is in wikibreak but I am like its padawan.

What is wrong with {{SN}} ?

I don't really understand the part about "it does not group the names+authors".

About {{WSSN}}, you should know that is not really liked in commons.

I added many thousand {{Wikispecies}} but I see that many contributor suppress or comment them.

I must confess, that I always find strange that wikispecies rarely provides its sources and never its classification (like APGIII in botanic).

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 17:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

The point of listing synonyms here is to aid in search. Also, interwiki-ing, maintenance, and to inform editors how certain names are treated (to avoid conflicting classifications). We don't need to list every single documented one, only those that have potential to still be used on other sites (like Wikipedia). I only link to 'Species if it has anything useful there (some Coleoptera pages, for example, are very thorough and referenced), not as a habit. Sometimes en.wp is better or a third-party site. Rocket000 (talk) 08:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

What do you think of The idea of having intelligent col= default value ? Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

will be active again soon

Yes, welcome back!
Ps: you should have said "I will be back" ;-)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Padawan Liné1. Yeah, I'll be active again here soon. Technically, I am "back" as of now :) but I won't be that active for awhile yet. Thanks for helping take care of things while I've been away. I see you have made many improvements with templates and all that. I really need a refresher course on all this taxo stuff (and templates in general) - it's amazing all the little things you can forget if you stop using them day-to-day. Thinking of all the stuff I used to be involved with here is a bit overwhelming. I think I might have to focus on one specific area for awhile just to get back in the swing of things and catch up on everything that has progressed since I've been away. See you around! Rocket000 (talk) 07:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I will prepare a small summary of the templates changes. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll appreciate that. Thanks! Rocket000 (talk) 08:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

10minutes that you are back and you already correct many of my mistakes ;-)

You will find here some of our latest improvments.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 09:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Good stuff. Glad to see those string manipulation templates make there way over here. I discovered them a couple years ago on en.wp and knew the potential they had, but at the time they were still in development and I couldn't figure out a way to make it work for strings of variable length. {{Str find}} is the piece of the puzzle I was missing and your example here is exactly the stuff I dreamt of doing. Can't wait to have fun with that. The direction {{Taxonavigation}} is heading with the include parameter is awesome and a bit scary. I thought about doing that once (putting the higher classifications directly in the template and automating the categories) but dismissed the idea as overambitious especially since taxonomy is so unstable at the top. Not to mention that previous effort in botany that didn't work out so well (abandoned and left us with a mess). So I decided to do it small-scale (i.e. {{Lepidoptera}} followed by {{Coleoptera}}). Order seemed to be the perfect rank to balance accessibility (for others) and manageability (for me and a few others that were maintaining this area). Any lower and there would be way too many templates to keep track of and any higher would be to difficult to maintain. As you know, classifications need to be updated and revised constantly. Putting a good portion of it in a template makes it centralized so it's much easier to change en masse, however, it also makes it less user-friendly when casual editors simply want to change the category but don't know how since it's generated by some intimidating template that may even be protected. I'm curious as to how it's going so far and if you have any plans to go lower than class. Rocket000 (talk) 13:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Not trying to hijack the thread but great to see you around :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thread is hijacked. Pleased to see you here, we old timers need to support each other ;) Patrícia ^msg 20:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Good news. Welcome back. --  Docu  at 05:10, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey, this is my welcome thread ;-) Liné1 (talk) 05:58, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Hijackers should beware.

Hey everyone. Good to see you too. Thanks for reminding me why I like this place. Rocket000 (talk) 13:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Eyes

I required your eyes several weeks ago and still do. -- Queeg (talk) 23:52, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

My eyes?! What do you want my eyes for? :p Rocket000 (talk) 13:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

• Question #1
• Question #2

If I had ever seen an international conflict where one side was completely wrong/evil and the other side was completely correct/good, I might have enjoyed it -- that remains to be seen and is probably like the scientific theory of an "ideal" anything which is theoretical and will never actually exist.

So, those are crappy videos from helicopters in Iraq, perhaps the enormous focal length makes up the video quality.

Question #1: The man behind the building is pointing a 1) telescope, 2) portable planetarium, 3) poster storage tube, 4) gun, 5) cheap golf bag or 6) an architectural plan at the camera?

Question #2: The men entering the building in the beginning and loitering outside of the building towards the end are carrying 1) telescopes, 2) portable planetariums, 3) poster storage tubes, 4) guns, 5) cheap golf bags or 6) architectural plans at the camera?

I realize that there is not much difference between a poster storage tube and a properly stored architectural plan; my quiz is lacking credible "things that appear tubular" items. -- Queeg (talk) 15:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Based on the video footage alone, I would say it's impossible to tell. But you want a guess. The second one when the guy in the center swings the object around as he walks (0:45) comes the closest to something recognizable. It does look like a firearm to me but maybe I would see something different if I wasn't looking through a gun scope at people from the air. Looks like war so guns would be quite appropriate given the setting. Or did you want me to attach circumstantial evidence and opinion to my answer? To that, I ask why are you asking me? Rocket000 (talk) 16:33, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Why you? Why not?

The third video I added is the reason I came here (then) to find out what you saw in the unmarked videos. -- Queeg (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Template

I wonder if you can help. I've tried to make this template (Fohy) and it show the parent species of a named plant hybrid. As it works now it can show two parents:

Formula hybridae: parent 1 author × parent 2 author 2

But sometimes three or even more parent species are involved. How do I write to get a flexible template... if the is a third or fourth parent? You you help me?Uleli (talk) 19:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I made it so it allows for a third parent species. I don't know how many more you want to add but you just need to add another #if expression for each species. Rocket000 (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

MediaWiki_talk:Copyright

MediaWiki_talk:Copyright 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 interface page ⧼pageinfo-talkpage⧽, 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. 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!

Saibo (Δ) 19:48, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Cigaritis and synonyms

Hi. Please look at the entry I have put on Category talk:Cigaritis, which is a quote from Williams, Afrotropical Lepidoptera. Most specialists in this area, and I count myself as one, now follow Heath, 2002, and regard both Apharitis and Spindasis as junior to and synonymous with Cigaritis. I notice that you have given priority to Apharitis, but would seek your agreement to conform to the references shown and include Apharitis under Cigaritis. I have already made appropriate changes to Category:Spindasis, as you will see if you look. I have also recently uploaded a number of new images to pad out the oriental species of Cigaritis. Thanks for considering this, Alan.

Refs

• Heath, A., Newport, M.A., & Hancock, D., 2002. The butterflies of Zambia. African Butterfly Research Institute and The Lepidopterists’ Society of Africa. i-xvii, 1-137.
• Williams, M. Afrotropical Butterflies.
• Savela Funet.

ACCassidy (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

You're the expert ;) feel free to fix/update anything I have done regarding Lepidoptera. I'm a bit busy right now but I do plan to return to this area (with some new literature) and can't wait to go through all the new images. If you want me to change or rename any categories for you, simply drop me a note and it'll be my first task when I have the time to resume my daily work here. Regards and thanks for your work, Rocket000 (talk) 03:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Ships_by_name_by_type

Ships by name by type 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!

Badzil (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't really like your modification of {{Taxasource}}

Providing "source=tolweb|name=Nymphalis/70342|urlencode=false" cannot be documented in anyway, because it is too awfull. By the way, it would not work if the name needs a urlencode (like a species or a name with a strange character).
There are 3 ways of doing what you want:

• you can provide your own url, with existing option |ref=<whateveryourwant>.
• you provide {{Species}} with |source=tolweb and if needed, you can provide additional {{Tolweb}}. Templates like {{Tolweb}} (see here the list of them) have the big advantage to be able to provide multiple urls (for mirrors, for links to sub pages...). They also have the advantage to be documented, where your |name=Nymphalis/70342|urlencode=false must be documented in a sub sub template difficult to find for {{Species}} users.
  
• we could enhance {{Species}}... & {{Taxasource}} with an additional optional |sourceid= that could be used in conjunction to some |sources=. |sourceid= being optional means that {{Taxasource}} will have to provide 2 urls for sources like tolweb: one to tolweb mainpage if |sourceid= is not provided + one to tolweb specific page if |sourceid= is provided. I will look at all our sources if this would solve all url possibilities. For Category:Nymphalis the parameters would only be "source=tolweb|sourceid=Nymphalis/70342". I would document in {{Taxasource/doc}} for each source if |sourceid= can be provided and which what value.

Could we discuss this before ?
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 10:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's so bad about my approach. Maybe |urlencode=false isn't the prettiest way to do it, but basically I think there should be a simple way to have unaltered text regardless of the source. I don't want to have to remember what sources can have sourceid or not. In the "source=tolweb|sourceid=Nymphalis/70342" example, I didn't want two urls or {{Tolweb}} (why link to the site twice?). How is "source=tolweb|sourceid=Nymphalis/70342" any different? You still need to use and extra parameter and you still have to turn of the urlencoding. You don't need to document anything.. I'm sure it's a rare case. My changes didn't affect any current use whatsoever so I didn't think discussion was necessary. Sorry. I know it's your baby. ;) You can undo it if you want. Rocket000 (talk) 03:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I wonder if {{urlencode:{{{name}}}|WIKI}} would work. I'm not familiar with it but it doesn't change slashes.

Test:

{{urlencode:äbc/x yz|query}} → %C3%A4b+c%2Fxyz (this is the default)

{{urlencode:äbc/x yz|wiki}} → %C3%A4bc/x_yz

Rocket000 (talk) 04:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I was proposing "source=tolweb|sourceid=70342"

• "source=tolweb|name=Nymphalis/70342|urlencode=false" is much longer than "source=tolweb|sourceid=70342"
• for a species it would be "source=tolweb|name=Nymphalis_stamatis/70342|urlencode=false" vs "source=tolweb|sourceid=70342"
• name=Nymphalis/70342 is ugly because name is no more a name (you must document that it contains the website id), whereas sourceid is really an id
• You have to document name=Nymphalis/70342 for tolweb and the other tricks for other sources. For sourceid, I would just have a single global phrase + a column saying that you can use sourceid=
• You cannot make |name= work for FishBase (or any other source ?). Whereas I wanted to do "if sourceid then htpp://...id=sourceid else htpp://mainpageoffishbase But this cannot be done by a trick arround |name= nor urlencode.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but then you're making the template too smart. If another exception/abnormality comes up you'll have to make another parameter, and another and another for every exception for every website. Whereas my way, I simply told the template to turn urldecode off on command. It wouldn't matter what the input was. If it Nymphalis/70342 or Nymphalis/70342/34534 or Nymphalis/7/03/42/abc it would work as intended. With sourceid, we're back to the same problem where it expects a specific format. Would I have to then add a urldecode switch for sourceid? Or create yet another parameter?

Of course, it's highly unlikely tolweb will create urls like Nymphalis/7/03/42/abc in time soon, but I think making code data-agnostic is good practice. It shouldn't assume too much on how people will use it to stay flexible. Anyway, I reverted my changes and used ref, which is good enough for me. If we add anything like urldecode=false it should work with spaces and weird characters too. Rocket000 (talk) 07:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I have checked all the 19 usages of source=tolweb. It does not work for Hiodontidae nor Category:Nymphalis. So I don't know if we really need to solve this small issue. Liné1 (talk) 10:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

No we don't. I just wanted a workaround and didn't know about 'ref'. Rocket000 (talk) 10:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Gallery

The gallery should be as complete as possible. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Sure, but the templates you used were specifically designed for category pages. They categorize and aid in bot work. Placing them on non-categories messes this system up. Also, how useful is to copy and paste redundant data on multiple pages? Personally, I think galleries should be about the individual images, and the category is the place for info about the group as a whole (taxonomy), but you may use {{Taxonavigation}} if you wish. Rocket000 (talk) 07:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The gallery accedible directly by the various wiki articles, and can be viewed without users having to search through the category. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Most wiki pages link to the category via {{commonscat}} since they are much more likely to exist and contain more images (galleries tend to go unmaintained). But we don't need to debate galleries vs. categories. Feel free to do anything you want to them, just please don't use {{Lepidoptera}} or {{Coleoptera}} as they belong to a certain category system. Rocket000 (talk) 08:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Why do you keep adding them? Rocket000 (talk) 08:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I totally agree. Some people put a lot of info (Taxonavigation,VN,SN,Subtaxon list,references) on galleries only, others on categories only. I put info in both (not much better I agree ;-)).

But as in the category/article war it is category who won (I can explain it if you wish) => There will always be a category and not always a gallery.

So it seems better to put info in categories only + put pictures-gallery in galleries.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 09:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Good thing you have a bot to help you cause you're doubling your work. ;) I don't know why no one ever picked up on my idea about how it doesn't have to be a category vs. gallery thing. The both can contain exclusive info. Categories are about the group as a whole (taxonomy, synonyms, vn). Galleries are about the images themselves (descriptions, organization, feature/quality/valued image seals, etc). I guess it's just easier to copy one page to another.. Still don't understand why people are making single image "galleries". Every image already has it's own page. I was really hoping we would have made some progress with this while I was away. Rocket000 (talk) 09:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Some people like galleries because they can follow the modifications of the galleries when you cannot follow the content of a category.

The pro-galleries said that you should not have species-category but only species-galleries.

But as I said, during the war the categories won, so we now create all species-categories, rendering species-galleries almost useless. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 10:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

{{IUCN}}

Hello my friend,
Did you ever see the result of {{IUCN}}: Category:Species by IUCN Red List category.
It now contains more than 5000 species cat + 2800 species articles!
Only the french version fr:Catégorie:Statut UICN does better thanks to my tool WikiBioReferences being widely used in fr.wikimedia.
By the way, I created {{Single}} that already has 900 usages in 2 weeks.
Cheers [[User:Liné1|Liné1]] ([[User_talk:Liné1|talk]]) (talk) 14:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Good work! I have been meaning to use {{IUCN}} more but always forget about it. What happened to your signature? Rocket000 (talk) 20:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

You really need to use my tool WikiBioReferences.

I promise any modification you need ;-) Like insect references.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

{{Taxonavigation/taxon}}

Hello Rocket, your last modification introduced a bug. Could you look at Template talk:Taxonavigation/taxon where I gave the correction. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Come on my friend: some thousand of articles have a title prefixed by :

We need to act quickly.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done fixed in the meantime :-) --:bdk: 12:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Interesting idea

Hello my friend,
About the war 'category vs articles' and the question what should we put in categories and what in articles:
User:Kersti Nebelsiek has an idea that seems very interesting:

• In the category he puts [[Category:<parentTaxon>]] into a <noinclude>..</noinclude>

  See Category:Melanogrammus aeglefinus

• In the article he puts {{:Category:<Taxon>}} and nothing more except the gallery

  See Melanogrammus aeglefinus

What do you think of it?
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 14:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Stumbled on this. I think it is a neat idea. Avoids maintenance of a lot of redundant work. But it is complicated to understand for users, who do not know about template tags and transclusion. --Slaunger (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I like it. Slaunger sums up the problems and benefits nicely, I think. Good documentation would help users understand it. But initially, many will find it opaque. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 01:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Someone (Orchi I think) suggested this idea to me a long time ago. While it would greatly reduce the amount of redundant work, it would greatly increase the amount of redundant content as a result. The idea of making it easier to maintain the unfortunate status quo never appealed to me. On a technical level, it's pretty hackish. (Hacks can be quite convenient, interesting or neat but are prone to big unforeseen problems and are usually more work in the end, especially in an environment such as this). People are not going to noinclude stuff properly, like categories, maintenance tags and other things only meant for the page they added it to. They probably won't be aware what they are editing is transcluded somewhere else.

Personally I have no desire to move in this direction as I see duplicating content a complete waste of human resource. Making a broken system more efficient makes it more efficiently broken. ;)

But if you guys really want to pursue something like this, I think a Taxon namespace idea is a bit more practical. Just make it impossible to use on Image pages please. Rocket000 (talk) 08:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

On second thought, I see your point with avoiding duplicate information. And that the problem is that the redundant gallery category system is, in essence, a broken system. --Slaunger (talk) 08:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I noticed, that we don't have have enough people to maintain both - gallery and category page information. In the birds it is usually Liné1, who does the work, to maintain the basic information on category pages, but he doesnt manage to do all - from time to time I stumble over a category page which has old information, or no basic information at all. Gallery pages are usually not maintained and therefore the informaton there usually is very old. Therefore using the category page information is the only way to get them maintained. Kersti (talk) 12:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Will create problems after bot moves. --Foroa (talk) 14:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Any idea what bot could be impacted ?

• bots for interwiki could be an issu on article including

what else ? Cheers Liné1 (talk) 14:12, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Most bots using the py framework, Category:Commons pywikipedia bots including SieBot, tend to regroup categories together without taking into account little details such as include, includeonly, ... Luckily, they rarely move templates that almost always create problems. --Foroa (talk) 14:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Is there any problem with working without the noinclude tags - than all gallery pages would be in the parent category too, with the same sort key as the cat, but I think, for users it may be no problem, if it is like this, many may think that they prefer to choose between gallery and category there. --Kersti (talk) 17:38, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

That may be true, but the problem isn't maintaining duplicate information but having duplicate information in the first place. Taking Category:Melanogrammus aeglefinus and Melanogrammus aeglefinus as an example, redirecting the gallery would solve the problem beautifully. But what about when that hypothetical someone wants to add a little feature picture badge or textual information to one particular image, you ask? Or arrange the images in a certain way? Well, <gallery> tags work on category pages too. Don't like the idea of showing galleries above category listings of the same images together? __NOGALLERY__ can help that. Now, I'm not suggesting we redirect all galleries to their category, but for cases when there's real no point in creating a gallery (one or two images, no visible difference like in the example given above, no additional content to add, etc.) a redirect is the only thing that makes sense to me. When someone wants to create a proper gallery, such as the ones Orchi creates, then it's ok change that redirect into something that compliments (in contrast to competes with) the category. Rocket000 (talk) 21:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

You are right, concerning these small gallery pages without additional information, especially as they unsually don't contain all pictures in the category and therefore it is contraproductive to have them. But that are not the pages I made up. I made genus pages and family pages like Fringillidae, Paridae, Corvus (genus), Cyanistes -- Kersti (talk) 17:59, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I like that idea a lot Rocket. It makes perfect sense for me. --Slaunger (talk) 17:54, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I mentioned the idea here as well. --Slaunger (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

And that's about the same (lack of) response I always get when I start offering up these crazy ideas that fall between the two extremes. ;) Rocket000 (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

How very sad that we could not agree on this:

• I will not be able to use that good idea => I will have to do my work twice (most of the galleries I see have duplicates info from their cat).
• But Kersti continues to insert <noinclude> => bots will still have an issue with the <noinclude>.

I corrected mine to detect the problem. Liné1 (talk) 07:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(Sorry, been busy again.) I think we need a more satisfying conclusion here or at least get more of the community involved before doing anymore category transclusions and noincludes... For the record, I'm against it of course, but whatever the case, we really need to all be on the same page. It's like how we got into this category/gallery mess in the first place, everyone just doing their own thing. :/ (I've been a little guilty of that myself in the past, who hasn't?, but this isn't just some minor formatting or template order preference we're talking about. It's kind of a big change.) Rocket000 (talk) 20:20, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Related to this, I have opened a thread at Commons talk:Categories, where I have referred to this discussion. --Slaunger (talk) 23:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It turns out that the sentence I have a problem with in the galleries guideline was introduced by you in 2009. Do you recall, if you a specifc reason in mind at the time for introducing it in the galleries guidelines? --Slaunger (talk) 09:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

What sentence? It looks like I was just rearranging stuff in that diff. Rocket000 (talk) 17:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The sentence "A single image on a page is not a gallery". I believe that was introduced in the (otherwise very good) restructuring. But I do understand your confusion as I linked to the wrong discussion page above. Sorry about that. I meant Commons talk:Galleries, and the issue with the sentence has been resolved now by introducing some exceptions to the rule (still a broken system though). --Slaunger (talk) 07:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

But a single image is not a gallery. Galleries, by definition, are multiple images... I'm confused what you take issue with. Rocket000 (talk) 02:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind, I'm didn't read Commons talk:Galleries. Rocket000 (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hiddencat

Hello, Rocket000. You have new messages at Category_talk:Hidden_categories#RFCt. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CFD on cat:Pictures_and_images and similar

As someone who has edited several subcats of Category:Pictures and images, please see the (non-) discussion (not) going on at Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/02#Category:Pictures and images (and the 9 nominations following it), if you haven't already, and comment there if you wish. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 01:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you help?

Hello Rocket000, some times ago tried Liné1 to solve my following problem:
Do you see a way to help? Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 18:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Template in Wikispecies

Salu Liné1, can you help again, please?: Wikispecies Template:WCL: [1].
I used your directlink to KEW. Unfortunately there is a problem with the × in the nothospecies (e.g.: Cattleya × ballantiniana).
Cheers. Orchi (talk) 20:46, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Of cours my friend. It was simple. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Salu Liné1, thanks for your quick answer. You made a result only for Cattleya × ballantiniana. Do you see an automatic way for all nothospecies or hybrids with the sign: × in the title?
I try to modify my question: Is there a way to create the urlencode without the × = "4|{{PAGENAME without ×}}" for this link:
http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/qsearch.do?page=quickSearch&plantName={{urlencode:{{{4|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}} {{{5|''{{{4|{{PAGENAME}}}}}''}}} ?

(I know my trouble with complex questions in english) Cheers. Orchi (talk) 18:48, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I think we can do what you want Liné1 (talk) 18:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello my friend,

I tried to solve your problem with {{Nothospeciescleaner}} and see the result in Template:Kew list/testcases.

But I totally failed.

The problem can be seen in Template:Kew list/testcases: {{urlencode:{{str right|Cattleya × ballantiniana|10}}}} has a bad result.

Maybee we could ask for help?

I could explain the problem to someone else

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I am not experienced with the string manipulation templates yet. I will try some things but I can't promise anything. Rocket000 (talk) 02:23, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

....I thank you very much first. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 09:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

New idea by User:Kersti_Nebelsiek

Hello my friend,
Just to tell you that User:Kersti_Nebelsiek had the idea to make a template per species for vernaculare name translation.
See his idea here.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:51, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I have added a discussion here and there.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 08:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Just letting you know I'm still alive and plan on becoming active here again.

So far I like what I see. Rocket000 (talk) 21:24, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Quality images logo.svg

File:Quality images logo.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 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!

188.52.36.125 08:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

{{Assessments}}

Template has been updated. I am curious what you think of the modifications. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 20:45, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Round 2, eh? I haven't looked at that template for a long time, but the changes seem to be an improvement, at least technically. I don't think subject auto-categorization should be added and I would suggest keeping things simple. Instead of merging everything (categorization, related templates), improve upon aspects of its main functionality (e.g. nomination link intelligence) and appearance. If you're like me, you like the idea of powerful all-encompassing super templates since it centralizes your template work and the complexity is not an issue, but from a template user's and design point of view, simplicity is the way to go. Sometimes keeping related templates separate is better. Do one thing and do it well, as they say. Rocket000 (talk) 21:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this. I have quoted it in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Request for clarity. --Slaunger (talk) 07:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Round 2? I am not looking for a fight.

I too am unsure of the categorization idea. It is merely sandboxed and is not in use anywhere. It is more of an experiment to express subject ideas which is something needed for POTY as it now has category specific winners.

Commons is in trouble in handling itself. A lot of tasks that can be handled by templates are delegated to toolserver. Each year someone needs to adjust code, run a new query or waste time in some other manner just to determine what files qualify for this years POTY. This can and should be automated through categories & templates locally.

I think the template is a lot simpler now. Auto translate was making my head spin prior to my edits in April.

-- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 14:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

{{Move}}

Hi. Would you be able to improve the {{Move}} template?

• the template {{Move}} allows to state the reason as the second parameter. It should be transfered also as the third parameter of the prepared bot command.
• It would be usefull to add a new parameter to tag controversial (opposed) move requests. Such requests should be categorizied in a separate subcategory instead in the subcategories by date.

Thank You. --ŠJů (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

hi

I notice a problem with a picture, the problem is shown here File:Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement svg display anomaly.png. The problem presents itself when the original image is scaled. It shows on firefox on ubuntu, and I'm not sure where else just yet. I thought you may wish to know. Penyulap ☏ 05:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Arctiinae

Hello Category:Arctiinae and Template:Lepidoptera Arctiinae and its tribes don't show their categories. Could u have a look, please. Thx. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 13:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You are back!

Hello Rocket,
You are back! What an excellent news.
I told everyone that I was your padawan, but by now they all discovered the big loss ;-)
To warm your skills, I have a first easy subject: Template:Category_redirect:

• here: It would be cool if you could move the doc in a subpage. Of course the subpage doc is ready and the sandbox ;-). You can copy the sandbox in the template, it is the same code but Rocket000 style indented (you know: with the <!--/n-->)
• here: User:Foroa and I don't understand why the template is usable in namespaces other than Category
• here: A small issue about the categories

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 11:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I was not the one that made the last two changes. I'm trying to figure out what Zolo was trying to do before I change anything. Rocket000 (talk) 23:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Metacats

Hi Rocket000. In 2010 you worked a lot on flat lists and on metacats. Since few days I made a little order in cat "Paintings" and some times by his subcats in the relative mother cats "Art...by...". I found everywhere a lot of cats "...by xxx" which have not the template {{metacat}}. Where I saw it, I put in the template manually. But I can imagine that there are hundreds of categories "by something" that have not this template. Is in your power a tool that you can apply to find quickly these categories and than give them automatically the template? I will be very gratefull to you if you can resolve this problem. But feel you free to nothing to do. Sorry for my bad english. Cheers, --DenghiùComm (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Mythimna conigera.jpg

File:Mythimna conigera.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!

Lymantria (talk) 09:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Zale duplicata.jpg

File:Zale duplicata.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!

—innotata 18:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

(minor message correction) "commons.wikimedia.org/Template:Protected" is missing word "on" in its error-text message

Currently the error-text is...

Error: This page is not currently protected. Please request protection it or remove the protection template.

Instead, this should be...

Error: This page is not currently protected. Please request protection on it or remove the protection template.

...or the word "it" should be removed altogether.

Error: This page is not currently protected. Please request protection or remove the protection template.

Hope this is clear.

Thanks!

--gnosygnu (talk) 02:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Wrong color information on CMYK image

Hey, i've found 2 wrong color values on the cmyk image located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Farbkreis_mit_CMYK-Werten.svg

2 values for the yellow part are wrong:

0,0,0,80 should be 0,0,80,0 
0,0,0,60 should be 0,0,60,0

--Alex.adam (talk) 14:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Asura

Asura 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!

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

your applying a Header template in 2008 with an undocumented parameter worked

You solved a problem in 2008; do you remember how? The Header template is not producing a proper rendering for my essays, mainly in that the first or only shortcut fails to appear on the screen, apparently because I need an undocumented valueless parameter named after an abbreviation of the page title, which implies that I need to add the abbreviated title somewhere else also, and I don't know where that is. This affects my new pages, Commons:Personality rights and Commons:Nonphotographs, video, and inaccuracies. On the other hand, you caused a proper display with Commons:Photographs of identifiable people (and see your revision in question), which has the parameter "Lang-PhotoOfPeople" (without quote marks, an equals sign, or a value), apparently copied from the name of an earlier template without parameters and with only minimal documentation on Commons (compare the earlier revision)), and I've seen a proper display on Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, which has the parameter "Lang-DESYSOP" (likewise without quote marks, an equals sign, or a value). I checked the documentation but it says nothing on point. I asked at the template's talk page, at the template doc's talk page, and at the help desk to no avail. How should I get the proper rendering? Thanks. Nick Levinson (talk) 17:10, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Sadly my friend Rocket000 is in wikibreak. Best regards Liné1 (talk) 08:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Available for art commissions?

Hiya, is there any way to contact you regarding the possibility of commissioning you for artwork (no more complex than icons you've created on here)? Thanks :) Xmoogle (talk) 23:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Sadly my friend Rocket000 is in wikibreak. Best regards Liné1 (talk) 08:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)