User talk:Slaunger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

VI seal The Mediawiki Commons valued image project has opened for nominations!

Contents

[edit] Mite

Hi

Thanks for showing me the mite pic. The first thing I have to say is that even given the Stellaria flowers to be pretty small (about 5 mm across I'm guessing?), that is one ENORMOUS mite! Far far bigger than any I've seen with my own eyes. My guess would be Trombidiidae as well but beyond that I am a bit lost. I will have a bit of a dig, I'm sure such a large, brightly coloured species must have some mention somewhere! Richard Barlow 07:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Mm, it is definitely an arachnid and the shape suggests a mite. Spiders always have the body clearly divided into two sections and all the harvestmen I am aware of have much longer legs than this and tend to be more drably coloured but a body length of 3 mm is seriously huge for a mite. I shall carry on digging! Richard Barlow 11:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Sorry I've not been in touch, not had much chance to dig! I'll get back to you soon Richard Barlow 08:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.jpg
An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.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! MER-C 12:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Upernavik edit

Hey. Have posted an edit at Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Upernavik. Have a look and see what you think. --jjron (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, if you want to email me, we can figure out a way to get the full size TIF to me and Ill certainly work on it for you. Go to my website and you'll find my email address. Mfield (talk) 01:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I have tried sending it for the last two hours via my gmail account. I have now aborted the operation since there was no reports on progress and I am doing a retry. The file is 114 Megs... -- Slaunger (talk) 10:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey Slaunger, it's too big to send directly, you will need to send it to me via Yousendit or similar. Mfield (talk) 15:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, but I wont bother with yousendit. I am just now doing a restitch of the hole thing using the newest bleeding edge version of Hugin and I plan to upload that in an unprocessed state in the highest jpeg quality possible once I have cropped it. Oh, and then I also intend to do another edit try. Previously I have never come further than selective Gaussian blur when it comes to noise removal, but today I have bought myself a fancy pro noise remover and I am impressed by some intial tests and i want to try using that on the image. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Upernavik
An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, Image:Upernavik evening panorama edit4.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! MER-C 06:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Valued Pictures Proposal

Hi Slaunger. Thanks for your comments and vote when this went through FPC talk. 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, especially as regards ideas for how well this integrates with the COM:VI stuff and whether they could work together. --jjron (talk) 17:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jjron, thank you for your notice. I saw you had published your proposal a few hours ago. I will go study it right away. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Re VI/VP. Heh, I just left a comment at Commons VI Talk re naming. Not meaning to butt in though, there's too much there for me to absorb... --jjron (talk) 14:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Nevertheless your comment made sense. Thank you. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Good luck and best wishes for the VI launch tomorrow at Commons. I know you haven't done it all yourself, but I think it's fair to say you've been the driving force behind it. I look forward to dropping by to have a look. Cheers, --jjron (talk) 09:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. It is a little exciting I must say (here 45 m before the opning). It has been a lot of work by me and many others, and I am anxious if the reviews will be sufficiently qualified. That aspect, is for me, the largest risk in the project. I certainly expect that in the beginning there will also be a learning curve for the reviewers and nominators, and it will be interesting to see if the guidelines are too complicated, or what else happens. -- Slaunger (talk) 23:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello again

First, please accept my apologies for taking so long to reply to your message on my talk page. To be honest, I had been getting a bit wikibonked about images processes and just couldn't put an appropriate amount of thought into it again at that point. Rather than working within your project on COM, I've decided to focus my meager efforts here on WP within the FPC and PPR processes, but I wanted to drop you a few lines to let you know, first, that it was not in any way my intention to ignore your request out of spite or apathy and, second, to offer you my admiration for the sheer amount of work you've done with images here and on COM and the amount of energy you've expended toward making the entire project better. While we're going ahead in EN in a different direction than I suppose you were looking for, your well-thought out arguments and civility helped shape things for the better. For your effort, please accept this, the barnstar of civility. Matt Deres (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Civility barnstar.png Civility Award
For keeping a cool head and staying focused during heated discussions! Matt Deres (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Matt, Thank you so much for this barnstar of civility! Previously, I have gotten barnstars from users who share approximately the same views as myself, and I consider it a special honor to get one from a previous opponent in a heated debate. For me, that you get back to me in this spirit represents an exquisite level of civility in itself. Actually, I had completely forgotten about that notice on your talk page, and upon reading it again, I must say I am not too proud of the underlying sarcasm I also had in that post along some portion of good intentions. I guess I was pretty much taken aback by the opposition to what I considered an absolutely brilliant idea (at the time). I think that now I have a more nuanced view on the relations and differences between EN and Commons. It is something I have learned to appreaciate more after nominating three images at FPC with a featured rate of 2/3. I respect that you want to focus on FPC and PPR work on EN. It is correct that I had hoped a higher degree of synergy between EN and Commons were to prefer, but my pragmatic approach now is to realize that the projects are just quite different implementations of basically the same goals. The civility thing means a lot to me, as my ways were recently considered incivil by a Commons admin (who has now retired) which saddened me. So getting this barnstar is a nice cancellation of that other incident. I am now again mainly focusing on COM:VI, which will be go live June 1 at 0:00 UTC. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)