Thanks for uploading File:Empire Express Streamlined 1941.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 05:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Empire Express Streamlined 1941.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 08:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Regarding File:Pioneer Zephyr Dawn to Dusk Club.jpg, just because a deletion review overturned a deletion does not give an image a free pass on having a woefully insufficient fair use rationale. Rather than waste your time edit-warring over the tag, why not bring the fair use rationale up to the proper standard? SchuminWeb ( Talk) 10:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Centpacrr. I see you've twice removed the {{ Non-free reduce}} tag I've added to File:Pioneer Zephyr Dawn to Dusk Club.jpg. That image is currently 640 × 494 pixels, or over 0.3 megapixels. It is used in articles only at thumbnail size, which is at maximum 300 × 232 pixels, or less than 0.07 megapixels. That means that the current resolution of the image is at least four and a half times as large as its use in Wikipedia articles. Can you provide a justification explaining why we need to have this image at such a resolution? Please see WP:NFCC#3b, which requires of non-free images, "Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used…. This rule also applies to the copy in the File: namespace." Also see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Image resolution, which says in part, "Ideally, most common image uses can likely be represented in an image containing no more than 0.1 megapixels." Note that User:DASHBot resizes non-free images above a threshold of 0.16 megapixels; the current resolution of this image is almost twice this size. This image is clearly of significantly higher resolution than any use in Wikipedia, and it seems to me that this high resolution is indefensible. But perhaps you can explain why it is necessary that we have this image at a much higher resolution than is ever used? — Bkell ( talk) 13:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
I think I can give you guys a hand with getting more free use images. Am not a train expert, but can upload free images to Commons and leave you a list on your talk page of what I've uploaded and then you can decide where the photo(s) would be best used. Am seeing a bunch of photos on postcards that are pre 1978 which I think would be useful. Have found one of Zephyrus in service in 1950. Was able to check out the producer of most of the cards that have no date on them and now know the ones that are pre-1978 are not copyright marked. Am going to get Zephyrus uploaded now and you can let me know if this might be of help. Also have found some 1940-1949 UP issued dining and kitchen photos that would be free use because they were issued without copyright marks by UP itself. We hope ( talk) 23:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Union Pacific
Other-
Found a diagram from Alco-GE that appears to be for the gas turbine UP-50, but it has a watermark on it and will take a little time to clean up. This discusses there being 2 cabs. There's a lot more if you want or need it. We hope ( talk) 23:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from uploading disruptive images with no encyclopedic value. It is considered
vandalism. Thank you.
SchuminWeb (
Talk)
11:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Flying Yankee at Portland Union Sataion.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 20:19, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
The use of all caps is considered an individual "affectation" that many sources may use. In wikispeak, only companies/organizations that use that titling for their official title, e.g. NASA, use an all caps format. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 19:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC).
Thanks for uploading File:Watering steam locomotive.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 13:12, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Portland Union Station c1890.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 15:40, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:UAL Route Map 1940.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 15:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:WBRobertson.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 15:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
How high of resolution can you scan that ticket envelope, as seen at [2]? Since it's PD-1978, we should have it in as high of resolution as we can get. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 18:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Watering steam locomotive.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 18:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AHL Philadelphia Phamtons 2005 Calder Cup.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 20:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:WBRobertson.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 03:40, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Schuyler Colfax Statue, Colfax, CA.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 03:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Spectrum and Stadiums.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 03:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:US Pacific Railroads 1887.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 04:31, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Please do not assume
ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.
SchuminWeb (
Talk)
02:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
I see you added this image. While I admire your artistic skills, I have to say... this is an encyclopedia. It's not a showcase for your artistic skills. Your image of keys is quite unencyclopedic. I would suggest you simply upload a nice image of the keys, without the fancy border or other superfluous artwork. I'm not going to push the matter and keep reverting you, rather I'll simply appeal to your good intentions as a Wikipedian and let it go at that. Regards. JBarta ( talk) 06:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:Palace Hotel Room Key c1935.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Centpacrr.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:CPRR Button 1867.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:South Philadelphia Sports Complex c1972.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Robertson Aircraft Corporation Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CPRR Button 1867.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 17:40, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
The images you added to Trestle#Steel trestles of City Point Trestle in Belfast ME are not images of a trestle. If this bridge is known locally as a trestle, it is most likely because it replaced a former trestle. The bridge is clearly a truss bridge#Warren truss, specifically, a deck truss. It does not have any of the defining characteristics of a truss, most notably, a series of bent (structural)s supporting the bridge from the ground. Your pictures may well be appropriate illustrations for Warren Truss bridges, but they do not contribute usefully to the Trestle article. Douglas W. Jones ( talk) 04:47, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I like it, great job! The big "A" is a lot more defined now, which is great. Thanks! Delaywaves talk 16:00, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Centpacrr, thank you very much for helping me with that photo and the signature. You did a flawless job there. I really appreciate it. Kind regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 00:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Yet again you helped me. It's very good to see a Wikipedian like you here. Thank you very much, Centpacrr, you're great. Regards. P.S.: Not trying to bother even more, but could you trim the margin of the picture? -- Lecen ( talk) 12:14, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your support of keeping this properly tagged FU image. I just wanted to let you know that I've all but given up on uploading FU images of any sort, with mugshots being the last bastion that it still attacked (usually through the NFCC#8 argument). I uploaded the image two years ago; but now, after tiring of arguing endlessly with the image deletionists, I try to stick to unarguably free images. Like this mugshot of Al Capone or this one of Whitey Bulger: only because they're from a Federal agency are they able to be tagged as "free" by WP standards. A state or local agency? Depends on the state (or country, in Hendrix's case). I've uploaded all kinds of FU images, both mugshots and not, all tagged appropriately - and about 1% of the ones I've uploaded survive because of arguments like the horridly worded and vague NFCC#8 gutting them from those who think text can describe any and everything. Anyhoo, Cheers :> Doc talk 07:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
This is a non-award, as you don't accept awards. :) As regards your self-portrait, I really don't see where the problem is, and the admin has clammed up. I'm not necessarily going to "advise" you to take it to WP:ANI, but if you truly don't get it, as I don't, maybe someone there could provide an answer. Alternatively, you could run the question by someone like Hammersoft or Delta, who are among the most prominent image deletionists, and they might have a clue about it. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
There are at least 2 different photos of you in Google images. If they won't let you use the one, is there anything stopping you from using the other one? Also, do you have the "original" of either photo? Assuming they are digital, if you upload them with the metadata intact, I don't see how they could yelp. (Though it's hard to think of everything deletionists might do.) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Broad Street Bullies Interview (HBO).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sreejith K ( talk) 05:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Have you uploaded any of the Cup presentation photos? Much as I'm sure it pains you, as your Flyers lost, it could be a nifty addition to the article. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Tweak? You reinserted a whole bunch of images that you removed in indignation two weeks prior. Interesting twist on the word "tweak". And you wonder why some folks go nutty to give you grief? Sure, we can point the finger at them and suggest they find something better to do with their time, but it seems to me that you share the blame by inviting it with your seemingly habitual duplicity. Just sayin... JBarta ( talk) 00:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Centpacrr. Thanks for helping me out with that Lincoln photo. I already added to its article. You've been helping me quite a lot lately and I hope you won't min if I make a request. There are three pictures which are being used in Featured Articles I wrote that I believe could be improved:
I don't want you to remove scratches or anything that came from the real picture (I want to keep the "old" feeling from them), but only fix any issues that came from poor scan. Also, don't feel obliged to do it, in case you're too busy or you simply don't want to, ok? Kind regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 05:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
The recent thread at the Graphics Lab reminded me of a past image which I shelved for months because of lack of time and color correction skills. I have no any attachment to this image (quickfixed because it was about to be featured on the main page then), but as I recall, there was no worthy substitute to this historical painting on the web. Wikipedia-wise, it would be great if you could apply your skills to this image. If you fix it, please upload over my poor version, for interwiki sake. Regards. Materialscientist ( talk) 00:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on getting your picture back. It's a nifty shot. I'm curious about something. A somewhat younger you is drinking from the Stanley Cup. (1) What was in it? and (2) I chuckled as I recalled a Sports Illustrated article from a few years back, about the custom of taking the Stanley Cup from player to player, and the writer commenting, upon seeing someone drinking from it, "God only knows whose lips have been on that thing." :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
You (and the graphics peeps in general) are studhorses. No barnie for you since you are so flipping proud. I appreciate ya though, man.
TCO ( talk) 17:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I see again you mention the alteration of files. I suppose you already know this, but I figured I'd mention it just to be clear. Once a file is uploaded to commons, it can be altered in any way by anyone. The original uploader retains no rights other than those defined in the license. Of course, if you wish to refrain from altering certain images for your own personal reasons, that's fine. Just remember that's just your own personal policy, it's not a Wikimedia Commons policy and has no effect on anyone but you. JBarta ( talk) 23:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI, you missed the circular watermark in the center. JBarta ( talk) 22:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, my friend, I'd like to wish you a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Keep up with the good job you're doing at the Graphic Lab. I hope we'll talk more next year. Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 23:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 03:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC).
Looks like you had a press-box view of the action. :) Was it very cold there, or fairly mild for January? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I went looking for that 2010 HBO special about the Broad Street Bullies, and as luck would have it, the entire thing was on youtube. I just finished watching it, and oh boy did it bring back some memories. :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi! A small reminder about image cleanup notices: after you have fixed a specific issue with an image, also look for and remove a notice template requesting that fix (e.g. {{ Opaque}}), if one exists. For {{ Watermark}}, it is also customary to replace it with {{ Watermark removed}}, rather than remove it, unless the image is in the public domain. Here's a list of almost all such notices. These templates usually place files in the Category:Images needing cleanup, where the Eight Requests images in the GL are taken from. — Quibik ( talk) 23:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
{{watermark}}
to {{watermark removed}}
like so. –
JBarta (
talk)
14:23, 13 January 2012 (UTC)Centpacrr, I'd like to ask you a favor. Please take a look at this painting. Is there anyway you could change the background (tone, colour, I don't know) and allow the character's hair to be actually visible? I don't want you to change anything at all on the person despicted, just the background. Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 20:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Centpacrr, I'm sorry. I wasn't clear enough. It's because the image of Emperor Pedro I doesnt look good. Too bright. I wanted it look like this coupled with the new background you made. Lastly, I saw you made his brown hair mroe bright on the other image. There is no need for that. You also forgot to change the color of the dark are below his chin (that's his beard as you can see here). Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 13:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
I think you should also remove the smaller watermark underneath the boat in File:FNR.Triremis.RomanEmpire.BCE31.SvenLittkowski.001.jpg. Cheers, Quibik ( talk) 17:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Nice job of watermark removal with the Petra Kvitova images. -- James26 ( talk) 02:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Please take it easy - we all have our views on how to "improve" an image, and all are stubborn to some degree :-). My issue with blue background is it is more of an artwork, whereas TCO is working on a reality article, i.e. the image is a factual evidence of a medical procedure. Materialscientist ( talk) 03:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
The "ice cream makes everything better" appreciation note Centpacrr, all else aside and in all seriousness, I do think you're an excellent graphist who does good and valuable work around here. I'm not apologizing, I'm not asking for forgiveness, I'm not turning over a new leaf and I'm not taking anything back. I'm just offering an honest and well-deserved compliment and an ice cream. Enjoy. ![]() |
![]() |
text-graphics partnership award |
Thank you for the graphics support for Fluorine, a high view article with importance to industry and schoolchildren TCO ( Reviews needed) 03:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Centpacrr. There really is no reason to manually archive requests as you did here. The automated DyceBot does it on a regular basis. While there may not be an actual "rule" prohobiting such, I would suggest archiving (or even "resolving") too soon removes the discussion without giving a chance for other editors to weigh in. Further, I would argue that this is especially inappropriate when there is some disagreement going on and you're one of the participants. As you would probably argue yourself, it's not a contest, it's a discussion with anyone and everyone given ample chance to weight in. – JBarta ( talk) 08:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi again, Centpacrr! As it seems you enjoy doing the "Eight Requests" cleanups quite a bit, I thought you could be interested in helping out with even some more images. As you might have noticed, all of the images I add are taken from Commons:User:Quibik/Files by viewcounts (that's images with cleanup needed, sorted by total pageviews on articles that use them), which in turn are taken from Commons:Category:Images for cleanup (English wiki has got this category too). So, whenever you have exhausted all images at Eight Requests, you are encouraged to work on any images from either of these places. All the best, Quibik ( talk) 13:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
About these three images: File:John Cena 2010 Tribute to the Troops (1).jpg, File:Dolhp Ziggler 2010 Tribute to the Troops.jpg, File:Jack Swagger Tribute to the Troops 2010.jpg. I believe you would agree, that an edited image should actually look better than the original. I cannot say, however, that a black rectangle is in any way an improvement over a watermark. Please do not edit just for the sake of editing. — Quibik ( talk) 18:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I hate to pile on here, but not only do I agree with Quibik above, I'm finding your incessant image "improvements" a little harmful. It really does seem as if you cannot pass near a file without messing with the colors, brightness, saturation, etc. Here are two recent examples 1, 2. In both cases, you felt the need to not only fix whatever needs to be fixed, but then you alter the image so it's now worse than when you got it. Seriously Centpacrr, chill out a little. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. – JBarta ( talk) 20:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting out File:Wool Exchange, Bradford 045.jpg. Much appreciated. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 02:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
As you're a regular I wil refrain from templating you, but when you make a revert like this one you put yourself firmly in the wrong. WP:RETAIN recommends keeping the language version of the article that it was written in, in this case clearly British English. In addition, your edit restored numerous other problems with the article (a spelling error, some overlinking, some unreferenced material). Please be more careful. Thanks, -- John ( talk) 06:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Centpacrr. I noticed that in some watermark removals you did, you changed {{watermark}} to {{watermark removed}}. That's good. But to do that for a datestamp essentially places an inaccurate tag on the description page. "Watermark removed" states "Attribution information, such as the author's name, e-mail, website, or signature, that was once visible in the image itself". In this example no such attribution information was removed or moved. Only the date was removed. So, if you remove an attribution watermark, use "watermark removed" (and make sure the attribution info is in the description). If you remove a datestamp, just remove "watermark" (and put the photo date in the description if you think it's pertinent) – JBarta ( talk) 18:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Can I make a small request? Would you please mark as done each of the eight requests as you complete them. It's getting to be a minor annoyance to click on image after image only to see you have already done it and will get around to marking them "done" sometime later when it suits you. It's a small small annoyance, yes... but a truly needless one. Thank you. – JBarta ( talk) 19:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
A super-minor request about {{watermark removed}} templates: would you please place them below {{information}} or the license rather than on the top. The content of {{watermark removed}} is rather unimportant to most users and editors, so it probably should not be the first item on the page. — Quibik ( talk) 14:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm actually kinda glad you lightened it. It looks better that way. After I got done with the minor repairs I did a some levels adjusting because it seemed too washed out. After I uploaded it though, I really wasn't liking it. I'm glad you made that change. (enjoy those words because I don't say that to you very often ;-) – JBarta ( talk) 22:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Watermark remains (upper right corner). – JBarta ( talk) 18:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Better, but I have to ask... what do you have against shadows? I've noticed on quite a few occasions you brighten the shadow areas of images, maybe not to the extent I feel the need to revert, but very often is unnecessary and does the image harm (IMO). Do you chalk it up to your personal subjectivity and you simply think photos look better that way? And don't take this the wrong way, but have you done any calibration checks on your monitor? Is it possible your monitor simply isn't displaying the full spectrum properly or is adjusted too dark? Sorry, I gotta ask... – JBarta ( talk) 04:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image created by you has been promoted to
featured picture status Your image,
File:Hadji Ali demonstrating controlled regurgitation Crisco edit.jpg, was nominated on
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution!
Makeemlighter (
talk)
11:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
|
Thanks for uploading File:Empire Express Streamlined 1941.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 05:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Empire Express Streamlined 1941.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 08:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Regarding File:Pioneer Zephyr Dawn to Dusk Club.jpg, just because a deletion review overturned a deletion does not give an image a free pass on having a woefully insufficient fair use rationale. Rather than waste your time edit-warring over the tag, why not bring the fair use rationale up to the proper standard? SchuminWeb ( Talk) 10:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Centpacrr. I see you've twice removed the {{ Non-free reduce}} tag I've added to File:Pioneer Zephyr Dawn to Dusk Club.jpg. That image is currently 640 × 494 pixels, or over 0.3 megapixels. It is used in articles only at thumbnail size, which is at maximum 300 × 232 pixels, or less than 0.07 megapixels. That means that the current resolution of the image is at least four and a half times as large as its use in Wikipedia articles. Can you provide a justification explaining why we need to have this image at such a resolution? Please see WP:NFCC#3b, which requires of non-free images, "Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used…. This rule also applies to the copy in the File: namespace." Also see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Image resolution, which says in part, "Ideally, most common image uses can likely be represented in an image containing no more than 0.1 megapixels." Note that User:DASHBot resizes non-free images above a threshold of 0.16 megapixels; the current resolution of this image is almost twice this size. This image is clearly of significantly higher resolution than any use in Wikipedia, and it seems to me that this high resolution is indefensible. But perhaps you can explain why it is necessary that we have this image at a much higher resolution than is ever used? — Bkell ( talk) 13:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
I think I can give you guys a hand with getting more free use images. Am not a train expert, but can upload free images to Commons and leave you a list on your talk page of what I've uploaded and then you can decide where the photo(s) would be best used. Am seeing a bunch of photos on postcards that are pre 1978 which I think would be useful. Have found one of Zephyrus in service in 1950. Was able to check out the producer of most of the cards that have no date on them and now know the ones that are pre-1978 are not copyright marked. Am going to get Zephyrus uploaded now and you can let me know if this might be of help. Also have found some 1940-1949 UP issued dining and kitchen photos that would be free use because they were issued without copyright marks by UP itself. We hope ( talk) 23:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Union Pacific
Other-
Found a diagram from Alco-GE that appears to be for the gas turbine UP-50, but it has a watermark on it and will take a little time to clean up. This discusses there being 2 cabs. There's a lot more if you want or need it. We hope ( talk) 23:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from uploading disruptive images with no encyclopedic value. It is considered
vandalism. Thank you.
SchuminWeb (
Talk)
11:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Flying Yankee at Portland Union Sataion.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 20:19, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
The use of all caps is considered an individual "affectation" that many sources may use. In wikispeak, only companies/organizations that use that titling for their official title, e.g. NASA, use an all caps format. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 19:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC).
Thanks for uploading File:Watering steam locomotive.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 13:12, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Portland Union Station c1890.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 15:40, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:UAL Route Map 1940.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 15:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:WBRobertson.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 15:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
How high of resolution can you scan that ticket envelope, as seen at [2]? Since it's PD-1978, we should have it in as high of resolution as we can get. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 18:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Watering steam locomotive.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 18:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AHL Philadelphia Phamtons 2005 Calder Cup.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 20:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:WBRobertson.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 03:40, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Schuyler Colfax Statue, Colfax, CA.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 03:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Spectrum and Stadiums.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 03:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:US Pacific Railroads 1887.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 04:31, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Please do not assume
ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.
SchuminWeb (
Talk)
02:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
I see you added this image. While I admire your artistic skills, I have to say... this is an encyclopedia. It's not a showcase for your artistic skills. Your image of keys is quite unencyclopedic. I would suggest you simply upload a nice image of the keys, without the fancy border or other superfluous artwork. I'm not going to push the matter and keep reverting you, rather I'll simply appeal to your good intentions as a Wikipedian and let it go at that. Regards. JBarta ( talk) 06:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:Palace Hotel Room Key c1935.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Centpacrr.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:CPRR Button 1867.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:South Philadelphia Sports Complex c1972.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Robertson Aircraft Corporation Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CPRR Button 1867.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 17:40, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
The images you added to Trestle#Steel trestles of City Point Trestle in Belfast ME are not images of a trestle. If this bridge is known locally as a trestle, it is most likely because it replaced a former trestle. The bridge is clearly a truss bridge#Warren truss, specifically, a deck truss. It does not have any of the defining characteristics of a truss, most notably, a series of bent (structural)s supporting the bridge from the ground. Your pictures may well be appropriate illustrations for Warren Truss bridges, but they do not contribute usefully to the Trestle article. Douglas W. Jones ( talk) 04:47, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I like it, great job! The big "A" is a lot more defined now, which is great. Thanks! Delaywaves talk 16:00, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Centpacrr, thank you very much for helping me with that photo and the signature. You did a flawless job there. I really appreciate it. Kind regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 00:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Yet again you helped me. It's very good to see a Wikipedian like you here. Thank you very much, Centpacrr, you're great. Regards. P.S.: Not trying to bother even more, but could you trim the margin of the picture? -- Lecen ( talk) 12:14, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your support of keeping this properly tagged FU image. I just wanted to let you know that I've all but given up on uploading FU images of any sort, with mugshots being the last bastion that it still attacked (usually through the NFCC#8 argument). I uploaded the image two years ago; but now, after tiring of arguing endlessly with the image deletionists, I try to stick to unarguably free images. Like this mugshot of Al Capone or this one of Whitey Bulger: only because they're from a Federal agency are they able to be tagged as "free" by WP standards. A state or local agency? Depends on the state (or country, in Hendrix's case). I've uploaded all kinds of FU images, both mugshots and not, all tagged appropriately - and about 1% of the ones I've uploaded survive because of arguments like the horridly worded and vague NFCC#8 gutting them from those who think text can describe any and everything. Anyhoo, Cheers :> Doc talk 07:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
This is a non-award, as you don't accept awards. :) As regards your self-portrait, I really don't see where the problem is, and the admin has clammed up. I'm not necessarily going to "advise" you to take it to WP:ANI, but if you truly don't get it, as I don't, maybe someone there could provide an answer. Alternatively, you could run the question by someone like Hammersoft or Delta, who are among the most prominent image deletionists, and they might have a clue about it. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
There are at least 2 different photos of you in Google images. If they won't let you use the one, is there anything stopping you from using the other one? Also, do you have the "original" of either photo? Assuming they are digital, if you upload them with the metadata intact, I don't see how they could yelp. (Though it's hard to think of everything deletionists might do.) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Broad Street Bullies Interview (HBO).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sreejith K ( talk) 05:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Have you uploaded any of the Cup presentation photos? Much as I'm sure it pains you, as your Flyers lost, it could be a nifty addition to the article. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Tweak? You reinserted a whole bunch of images that you removed in indignation two weeks prior. Interesting twist on the word "tweak". And you wonder why some folks go nutty to give you grief? Sure, we can point the finger at them and suggest they find something better to do with their time, but it seems to me that you share the blame by inviting it with your seemingly habitual duplicity. Just sayin... JBarta ( talk) 00:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Centpacrr. Thanks for helping me out with that Lincoln photo. I already added to its article. You've been helping me quite a lot lately and I hope you won't min if I make a request. There are three pictures which are being used in Featured Articles I wrote that I believe could be improved:
I don't want you to remove scratches or anything that came from the real picture (I want to keep the "old" feeling from them), but only fix any issues that came from poor scan. Also, don't feel obliged to do it, in case you're too busy or you simply don't want to, ok? Kind regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 05:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
The recent thread at the Graphics Lab reminded me of a past image which I shelved for months because of lack of time and color correction skills. I have no any attachment to this image (quickfixed because it was about to be featured on the main page then), but as I recall, there was no worthy substitute to this historical painting on the web. Wikipedia-wise, it would be great if you could apply your skills to this image. If you fix it, please upload over my poor version, for interwiki sake. Regards. Materialscientist ( talk) 00:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on getting your picture back. It's a nifty shot. I'm curious about something. A somewhat younger you is drinking from the Stanley Cup. (1) What was in it? and (2) I chuckled as I recalled a Sports Illustrated article from a few years back, about the custom of taking the Stanley Cup from player to player, and the writer commenting, upon seeing someone drinking from it, "God only knows whose lips have been on that thing." :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
You (and the graphics peeps in general) are studhorses. No barnie for you since you are so flipping proud. I appreciate ya though, man.
TCO ( talk) 17:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I see again you mention the alteration of files. I suppose you already know this, but I figured I'd mention it just to be clear. Once a file is uploaded to commons, it can be altered in any way by anyone. The original uploader retains no rights other than those defined in the license. Of course, if you wish to refrain from altering certain images for your own personal reasons, that's fine. Just remember that's just your own personal policy, it's not a Wikimedia Commons policy and has no effect on anyone but you. JBarta ( talk) 23:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI, you missed the circular watermark in the center. JBarta ( talk) 22:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, my friend, I'd like to wish you a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Keep up with the good job you're doing at the Graphic Lab. I hope we'll talk more next year. Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 23:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 03:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC).
Looks like you had a press-box view of the action. :) Was it very cold there, or fairly mild for January? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I went looking for that 2010 HBO special about the Broad Street Bullies, and as luck would have it, the entire thing was on youtube. I just finished watching it, and oh boy did it bring back some memories. :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi! A small reminder about image cleanup notices: after you have fixed a specific issue with an image, also look for and remove a notice template requesting that fix (e.g. {{ Opaque}}), if one exists. For {{ Watermark}}, it is also customary to replace it with {{ Watermark removed}}, rather than remove it, unless the image is in the public domain. Here's a list of almost all such notices. These templates usually place files in the Category:Images needing cleanup, where the Eight Requests images in the GL are taken from. — Quibik ( talk) 23:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
{{watermark}}
to {{watermark removed}}
like so. –
JBarta (
talk)
14:23, 13 January 2012 (UTC)Centpacrr, I'd like to ask you a favor. Please take a look at this painting. Is there anyway you could change the background (tone, colour, I don't know) and allow the character's hair to be actually visible? I don't want you to change anything at all on the person despicted, just the background. Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 20:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Centpacrr, I'm sorry. I wasn't clear enough. It's because the image of Emperor Pedro I doesnt look good. Too bright. I wanted it look like this coupled with the new background you made. Lastly, I saw you made his brown hair mroe bright on the other image. There is no need for that. You also forgot to change the color of the dark are below his chin (that's his beard as you can see here). Regards, -- Lecen ( talk) 13:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
I think you should also remove the smaller watermark underneath the boat in File:FNR.Triremis.RomanEmpire.BCE31.SvenLittkowski.001.jpg. Cheers, Quibik ( talk) 17:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Nice job of watermark removal with the Petra Kvitova images. -- James26 ( talk) 02:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Please take it easy - we all have our views on how to "improve" an image, and all are stubborn to some degree :-). My issue with blue background is it is more of an artwork, whereas TCO is working on a reality article, i.e. the image is a factual evidence of a medical procedure. Materialscientist ( talk) 03:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
The "ice cream makes everything better" appreciation note Centpacrr, all else aside and in all seriousness, I do think you're an excellent graphist who does good and valuable work around here. I'm not apologizing, I'm not asking for forgiveness, I'm not turning over a new leaf and I'm not taking anything back. I'm just offering an honest and well-deserved compliment and an ice cream. Enjoy. ![]() |
![]() |
text-graphics partnership award |
Thank you for the graphics support for Fluorine, a high view article with importance to industry and schoolchildren TCO ( Reviews needed) 03:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Centpacrr. There really is no reason to manually archive requests as you did here. The automated DyceBot does it on a regular basis. While there may not be an actual "rule" prohobiting such, I would suggest archiving (or even "resolving") too soon removes the discussion without giving a chance for other editors to weigh in. Further, I would argue that this is especially inappropriate when there is some disagreement going on and you're one of the participants. As you would probably argue yourself, it's not a contest, it's a discussion with anyone and everyone given ample chance to weight in. – JBarta ( talk) 08:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi again, Centpacrr! As it seems you enjoy doing the "Eight Requests" cleanups quite a bit, I thought you could be interested in helping out with even some more images. As you might have noticed, all of the images I add are taken from Commons:User:Quibik/Files by viewcounts (that's images with cleanup needed, sorted by total pageviews on articles that use them), which in turn are taken from Commons:Category:Images for cleanup (English wiki has got this category too). So, whenever you have exhausted all images at Eight Requests, you are encouraged to work on any images from either of these places. All the best, Quibik ( talk) 13:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
About these three images: File:John Cena 2010 Tribute to the Troops (1).jpg, File:Dolhp Ziggler 2010 Tribute to the Troops.jpg, File:Jack Swagger Tribute to the Troops 2010.jpg. I believe you would agree, that an edited image should actually look better than the original. I cannot say, however, that a black rectangle is in any way an improvement over a watermark. Please do not edit just for the sake of editing. — Quibik ( talk) 18:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I hate to pile on here, but not only do I agree with Quibik above, I'm finding your incessant image "improvements" a little harmful. It really does seem as if you cannot pass near a file without messing with the colors, brightness, saturation, etc. Here are two recent examples 1, 2. In both cases, you felt the need to not only fix whatever needs to be fixed, but then you alter the image so it's now worse than when you got it. Seriously Centpacrr, chill out a little. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. – JBarta ( talk) 20:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting out File:Wool Exchange, Bradford 045.jpg. Much appreciated. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 02:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
As you're a regular I wil refrain from templating you, but when you make a revert like this one you put yourself firmly in the wrong. WP:RETAIN recommends keeping the language version of the article that it was written in, in this case clearly British English. In addition, your edit restored numerous other problems with the article (a spelling error, some overlinking, some unreferenced material). Please be more careful. Thanks, -- John ( talk) 06:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Centpacrr. I noticed that in some watermark removals you did, you changed {{watermark}} to {{watermark removed}}. That's good. But to do that for a datestamp essentially places an inaccurate tag on the description page. "Watermark removed" states "Attribution information, such as the author's name, e-mail, website, or signature, that was once visible in the image itself". In this example no such attribution information was removed or moved. Only the date was removed. So, if you remove an attribution watermark, use "watermark removed" (and make sure the attribution info is in the description). If you remove a datestamp, just remove "watermark" (and put the photo date in the description if you think it's pertinent) – JBarta ( talk) 18:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Can I make a small request? Would you please mark as done each of the eight requests as you complete them. It's getting to be a minor annoyance to click on image after image only to see you have already done it and will get around to marking them "done" sometime later when it suits you. It's a small small annoyance, yes... but a truly needless one. Thank you. – JBarta ( talk) 19:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
A super-minor request about {{watermark removed}} templates: would you please place them below {{information}} or the license rather than on the top. The content of {{watermark removed}} is rather unimportant to most users and editors, so it probably should not be the first item on the page. — Quibik ( talk) 14:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm actually kinda glad you lightened it. It looks better that way. After I got done with the minor repairs I did a some levels adjusting because it seemed too washed out. After I uploaded it though, I really wasn't liking it. I'm glad you made that change. (enjoy those words because I don't say that to you very often ;-) – JBarta ( talk) 22:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Watermark remains (upper right corner). – JBarta ( talk) 18:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Better, but I have to ask... what do you have against shadows? I've noticed on quite a few occasions you brighten the shadow areas of images, maybe not to the extent I feel the need to revert, but very often is unnecessary and does the image harm (IMO). Do you chalk it up to your personal subjectivity and you simply think photos look better that way? And don't take this the wrong way, but have you done any calibration checks on your monitor? Is it possible your monitor simply isn't displaying the full spectrum properly or is adjusted too dark? Sorry, I gotta ask... – JBarta ( talk) 04:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image created by you has been promoted to
featured picture status Your image,
File:Hadji Ali demonstrating controlled regurgitation Crisco edit.jpg, was nominated on
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution!
Makeemlighter (
talk)
11:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
|