User talk:Alvesgaspar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Radcliffe Camera
You're right that it does look quite different from above and I think I mentioned this in the discussion on the page. I still think it looks just as nice, but aesthetics is as you said: very subjective. You're also correct that Oxford isn't far from London, and I may re-visit one day soon. :) I think Cambridge is next though, so we'll see what sort of photographic inspiration I find there! Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Featured picture promotion!
 |
|
- This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:The photographer new.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on January 28, 2007, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howcheng {chat} 07:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The destruction...
Check your edit. You moved my closing small tag into your comment, thus leaving my tag unclosed and yours doubly closed. --Dschwen 12:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Image:Twin lantana camara edit.jpg
Will you please verify the FP vote count for picture Image:Twin lantana camara edit.jpg? I can see 6 support votes for edit 1. Regards, Alvesgaspar 18:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- You were right, I've changed it. However, this unfortunately doesn't change the outcome. Thanks anyways. NauticaShades 19:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry to insist, but I think it does change the result (2/3 majority). Also, you forgot to count my vote (which, of course, applies to both versions). It should then count 7 support and 3 oppose. - Alvesgaspar 19:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- 6/3 is a 1/2 majority, not a 2/3 majority. Also, I recounted it, making sure to include yours, and found it was actually less than I had thought. Let me go over the supports quickly:
- Your vote: Support = 1
- SOADLuver's vote: Support = 2
- Janke's vote: Weak Support = 2.5
- CountdownCrispy's vote: Weak Support = 3
- My vote: Weak Support = 3.5
- gren's vote: Support = 4
- jjron's vote: Support = 5
- jlao04's vote: Weak Support = 5.5
--NauticaShades 20:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- I’m sorry to disturb you again. First of all please forgive my ignorance: I did not know that a weak support only counted ½ vote... But I still don’t think the result is clear enough. Two of the oppose votes (Adrian Pingstone and Samsara) were given before edit1 was published and were based on problems that were later solved (at least partially). These votes (and perhaps the support vote of SudLover, if we want to be straight) shouldn’t count. May I suggest that the picture returns to the section “Older nominations requiring additional input from voters”, in order to clarify the consensus? - Alvesgaspar 23:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, Newton's Cradle was by Demon DeLuxe, not me; I simply nominated it. NauticaShades 19:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lantana
Sorry to disappoint you but I oppose edit 1 as well, and have said so on the FPC page - Adrian Pingstone 12:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congrats
 |
|
Hello,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Twin lantana camara edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 14, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-02-14. howcheng {chat} 00:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Featured picture promotion!
 |
|
Hi Joaquim,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Using the caliper new en.gif is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 10, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-03-10. howcheng {chat} 17:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sextant
Do you think we might work together to produce a successful animation? I think your work had real potential. John Reid ° 19:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Featured Picture
 |
|
Congratulations, and thanks for making it for us. Raven4x4x 07:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Changing votes
I don't understand why you stroke my vote on the original squirrel image. My intention was really to vote "weak support original" and "support edit 1". Alvesgaspar 17:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please accept my humble apologies for my misinterpretation. Now I know I still have a lot to learn
. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 17:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
No harm done. Good luck with your exams ;-) Alvesgaspar 17:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! I have completed two exams, and I have six exams left. After that, I may change my signature to "happy holidays!" or such. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 17:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- My signature has been changed since my final exams are over. s d 3 1 4 1 5 Happy Holidays! 00:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Happy Holidays!
[edit] Merry Christmas!
- Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays Alvesgaspar! | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 |
May you and your family have a Merry Christmas, as well as any other Holiday you may celebrate. I hope that warmth, good cheer, and love surround you during these special days. May God bless you during the Holidays. | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |  |
You're welcome. Nice philosophical aproach for the new year too. ;-) | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 19:13, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and thanks for signing my autograph book too. :-) | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 11:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Year
- I Hope You Have A Happy New Year Alvesgaspar!!!! ¿Why1991 ESP. | Sign Here 22:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 |
I hope that you have a wonderful New Year and will party all night long. If you don't celebrate New year at this time well then happy early or late New Year and I still advise that you have a good time tonight!!! ¿Why1991 ESP. | Sign Here 22:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC) |  |
[edit] Fruit basket
If you don't mind we should just remove FBs comment on Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Indian_bride_portrait including our replies. It was just vandalism. That user has nothing but vandalized. Check this, how he transformed a vandalism warning into a welcome template. --Dschwen 15:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Commons POTY identity confirmation
I confirm I am the same user as 85.139.196.32 - Alvesgaspar 23:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bassoon
 |
|
Mr Gaspar,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:FoxBassoon.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 5, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-06-05. howcheng {chat} 23:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re:POTY 2006
Thanks for the message. I have no idea what I was supposed to do. Maybe making it a bit more jargon-free might help for next time. I would point out that your message to me that my vote wasn't counted was only a couple of messages away from my confirmation that it was me voting. Never mind, I'm sure it makes no difference anyway. Mallanox 22:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Uh...
I voted on 1 February. My Commons username is NSLE-Chacor, and had over 100 edits at time of voting. As far as I can see, my vote has not been discounted. What are you on about? – Chacor 14:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- On the same issue, regarding this your message [1]. Unfortunately, I don't know how to sign my IP automatically, and not sure whether it was necessary. Anyway, my IPs are dynamic so doing it now would be useless. I think my vote should be counted simply because of the diff. Wishes, Ukrained 18:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Commons Picture of the Year 2006
Regarding this msg that you left on my talk page, is this diff fine?. --Bluerain talk 17:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Regarding diff - I can see it right there on the end of my vote, 81.179.66.146 ... what am I missing? --Stephen Burnett 18:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I followed the diff-making instructions to the letter, and there is no mention in them of referencing an IP in a diff. The diff that the instructions give as an example also does not contain any reference to an IP. Many other diffs on the voting page that do not reference an IP have been left alone there. Why are you only selecting some for deletion, especially given that you are requiring steps that are not in the instructions?--Margareta 21:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- It may help you to review the diff-making instructions. As you will see, I followed them correctly.--Margareta 21:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! :-) --Margareta 01:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] US Statehood FPC
Could you please check this picture? I belive your objections have been met. The Placebo Effect 20:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Promoted image
 |
|
Hi Joaqium,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Using sextant swing.gif is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 30, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-08-30. howcheng {chat} 00:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Glossy Ibis FPC
Hi Alvesgaspar - I went ahead and masked out the glossy ibis FP nom and blurred the background (and desaturated it a bit). I can't help the cropping, but maybe it will meet your standard? Take another peak at the nomination if you like. Debivort 22:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DSLR ?
Salut, tu parles très bien français, je suis impressioné :) but let's continue in English. I don't know much about DSLR, but enough to give a very few hints (diliff and dschwen seem to know much more than I do). I personnaly own a Canon EOS 400D with a EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens. This lens, though great can't be used on full frame (24x36') sensors bodies such as 5D and 1D, so beware if you intend to buy the same and plan to upgrade your body to a full frame one some time later.
I think at some level, all cameras perform basically the same. So D80/400D/A100 are all good choice. I like the Canon interface and very low noise sensors, but I can't tell if they are better than Nikon's and Sony's. [2] and [3] may be worth a look for you. You should also take into account which lenses are available for the body you are going to get. Canon and Nikon seem to offer the largest choice. Some day, I hope I'll own a 70-200 f/2.8 which is said to be great (either in its standard or IS flavour). This way I'll cover focal range from 17 to 200mm (with a slight gap from 55 to 70). To me prime lens might not be necessary because 17-55 is really really nice and fast enough at f/2.8.
I often read [4] for lens reviews, and if you go for a Canon body, [5] is to be in your bookmark.
this is a lot of money. you'll certainly want to use some nicer lens than the kit ones, so I'd say (whatever body you choose) that a 2000€ budget won't let you a huge margin to start. In that case I would eliminate the D200...
I'd like to mention that I started with the kit lens (18-55). It's not that bad for landscape when stopped down to f8. My two FP were taken with this lens (I downsampled them because the corners looked a bit bad).
Hope this help a bit. Blieusong 22:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Je suis assez surpris que tu parles si bien alors qu'à priori, tu n'as pas pratiqué le français depuis longtemps. Moi j'ai appris l'espagnol (même si tu es portugais) au lycée, et je crois avoir tout oublié (à part Buenos Dias, Como Estas...). Yup, from a technical point of view, none of these cameras seems to stand above the others. So it's certainly just a matter of user interface and lenses choice. Blieusong 21:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
And no, you can't use the ** (or ^) operator :) Blieusong 22:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- your solution is wrong, you used a "power operator", and you can't. Hint, your intermediate results can be a rational number. Blieusong 21:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Oedemeridae taxobox image
Hi Alvesgaspar - I think your image for Oedemeridae is better than the previous one, but the insect is so small in your image, that as a taxobox image goes, I think it is worse. Would you mind generating a crop that is pretty much only the insect, and using that in the taxobox? Thanks. Debivort 09:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done - Alvesgaspar 09:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lantana flower and leaves
 |
|
As for the reason why the nom was left open for a long time, the page became heavily backlogged while I was unable to promote FPs and nobody else was willing to take the burden. MER-C 04:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Joaquim,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:LantanaFlowerLeaves-3.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 18, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-09-18. howcheng {chat} 22:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Featured Picture
 |
|
Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 02:16, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Joaquim,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Acrididae grasshopper-2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 4, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-10-04.
[edit] Featured Picture
 |
|
Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 09:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Joaquim,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:WInd Rose Aguiar.png is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 14, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-10-14. howcheng {chat} 22:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] in the RAW
What are your misgivings about RAW? I know I hesitated with it for a good while, so if you have any questions I'd be happy to help. mikaultalk 13:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Battle of Aljubarrota (1385)
 |
|
Hi Joaquim,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Azulejos Parque Eduardo VII-2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 21, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-10-21. howcheng {chat} 22:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Female red-veined darter (new)
 |
|
Hi Joaquim,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Darter August 2007-22 edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on December 15, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-12-15. howcheng {chat} 18:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Using sextant swing.gif
Isn't that backwards? I was taught to find the celestial body first, then bring it down to the horizon, not bring the horizon up to the body as you're showing. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Greenbottle fly
Thanks for the correction.Muhammad Mahdi Karim 13:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bouncing ball FP nomination
There is a new extremely professional re-edit from my original RAW file by Richard Bartz, and I'd urge you to vote for this instead of my own imperfect Photoshop efforts. Thanks very much to Richard for the work he's put in. Please consider voting or amending your vote at: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Projectile motion. --MichaelMaggs 17:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Long tongue tachinid fly.jpg
Hi Alvesgaspar,
I've uploaded an edit version of the image which I think addresses your cropping concerns. Perhaps you could reconsider your vote? Thanks, --Fir0002 22:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pythagorean theorem
The discussion on FP talk seems a bit sterile to me. Why not just renominate the second version? It just needed more time.--MichaelMaggs 21:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pythagoras
Hi Alvesgaspar,
Just saw you comment on your Pythagoras nom when looking through the archives. I think a more simple animated proof would be:
- Start with the abc triangle.
- Grow c out to make a square of size c².
- Grow a square out from a and b, making a² and b².
- Move the b² square into the c² square.
- Divide the a² square up and fill the remaining space in the c² square with the parts of a².
You could use different colours and/or transparencies to make things clearer to users.
I don't see that this would be any harder to animate than the one you did - in fact possibly easier. It's also simpler to understand, at least to me. The original triangle is never changed or removed, and it seems clearer that the c² is equal to a² + b². --jjron 07:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response. Yes, there are several geometric "proofs" like the one you suggest (please see the article). But this one is much simpler and elegant. Alvesgaspar 08:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- To me, the main reason people were opposing the nom was that the 'proof' in fact wasn't simple to understand. For mine, as soon as you started duplicating the triangle, it became confusing.
- If the only people that can understand it are those that are mathematically inclined, then I think that reduces it's usefulness, as they undoubtedly already understand the concept anyway. I have taught this stuff to high school students, and if doing a (paper based) geometrical proof I would use basically the one I suggested above, as it is quite simple to do and follow.
- I realise you must have put a lot of time into the version you did, so probably aren't very inclined to do another version anyway, but I just feel another version may gain more recognition. --jjron 06:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Loved your quote
[6] Just wanted to tell you. You've got the right spirit. Samsara (talk • contribs) 04:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Syrphidae poster.jpg
 |
|
Could you cleanup the individual pics and/or downsample it? I felt that the enc value more than compensated for technical imperfection but it'd be good if some of the concerns were addressed (as in no delist nom in several months time). It's the same story for the mustard one. There's also a relevant policy about edits being featured. After all, it's a wiki. MER-C 11:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your concern. OK, I'll try to clean up or downsample the poster, before someone does it for me. I must confess I did not except this nomination to succeed (and still don't understand how) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vanessa January 2008-2.jpg
 |
|
[edit] hi
Hi. I found you in categories of users who can contribute in English and Portuguese. I myself am a native speaker of English, but I'm well on my way to learning Portuguese. Just check out my user page and talk page, and join in any of the discussions. To keep updated, you can even put a watch on my user page, which will automatically watch my talk page. :-) learnportuguese (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Recent FP votes
Hey, I had noticed on a couple of the recent FPCs that you opposed an edit for "ethical reasons." I just wanted to drop a note and let you know that editing other people's candidates is common practice; and, if it results in a better quality image being created, even encouraged. Once you have released the photo (which you must do to upload it), you give other's the right to edit it. I do understand how you may not like other users to edit your photos (pride of authorship and all that, I do it too, sometimes.), but for FPC it is accepted practice to do this. Hope this helps. Have a great day! Clegs (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks you for your message. Yes, it is a common practise here, but not in COM:FPC, where the author is (usually) invited to improve his image when necessary. As I said in my comments, this is not a question of "right" but of "elegance". If, as I believe, the main purpose of WP:FPC is to encourage authors to participate at their best, then the "pride of authorship" should be considered as an important factor. Alvesgaspar (talk) 01:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ID of photo
Hi. You incorrectly identified a photo of a queen bumblebee as a carpenter bee; I have restored the original image. It's a fine photo, but it's not what you thought it was. Dyanega (talk) 18:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- As an aside, looking in your bee/wasp gallery, you have several misspellings and misidentifications in addition to this particular misidentification. The list: Apis mellifera is often misspelled as "melifera"; your "male Lasioglossum" is a male Halictus species; "Polistes gallicus" is not a valid species name (the correct name is Polistes dominulus); there is no family "Xylocopidae" (which you misspelled "Xylopcopidae") - carpenter bees are in the family Apidae (as is Amegilla - the family "Anthophoridae" was sunk back in 1990); the Halictus species name is spelled "scabiosae" (not "scabiose"); Bembix and Philanthus are in the family Crabronidae (not Sphecidae). If you need help with IDs and nomenclature in the future, please feel free to post links to images on my talk page, and I will happily offer my assistance. Your photos are excellent, and it's a shame to not have the correct names to go with them. Dyanega (talk) 18:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- You have three photos of the same Bombus; I am not familiar enough with European Bombus species to give a species-level ID, but another editor (such as Paul Williams) may be. You might wish to put one of the photos on the bumblebee page and see if anyone can put a name on it. Xylocopa do not have hairy abdomens, and many bumblebees have dark wings with purple highlights. Dyanega (talk) 21:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- No, it is not Anthophora plumipes, I'm afraid. The wings are much too long, with a long marginal cell - your photos are of a queen Bombus - there are several European species with black forms, including campestris, hortorum, humilis, mucidus, ruderatus, and subterraneus. They are exceedingly difficult to distinguish, but I can assure you that it is NOT an Anthophora. Dyanega (talk) 22:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- This picture is a photo of Xylocopa violacea (the reddish color on the hind tibiae is not the hairs, but the pollen wedged in between the black scopal hairs) - it is neither a Bombus nor an Anthophora. None of your photos are of Anthophora. However, your comments about the reddish antennal segments had escaped me initially, but now that I look closer at your photos, I'm puzzled by this feature. Now I'm wondering whether that might be a male bee, and not a female, as we had both assumed. I'll get back to you on this. Dyanega (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
That was the problem with making the ID; I see from the one specimen we have in our collection that males of X. violacea have very different head shape from the females, and have the distal flagellomeres reddish. Since I had assumed it was a female bee, I was correct that it could not have been a female Xylocopa, but I had not personally seen a male of that species before - the hairiness of the abdomen is extremely atypical, and I suspect it may be an artifact of the angle of the photograph, in combination with condensation of moisture on the hairs to make them appear longer and denser. So, my apologies for making that mistake: it is indeed a male of X. violacea, and not a Bombus. Dyanega (talk) 21:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Bumblebee October 2007-3a.jpg
 |
|
[edit] Wikipedia:Caliper
What is the right place for for|see links, and why did you take out the one that was already there? --Ecographer (talk) 17:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- I believe the right place to insert links is in "See also" (internal) or "External links" (external). When there is another meaning for some title (that was the case of "caliper brake"), there should be a disambiguation page with a list of all different meanings and corresponding articles. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. I will put in a see also link. Ecographer (talk) 19:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Asteracea poster.jpg
 |
|
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Head of a hoverfly
 |
|
[edit] Wasps do not regurgitate nectar
It's really that simple. Paper wasps use water to make paper. Dyanega (talk) 17:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- The use of regurgitated water droplets for evaporative cooling is very well-documented for honey bees, incidentally; everyone who studies paper wasps recognizes that they do the same thing, and I've seen it myself on numerous occasions. Just because it isn't researched in every insect that does it, does not mean it is not well-known. Paper wasps also use regurgitated water to dampen the nest and cool the brood, but the female in the photo is not on a nest, so she is clearly using it to cool herself. Dyanega (talk) 17:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Many different winged insects regurgitate fluid, not only wasps and bees. In the case of flies, that happens normally in bright sunlight and the practise is believed to be a way of warming up the fluid (a long discussion on the subject can be found here). Physically, I can't understand how evaporative cooling of the insect body is achieved through the evaporation of a spherical water droplets positioned in one of its extremities. If some evaporative cooling really takes place, it should be on the surface of the droplets, and some breeze is needed for the process to be effective. Bees use evaporative cooling to cool the larvae by depositing water and then fanning air with their wings. It seems obvious for me that insects take sunbaths to warm up, no to cool down. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- In the case of this particular wasp, the droplet disappeared and formed again a number of times during the period I was there. In the meantime, the wasp remained motionless. BTW, wasps do feed on nectar, not water -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wasp bubble blowing
 |
|
[edit] Missing image Image:Mosquito 2007-2.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Mosquito 2007-2.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Mosquito 2007-2.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Mosquito 2007-2.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 08:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fernão Vaz Dourado nautical chart
 |
|
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ptolemaic geocentric model
 |
|
[edit] Quote
This [7] is going to be my quote of the week. Oh yeah, how mature... ;-) --Dschwen 23:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Being a species that shares this same odd characteristic, maybe we should be put in the Mecoptera order. Unless it doesn't count for being biped ;-) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/A solitary bee (Eucera sp.)
 |
|
P.S. please don't put wiki markup in nomination titles, it stuffs up the featured picture tag. I've fixed it by moving the page, but it's something I'd rather avoid doing. MER-C 12:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:FPC talk
Hi Joaquim, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would strike your last response as an act of good faith. It will only serve to inflame an already overblown, irresolvable argument and divert attention away from the main issue. Whatever issues people have with Commons, they will be resolved by better communication, not bigger arguments. Cheers, --mikaultalk 11:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I did as you asked as a sign of good faith and because I believe this is a useful debate. But it was not me who inflamed the discussion :( -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. Emotions were way out of hand long before you arrived. I think your suggestions have been very constructive, FWIW. Thanks for helping to calm things down. --mikaultalk 12:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Wasp colony.jpg
 |
|
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Hoverfly April 2008-1.jpg
 |
|
[edit] Locust
Friend, I do not doubt the validity of your statement that the image you prefer is better than the one of Desert Locust; however, the article is about Locusts and the image of a grasshopper. Therefore, I have undone your last change. Thank you—GRM (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- You are right and I was was wrong. Sorry. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Valued Pictures Proposal
Hi Alvesgaspar. Thanks for your comments and vote when this went through FPC talk. I realise you preferred Option 3, but there was a pretty clear consensus for Option 2 which involved setting up the project here. I have developed a trial version at User:Jjron/VP Trial. I have put up a discussion at PPR talk - Wikipedia_talk:Picture_peer_review#Valued_Pictures_Proposal for comments. Feel free to drop by and give your thoughts. --jjron (talk) 17:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Wasp May 2008-11.jpg
 |
|
![[7]](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Scorpionfly_March_2008-1.jpg&diff=199328485&oldid=199322734){kind=link}
