Archiving all existing threads on this page. Respectfully requesting the patience of fellow editors regarding unresolved existing issues. I tend to be the mouse who bells cats and there was a rather large tiger running around today. This is likely to take up a fair amount of energy for the near future.

In the meantime I will be doing my best to return to the content I was working on as today's events were brewing: a fourteenth century manuscript navigational chart of the Mediterranean Sea. Let's all remember please that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; urging other editors to direct their energies into useful content. With respect toward all, Durova^Charge! 22:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, a while ago I unblocked Bus stop on the understanding that he'd be mentored by you. A cursory review of his contributions revealed no issues, but I wanted to check in with you and make sure he's doing ok.--Aervanath talks like a mover, but not a shaker 06:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be. I'd been on the fence about leaving a touch-bases post at his user talk, and have done so now. Thank you for coming by. :) Durova^Charge! 17:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Mount Rushmore2.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! Noodle snacks (talk) 11:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 17:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new guide for professional photographer's to help them when they contribute images to wikipedia. You can check it out here Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography/Guide for Professionals. Since you seem to be an expert in everything (including photography), your input would be greatly appreciated. Remember (talk) 13:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had a brief correspondence with Jerry Avenaim when his portrait of Mark Harmon was up for FPC. There's a great untapped potential in this area. You seem to have a direction for this page already; what are you seeking to do? Durova^Charge! 17:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to create a page so that those people that are professional photographers can have a page to turn to which discusses their unique situation in uploading pictures to wikipedia. I also think that having this page might be useful when trying to get in touch with a professional photographer because you can just point them to this page and it will show the basics of how it is done and who has done it in the past. Your thoughts? Remember (talk) 02:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a large bible "The Brown Bible" dated from 1878, each page is a bit bigger than A4 in size. There are many pictures in it, some in quite good condition. Any clues as to how to determine the author(s)? Noodle snacks (talk) 13:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whew, good question. Definitely would be PD-1923. Probably PD elsewhere at that age, but to document it a reference librarian would be the best place to start. Or possibly an antiquarian bookseller. Durova^Charge! 17:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This has gone awful quiet and so has this — Realist² 17:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The review went too long for a short article. If you are busy, please tell us or indicate at GAN that it needs to be rereviewed by someone. Thanks, Durova. --Efe (talk) 05:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks When you reviewed Everything That Happens Will Happen Today, I was essentially the only editor to the article (I still am), and I was also taking a break from Wikipedia. Consequently, no one acted on the simple suggestions that you made for this article to pass a GA review. I have been working on it for the past several hours and will continue for the next day or two. If you want to take a look at it in a couple of days when I'm done, let me know. If not, I will go through the process of submitting it for review again. Please post on my talk if you'd like to respond. Thank you for your time. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There you have it I think I'm done. Here are my comments to your earlier GA review (which I can't get to display at Talk:Everything That Happens Will Happen Today for some reason), and here is the permanent link to the revision. Again, please post on my talk if you're interested in looking this one over again or if you think it would be wise to resubmit this to GA Review. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more bit I figured I should let you know that I made some pretty marginal changes to the article since that permalink above. Here is the new one. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think your phrase "wondering how I had signed up for the right reasons and joined the wrong war" is very moving. DuncanHill (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 16:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is low-priority, but it's vexing me: I can't figure out why my photo of John Reed (novelist) isn't showing up in the info-box. Any ideas? --David Shankbone 19:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind - it appears to have been something with categories that were put on that didn't belong there. I don't know the issue, but it's not worth your valuable time. --David Shankbone 19:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Durova's day! For your good work in both article and community space, enjoy being the Star of the day, Durova! Cheers, bibliomaniac15 01:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 01:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova. Did anything come of Campbell's deletion request? Are you still in discussions with him regarding it? I ask because there's currently an AfD underway, which I figured was largely irrelevant until we figured out if discussions were still ongoing, which of course could end in you agreeing to delete the page, thus negating the need for an AfD in the first place.
For obvious confidentiality reasons I'm not looking for in-depth information. Really just whether the discussions are still ongoing, or if they are over and nothing came of them. Thanks. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 14:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also interested to hear what the outcome was of this. Thanks. Jumble Jumble (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From today's scout report Pictures of Science: 700 Years of Scientific and Medical Illustration

http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/explore/?collection=SeeingIsBelieving700&col_id=197

Brought together originally in 1999 for an exhibition held at the New York Public Library's Gottesman Exhibition Hall, this set of intriguing images covers the fields of astronomy, chemistry, geology, medicine, and physics taken from different engravings, lithographs, and manuscript illuminations. The images here range from the 16th to the 19th centuries, and they are culled from works such as the 1798 volume "Elemens de la philosophie de Neuton" and the important 1830 volume "Principles of Geology" written by geologist Sir Charles Lyell. I thought maybe some of this images could be uploaded to wikipedia and fixed up, but I thought you would be a better judge of this. Remember (talk) 16:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Blanchardballoon3.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 19, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-01-19. howcheng {chat} 17:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and excellent caption as usual. I've tweaked the syntax a little for clarity. Best, Durova^Charge! 18:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why? isn't Biszilla also Bishonen? GoodDay (talk) 19:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, last time I checked that page the request wasn't likely to open. But to explain the reason for the name proposal she had used the Bishzilla account to implement the block. Durova^Charge! 19:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okie Dokie. PS- oops, I thought Bishonen was a male. GoodDay (talk) 22:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for coming here to clear it up. Durova^Charge! 22:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. PS- I remember you, from the Fidel Castro article (remember El Jigue?). It's been awhile. GoodDay (talk) 22:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! Yes, the fellow who supposed I was the last Communist in Eastern Europe. Penned a blog post on that last May: "The official Soviet red herring".[1] Brings back chuckles; much appreciated. :) Durova^Charge! 23:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think some moderation in your approach to promoting the importance of sensitivity and civility on Wikipedia might be a good thing. Accusations and implications of complicity and association with serious abuse and harassment is a very serious charge. I am redacting my quotation of the specific comment to which I am referring, but it is in this page's edit history. I'm not trying to create more drama or inflame the situation, I just wanted to offer my perspective. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the refactor. I had written a reply and ec'd. Shortening the reply a bit, and your candor is welcome here. The other day regarding David Gerard's oversight of FT2's post, I observed that normal adults sometimes overreact when a hot button issue surprises them. Most of us have that kind of moment sometime or other.

Naturally Giano is not responsible for the extreme problems that sent me to the FBI and another woman to the police. The question I am raising is what tone does he set? What boundaries do other people test and tolerate, when the diffs I posted to the RFC and its talk page become inside the goalposts? The young woman I was helping at the time saw the connection immediately: one of the reasons she quit this site was because she despaired at getting any sensible assistance at all for her own problem, in light of what I was being told to put up with from Giano. She was very clear about her conclusion before she left.

I've done awareness raising, such as going public along with David Shankbone when we both opened FBI cases. Google our names and P2Pnet news to read the report. Maybe you've followed every word here and you differ with the conclusion. Reasonable people can disagree. I stepped forward expecting a few harsh reactions, and am willing to weather this out of respect for other women. Durova^Charge! 21:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I have a few comments.

1) With regard to editors being driven away, I have seen some very disturbing resopnses on the notice boards to people who bring issues there. By the time someone is asking for help they are usually exasperated and frustrated. These are often relatively new users who don't understand the subtleties of how things work (for instance not asking for a block, or keeping their complaint short and allowing others ot look into it). They don't understand well the grand scheme of who is responding to them and how these things are handled (for instance anyone responding on a noticeboard is thought to be an Admin). They also don't have established relationships and friends who look out for them and weigh in on their behalf. They are treated as noobs and to use a hunting metaphor, noobs are always in season. The problem doesn't just happen to new editors though, more experienced editors who haven't dealt with disputes before can get a bit of a shock on how things work when they discover how their exaperation and frustration is dealt with. The response they get is frequently along the lines of a three stooges routine. Often their complaints are dismissed without any empathy (let alone sympathy or compassion) and the complainant is ridiculed and criticized.

Whether their complaint is right or wrong, people should be treated with dignity and respect and have their concerns taken seriously. I also take issue with the "you're in the wrong place" response. What difference? Answer their question, and point them to how those matters are handled. My point is that the level of arrogance and flippancy is a substantial and general problem, and gender insensitivity is, I think, one component of it.

2) Giano pushes the boundaries (crosses the boundaries?) of taste and civility. There's no question about it. But he has to be held responsible for his own actions and not those of other editors or more general atmospherics. A more general discussion of what constitutes civility may be appropriate in the appropriate forum, I have my own thoughts on that issue, but I think making any user the poster-boy (if you will) for incivility, or sexism, or harassment, is problematic in all sorts of ways.

3) The context of your comments was an RfC on Giano. When a target it put on someone and all sorts of people launch arrows and barbs and feel free to discuss them and their behavior, they should expect a strong reaction and a combative and/ or bunker mentality in return. I've seen a number of people comment that Giano is treated with a sort of immunity to the rules, but Giano is also a special case in the level of incoming fire and attention he receives. Giano strikes me as being an intelligent and reasonable person, and I think he needs to be shown a greater level of respect and tact in how people address their concens about the things he says and how he deals with other editors and the frustrations that arise in editing Wikipedia. There seems to me to be a self-perpetuating pattern of abuse on both sides. I highlighted your comment because it seems to me to play into the drama. Many of the complaints on both sides are based on things said and done in 2008. A month or two is a long time on here, it seems to me, and I think it's better to move forward rather than constantly reaggravate old grudges and to muck about in old disputes. What Giano did or didn't do in October or November of last year seems to me to be largely irrelevant.

4)Finally I would note that those of us who do not possess "a few extra buttons" experience Wikipedia in a very different capacity than those who do. If the cop tells you that he just has a few extra powers and is subject to all the same laws you are, that's not a great comfort when he's holding a gun to your head.

I am certainly not an expert on the issues involved and have only witnessed them in the most peripheral of capacities. But that's my two cents on the situation. Sorry for the rather long explanation. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good points, articulately expressed. Two of the examples I cited came from last month, and in light of his temporary hiatus that's recent. Maybe different underlying wikiphilosophies play a role: the vested contributors issue? Not a principle I've bought into. Well, up to a point: anyone could have a bad day or a bad week, but if the overall if the problem becomes habitual? That's how Usenet went downhill. My take is it's the same rules for everyone. That's why I called out Charles Matthews for incivility while he was an arbirator--possibly tanked his reelection--and why I gave JzG a civility block warning while I was an administrator. Handed in those 'few extra buttons' at this project (but have them at three sister sites) and may be the last person who seriously believes they're no big deal. Giano is certainly intelligent, and it may be a quirk of the wiki that spun out the talk discussion on one of three examples in a manner that article space would call 'undue weight'. None of us are perfect: does he step back from his mistakes? It isn't easy, as we both know. We have; will he? Durova^Charge! 23:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Currier & Ives Brooklyn2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. SpencerT♦C 23:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! :) Durova^Charge! 23:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remarks upon Signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:LBJ Civil Rights signing 1964 edited.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Xclamation point 23:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 17:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Thanks for the info. I had seen the protest picture in the portal but was not quite sure who was in charge. Is the review process similar to that of FPC? --Muhammad(talk) 07:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, featured portal candidates have their own review process. Usually when something is a featured picture already the only issues would be relevance to the topic and captioning, for the featured portal reviewers. Cirt is Wikipedia's most prolific featured portal contributor. On several drives in the past I've worked with him contributing images. Sometimes doing restorations to fill out the selections. I was thinking overnight about something you might help choose. The Library of Congress has several dozen Islamic manuscripts from Mali. Not fine calligraphy like the Ijazah, so the encyclopedic value would be more due to the content of the Mali manuscripts. I'm headed out the door for brunch right now, but wondered if you could review them and select the most important one? I'd restore. It'd be great to have more African FPs and another image for the portal drive. Think you could help there? Durova^Charge! 16:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am willing to help. Just post a few of the pictures on my talk page and I'll try to select the most encyclopedic one. Good nomination at FPC, BTW --Muhammad(talk) 14:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova. I hope you don't mind me pestering you, but I have a question or two in relation to the Triple Crown awards and was hoping you would be able to provide me with some answers? First off, for one to become eligible for the Wikiproject Australia Triple Crown would one have to just get one each of DYK, GA, and FC on a topic related to Australia? And, if so, would one be eligible for both the Wikiproject Australia Triple Crown and the Standard Triple Crown, or would two different credits of each be required? My main motivation for asking is that I hold a Standard Triple Crown and each of the articles it is for are Australian topics—Australian Victoria Cross recipients to be exact. Also, do each of the DYK, GA and FC need to be different? As in, if an article had been up at DYK and had passed as GA, would it count one for each or just one or the other? Same with GA to FA? Thank you very much for taking your precious time up to read this, and hopefully reply. :) Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:58, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out. Do you think that Vanity Fair caricature has FP potential, and if so, how challenging a project would it be? I'd be willing to give it a shot.--ragesoss (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup Newsletter

This is not a race, Durova. :) -- Samir 07:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not meaning to, just trying to finish up and get to bed. Late evening in California. :) Durova^Charge! 07:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Took me a while to realize what was happening with the edit conflicts. Even later here in Toronto. Have a good night -- Samir 07:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You finish up then. I'll finish in the morning. Best wishes. :) Durova^Charge! 07:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agh, you beat me to this one! Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jen, I had already downloaded the one you nommed. Restoring it would have been my next project. Cirt's working on a featured portal drive for Portal:Islam. Cheers! :) Durova^Charge! 17:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova:

I was wondering whether I might ask a favour of you please (in your Commons admin capacity). If you are unable to, I shall entirely understand: I know how thinly you must sometimes find yourself spread :)

We have just overhauled the design of our existing A-Class medal and added three more variants. For information, the new designs are as follows:

File:Mil Hist A-Class Bronze Medal (variant).png File:Mil Hist A-Class Silver Medal.png File:Mil Hist A-Class Gold Medal.png File:Mil Hist A-Class Gold Medal - Gold Oak Leaves.png

The files have already been uploaded to Commons by Noclador but we would like their names changed. I gather that only sysops can move files on the Commons: hence, my bothering you :) The idea is also to overwrite the first existing file with a new image so we don't need to update the awards so far manually. Anyhow, here are the existing names and the preferred file names:

Image:Mil Hist A-Class Bronze Medal (variant).png > Image:WPMH ACR.PNG

Image:Mil Hist A-Class Silver Medal.png > Image:WPMH ACR (Oakleaves).PNG

Image:Mil Hist A-Class Gold Medal.png > Image:WPMH ACR (Swords).PNG

Image:Mil Hist A-Class Gold Medal - Gold Oak Leaves.png > Image:WPMH ACR (Diamonds).PNG

Many thanks in advance for any help you can provide, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 14:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Queen_Wilhelmina2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Wronkiew (talk) 17:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) I was in chat with two Dutch Wikimedians when you posted this. They're delighted. :) Best regards, Durova^Charge! 17:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:82northe.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 23, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-01-23. howcheng {chat} 17:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Did a little copyediting. Durova^Charge! 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova, it's strange to me that you're suddenly, a week after the fact, officiously posting to me about filing the RFAR.[2] "To Bishonen, it's quite simple"—it sounds like I've been nagging you to explain your request for arbitration ever since! (Whereas I've actually never even mentioned it.) How are you involved? What's your role? How many people are you going to explain it to? [3]

Your notion that retiring the Bishzilla account is a "step forward" (from what?) is meddlesome, and your thanks offend me. Please refactor them. Bishonen | talk 19:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Bishonen, you referred to me by name in a late follow-up statement. I have been working on content and did not notice your post immediately, so addressed it as soon as I did see it. My opinion of Bishzilla has been no secret to you since the Tango arbitration request: it used to be a wonderful joke, then along the line something changed and it stopped being funny, and the tangible bitterness here in your words reinforces the opinion that it was a good decision to retire the account. I miss the Bishonen of two years ago--miss your warmth and humor and wonderful articles. Really, I do hope to see those sides of you again. Now it's time for content: I finished two restorations today and a .ogg conversion to upload, and have three featured content candidates to write. After that there are some promises that have been on hold that need to be kept. Perhaps in the interim you'll reconsider your post here. Today is a day of reconciliation. Nobody's perfect; let's put behind the past and move forward. Durova^Charge! 19:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the only person I can think of with experience in both the technicalities of working with old images, and the use of images between Commons and Wikipedia (I'm sure there are others, but I don't generally have many dealings with the Commons crowd), would you be able to have a look at this image and the storm-in-a-teacup that's ensued regarding its copyright status? A deletion request over on Commons has now spawned a sprawling thread there about its status. (FWIW: my personal opinion is that it's almost certainly a tinted black-and-white photograph and not a painting, given the black-and-white human figures and that trivial elements in the foreground such as gravel and power lines are shown in sharper focus than significant elements such as the station and buildings; that there's no reason to doubt that it dates from 1915 or earlier; that there's no reasonable way to identify the creator, and in any event the copyright would almost certainly have belonged to the publishing firm and not the photographer; and that uploading the back of the image as "proof" of the age is pointless – given that there's no way to demonstrate authenticity of the back, this requires just as much of a leap of AGF as "taking the uploader's word for it" does.) If you have any suggestions in breaking the logjam – even if it's "delete the image" – it would be useful; this relatively minor debate over this image – which isn't essential to either of the articles on which it's used – is potentially going to hold up FAC of one of said two articles, and I'd love to get it resolved sooner rather than later. – iridescent 20:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale should be better documented with direct links to the reference sources (not to the Wikipedia article) and a link to a non-copyvio hosting of the post-1923 platform for visual comparison. Once that is done this image should be transwikied to local hosting at English Wikipedia unless the artist can be identified. The pre-1923 rule applies to US law, not British law, so it would satisfy local English Wikipedia hosting rules (where US law applies) but not Commons hosting policy (which requires evidence of copyright compliance in all relevant countries). Makes sense? Durova^Charge! 20:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Yes, that's very helpful – reverse-transwiki-ing hadn't occurred to me. Assuming it's deleted at Commons, I'll get hold of the original uploader and se if the rationale can be tightened. – iridescent 20:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Technically it'd be a valid Commons deletion, but no need to rush on that since it looks like it can probably be verified as legit PD stateside. It's easier to transwiki this way. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 21:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Amsterdam photochrom2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Wronkiew (talk) 05:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 05:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Darwin restored2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The request for arbitration named above has been declined as superseded by motion :

• Bishzilla (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) is strongly admonished for her conduct in this matter. She is advised not to block users to force further discussion or action on an issue, nor to increase the pace of an issue, and not to take administrator actions with respect to disputes in which she is involved. Bishzilla is warned that any further such incidents are likely to lead to the suspension or revocation of her administrator privileges.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Mailer Diablo 14:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI diff, if you might find this useful I'd be glad to help, otherwise the best of luck. Tim Vickers (talk) 22:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment or not? Here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, I've commented at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stuart_Campbell_(journalist)#Stuart_Campbell_.28journalist.29, operating on the assumption that the person who requested deletion of the article is indeed the subject. Should I have been mistaken in that, please let me know on my talk page and I may revise my comment (although based on what the article cites at present, notability seems pretty borderline anyway). Thanks, Jayen466 13:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you might wish to revisit your comment on the talk page of the Arbitration Enforcement RFC with respect to Tango's desysop. Tango was desysopped because he had made a series of questionable blocks, the last of which was a block which he attached to the 9/11 sanctions. The evidence was that almost every block Tango made on a "named" editor was questionable, with the exception of a 3RR block to a well-known edit warrior. It was his pattern of behaviour that resulted in his desysopping, not one single action. Risker (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course. What triggered the RFAR though? He blocked Mongo, per the discretionary sanctions. Got that one right down to the letter, didn't he? The rest of Tango's actions are irrelevant to the point I was making. Durova^Charge! 23:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the contemporaneous discussion on ANI was very split on whether the block was appropriate; the RFC that was started after the RFAR was filed demonstrated certain behavioural issues, and evidence had already been provided to Arbcom about other problematic blocks. It was only after all of this transpired that the case was accepted. MONGO was blocked for saying "get lost...if you support conspiracy theorist misusing this website, then you should be deadminned" in response to a warning from Tango to be nicer to an editor who was, about six weeks later, topic-banned from 9/11 articles for conspiracy-theory POV-pushing. Problematic admin activity is problematic admin activity, regardless of whether the activity involves arbitration enforcement in whole or in part. Risker (talk) 03:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that his action was unwise. The point is, that unwise action was within the latitude ArbCom had authorized. If you'd like to discuss the other example I brought up in my first statement on the RFC itself, would be glad to do so via email. Not as a complaint regarding any particular editor--more as a second example of discretionary latitude backfiring. That one went to a clarification request. I believe there's also another example of a bad AE decision heading back to RFAR, although can't put my finger on it at the moment. In addition to the Scientology case, that is, which was more like AE clogging up and discretionary sanctions simply failing. Although you'll notice even there, one of the few administrators who did show up had quite a bit to conceal. Without enough eyes on the place, these broad powers are apt to go haywire from time to time. You can explain it away case by case if you like; I see a pattern. Durova^Charge! 04:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Gustave Doré - Dante Alighieri - Inferno - Plate 22 (Canto VII - Hoarders and Wasters).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Fir0002 11:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 18:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova! Just a note to let you know I've sent you an email. Thanks, ~Eliz81^(C) 20:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, haven't received it yet. Durova^Charge! 20:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re-sent! ~Eliz81^(C) 02:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Excellent Userpage Award
		Durova, your user page is amazing! Johnfos (talk) 20:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, thank you very much. :) What a pleasant surprise! Durova^Charge! 20:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. BTW, Durova, I just love your collection of sockpuppets :) It is certainly  Confirmed that you've been socking rather heavily. Keep up the good work :) - Alison ^❤ 08:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup Newsletter

17:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Fultondesign7.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 27, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-01-27. howcheng {chat} 17:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great. Thank you! Durova^Charge! 17:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. File:Bingham Canyon Mine 1942c.jpg follows on January 28. howcheng {chat} 17:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. Did a touch of copyediting. :) Durova^Charge! 18:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Currently you have two articles at GAN that you have placed on hold- Defeated Sanity and Solange Knowles- which have been on hold for 43 days. Not sure if you forgot about them or what's going on, just letting you know! --PresN 21:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova, please take a look at this vandalism: [4]. I don't know where to report it.--Fahrenheit451 (talk) 04:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they look like owls that the "grays" might have.  ;) •Jim62sch•^dissera! 23:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm up for a different pic, and will co-nominate. Ceran^→//forge 00:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Mediterranean chart fourteenth century2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Wronkiew (talk) 06:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 01:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Boston, 1775bsmall1.png is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 31, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-01-31. howcheng {chat} 06:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Mirror writing2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Muhammad(talk) 17:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 01:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Layla and Majnun2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Muhammad(talk) 17:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 02:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just a friendly heads-up that I think you forget to include a caption at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Amsterdam Centraal railway station. Best wishes --Eustress (talk) 06:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova. Following a successful FPC nomination and my sticking around over there, I've seen a lot of your restoration work recently and have seen in a couple of places that you are willing to "teach"(?) your skill to anyone who is interested. I am interested but have practically no image manipulation software on my computer. I also can't really afford to buy any, meaning OpenSource software is my preferred (read only!) choice. Would this be possible? If so, can we take it in "baby steps"! Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. :) Durova^Charge! 00:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful. I guess the first step is to download the necessary software. Again, with my OpenSource/free requirement, do you have any suggestions? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GIMP. :) Also Skype, which isn't open source but is free. It'll speed up our communication. Durova^Charge! 09:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to learn, if you're willing. Synergy 22:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick heads up on those LoC scans.

From what I can tell, the Library has access to two systems, one is Phase One kit and if it's the system I think it is, it's state-of-the art. I can't say which department uses it but suffice to say, it wasn't around when they scanned a lot of the maps and other images in the American Memory collection. They used an old Tangent Artisan 2000 scanner, donated by the manufacturers in the mid-90s, the firmware for which wouldn't have provided any way of correcting white balance on-the-fly, as modern systems do. I used to use something very similar base on the early Leaf platform and it was a wholly manual, post-processing task. The Tangent would have given very high quality, low-contrast result ideal for maps & plans but completely uncorrected as a raw file.

LoC archivists at the time appear to have routinely adjusted the files but only for brightness and contrast, basically due to time constraints resulting from the huge volume of work at hand. It's also much less likely that the workflow in place at this time was calibrated from device to display, although I can only infer this from the colour shift apparent on my (modern, calibrated) monitor. I figured it was worth contacting the library, as you suggested, to confirm that no colour correction, in particular white-balance corrections, were performed, ie that basically "raw" files, with only basic luminance correction, are placed in the public archives. The American Memory team referred me to the Prints and Photographs Division, who replied this morning:

Hello Mick Stephenson

I have consulted with our digital conversion coordinator to make sure that our practice matches what you describe as "raw" scans. He says it does.

For information on our digitization specifications for particular sets of images (which will have varied in resolution standards depending on how recently the scans have been made), check for digitization information accompanying the collection: From our collections listing page < http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pp/pphome.html >), select "More information" next to the collection you are interested in. Generally, if we have drafted specific digitization information, it will be called "Digitizing the ...." For example:

- Digitizing the FSA/OWI Color transparencies: <http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pp/fsacdig.html>

- Digitizing the Civil War negatives: <http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pp/cwphtml/cwpdig.html>

Best wishes.

Barbara Natanson
Reference Section
Prints and Photographs Division
Library of Congress

If you check the [http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/pmhtml/pandigit.html Panoramic Maps "Digitizing the..." page, for example, it confirms the use of the Tangent system and lack of white balance correction. Incidentally it's worth noting this doesn't necessarily mean more recent scans are unreliable from a colour fidelity point of view, as the Phase One scans (for example) will almost certainly perform a basic white point selection on the fly. Chances are, these would be very reliable indeed, given modern colour profiling and display calibration.

From our perspective as an encyclopedia, it means we have no reliable white point reference other than the possibility that there remains a small amount of white border from the scanner hood, or white backing paper. Where this is visible, it can be selected with an eye dropper tool in Pshops Levels or Curves dialogs as a start point, and tweaked from there. Where the scans were all made at roughly the same time, we can safely infer a similar white shift for all similar documents. I guess the only real confirmation would be in person, with a trip to the Library to view it first hand, although perhaps that would be a little bit too time consuming ;)

I'm sure you know the procedure I'm referring to well enough as I've noticed some impressive results, presumably using this approach, in the past. I only brought this up as it seemed there may have been an assumption that the archives at LoC are already corrected for colour and hence not corrected. I hope you can see that this in not the case. I also hope you can accept that I'm not interested in scoring points here, nor did I have any intention of upsetting you in bringing the issue up. I'm sorry if it came over that way. I should add that I'm in awe, frankly, of the time you dedicate to the project and the immense value your efforts provide. However is does seem to me that this correction should be a fundamental one in restoring artworks, if only from a historical accuracy point of view; maybe it's an under-addressed issue generally and should be discussed further elsewhere. I'd be interested to participate in that and who knows, maybe even get back into contributing some restoration work again soon. Real life just ain't backing off enough at the moment :/

Good luck with the nominations, anyway. mikaul^talk 21:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to improve this shipwreck image from the 70s? It has a texture all the way across it and some white flecks in the sky. - Shiftchange (talk) 11:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't much that really could be done with the texture on that image. If you have the negative, suggest you contact Uncle Jerry's Photo Restoration Group on Flickr for assistance. Durova^Charge! 00:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One trouble with the discussion on ANI is there is fear to express one's opinion. I have not researched the user's edits but if I were to come out in favor of unban, I could be indefinitely blocked accused of being a sock defending the master. The safe thing to do is to say nothing or advocate even harsher measures. There should be safeguards against false accusations. Perhaps there could be identity verification. If I am Mary then accused sock must prove he is not Mary, or he could be blocked. The chances that two different people falsely accused of being a sock but sharing the same first name is not that likely. Chergles (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are not a sock of RMS. Feel free to join in the discussion there - Alison ^❤ 16:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I invite no action or comment; but I wonder if it might be worthwhile for you to examine what I have posted as a "comment" at User talk:Tznkai#Note on the topic bans (Caspain Blue and Sennen goroshi)? Plausibly useful? --Tenmei (talk) 20:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't really followed that dispute closely enough to have a good finger on the pulse. Durova^Charge! 00:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Dogcart3.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 1, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-01. howcheng {chat} 00:14, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. File:Dallas skyline 1912c.jpg follows on February 2, which purely coincidentally happens to the date of the city's incorporation. BTW, I dunno why the LOC has the date of the photo as August 1912, when it clearly says "April 1, 1913" right on the photo itself... howcheng {chat} 00:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as always. :) Durova^Charge! 00:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saw that you removed the source template on Mae West. Your action in doing so has been appreciated by many readers. We'll hope it lasts that way. Two questions for you about that very important article:

• Since practically every detail in the text there is covered by the biographies and other sources given as "Footnotes", aren't most or all of the many source tags that remain in parts of the text superfluous now, besides being what readers might find unsightly and/or confusing?
• West was one of the few American entertainment pesonalities whose contributions to comedy, female courage and independent spirit have been universally appreciated, one of the most beloved of all in fact. In this article there is almost nothing appreciative about her international public reputation as one would expect to find (and which factual books such as Mae West, Empress of Sex by Maurice Leonard were about), and anything like that that has been put in seems to be removed quickly by the repeated actions of certain editors who have watched the article. Is this sort of intentional omission odd, or would you find it normal and acceptable, as well as becoming to enWP?

It seems that all the extended and extensive work on this particular article should lead to a reasonably complete text one of these years. There are a number of us Wikipedia users who hope that will happen in 2009. 217.209.96.57 (talk) 18:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. It's silly to see tags like that on an article that's so well cited. As for specific sources, go ahead and ask at the reliable sources noticeboard. Perhaps dispute resolution would be good. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 00:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have strong reason to believe that an administrator is a sockpuppet. Factors to expose this person include Wikipedia's distaste of sockpuppets, the feeling that administrators shouldn't be sockpuppets. Factors to not do anything include that innocent people have been blocked indefinitely as sockpuppets (for example, Ryulong's block of me 2 years ago) and that the sockpuppet's edits are reasonable.

If the standard of guilt is "beyond a reasonable doubt" or "clear and convincing evidence", I will not proceed because my level of confidence in the evidence is not that good. I believe the "preponderance of the evidence" does support sockpuppetry. Chergles (talk) 22:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC) For the record (the second letter of the offending user's name is e)[reply]

Well, it's rare but it's been known to happen. Suggest you confer with someone who has a good reputation in that area and ask for a reality check. The burden of evidence is on you. Durova^Charge! 00:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to hold off because it's bad if one is falsely accused, especially if you are the accused (at least from my own personal experience). There is no damage to WP by not doing anything because the person does make constructive edits and hasn't double voted on anything that I saw. If this person is blocked, then there would be damage to WP (lost edits that never would occur) and the possibility of misidentification of socks. There would also be additional drama because many administrators do not want to sanction another administrator but are very happy to block those who question a fellow administrator. The answer seems clear to me. If the situation were to change, such as double voting, then I would have to rethink the matter. Chergles (talk) 22:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is why it's sometimes a good thing to get a reality check privately. Feedback can either relieve your worries and help reorient the energies toward productive endeavors, or occasionally firm up your concerns. The one thing to be careful about is to avoid mistaking 'looks good' for real feedback. If they don't get down to brass tacks they may not have read it. Learn from my mistake there. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 07:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in, and I wanted to let you know I appreciated all of the comments, advice, criticism, and seriously took it all to heart this past week. I'll do my absolute best to not let any of you down with the incredible trust given me today. rootology (C)(T) 07:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers and pfft. It's no big deal. Durova^Charge! 08:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Japanese archer 1878b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know that you are "backlogged", but would you be able to restore this image? I must confess to I having no knowledge of how or what you do to images to 'restore' them, but I do know that they tend to look rather good when you are done with them. :) Thanks for your time! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, fortunately there happens to be a 37MB uncompressed version of this file. Am downloading and will give it a look to see what potential it has. Is there a special reason for this request? An article you're working on? Durova^Charge! 18:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And yeah...Lexington-class battlecruiser. I'm hoping to nom it for FA sometime around the end of March-ish. I would have asked for the lead picture to be restored, but I really don't like that image all too much. :\ Thanks again! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the uncompressed file comes to 19 megabytes after rotation and cropping. There's enough data to work with. It's got damage; not sure how this will turn out in terms of featured picture potential. We'll see how this goes. Durova^Charge! 19:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I know exactly what "19 megabytes" means. :P Yeah, I know it has damage...that's why I came to you. It's not the biggest deal in the world, so don't lose sleep over it if it doesn't work out, but I just wanted to see what could happen with it, and even if it can't get to FP, at least there will be a better image there! Thanks so much for your time (and help!), —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 20:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Took three days, but it's done. Best wishes with your FAC drive. :) Durova^Charge! 02:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch - that looks great! I may have already seen you replace the image in the article and comment on the FPC page... ;) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 02:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above-linked Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published.

PHG's mentorship and sourcing arrangement is both revised and extended; the full list of new conditions are available by clicking this link. Furthermore, the original topic ban on editing articles related to medieval or ancient history has been rescinded. PHG is prohibited from editing articles relating to the Mongol Empire, the Crusades, intersections between Crusader states and the Mongol Empire, and Hellenistic India—all broadly defined. This topic ban will last for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion.

Any particular article may be added or removed from PHG's editing restriction at the discretion of his mentor; publicly logged to prevent confusion of the restriction's coverage. The mentor is encouraged to be responsive to feedback from editors in making and reconsidering such actions. Furthermore, the Committee noted that PHG has complied with the Committee's restrictions over the past ten months, and that PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. PHG should be permitted and encouraged by other editors to write well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons, and to build trust with the community.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 22:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Took ya guys enough tries. ;) Durova^Charge! 00:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Dutrieuc.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 5, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-05. howcheng {chat} 00:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: File:Johannes Vermeer (1632-1675) - The Girl With The Pearl Earring (1665).jpg follows on February 6. howcheng {chat} 01:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as always. Am running out the door atm; will give this a look a bit later. All the best, Durova^Charge! 01:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Pulaski bird's eye2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:The camel corps at Beersheba2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Durova. I located the theater. I've left the details on the FPC page. Best regards. --Chasingsol^(talk) 05:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you very much! :) Durova^Charge! 05:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Managed to find location information for this one too. See FPC page. Best regards. --Chasingsol^(talk) 06:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, this earns you a barnstar. :) Thanks so much. Durova^Charge! 06:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was unexpected and truly appreciated. Thank you! More than happy to try and find location information for the amazing restorations that you do of historic images. I'll try and keep an eye out on FPC and add them when I can. Best regards. --Chasingsol^(talk) 07:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your research is a really pleasant surprise. By all means continue. :) Durova^Charge! 07:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more for the night! This one was a toughie, primarily because Tel-el-Sheria (various spellings) ceased to exist after the battle. I reviewed and triangulated based upon several different accounts of the battle and several different maps. The location should be accurate to within about a half mile. Best regards. --Chasingsol^(talk) 08:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again. :) Durova^Charge! 18:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it is great that you are active on the admin's noticeboard, and you were very thorough with your intervention of the role account. So, here's this:

		Wikipedia Administrator's Award
		{{{1}}} {{{2}}}

Good going! -BlueCaper (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! But...(blush)...I'm not an administrator anymore. Resigned in disgrace. Best wishes though! Durova^Charge! 18:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you were interested in the tif file of the image.

The copy of the original tif on my harddrive is lost (I deleted some intermediate tif files some days ago cause I needed space..., bad luck, it was in the list.) I suspect the original to be intact at my father place, but I can't access for now, since he lives 350km from me and since he is not so good in computing.

Now I still have the jpeg I shotted this day. I remade the hdr , corrected the perspective in gimp and saved it as a tif file again.

http://dl.free.fr/uPaimQcW8 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esby (talk • contribs) 21:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About the licence issue, I don't really care, let it be PD-old100, that should be enough. Attribution don't really have a sense, since it's a moral right according to the french law, what ever it is mentionned or not, it is mandatory to at least mention Farsari as the original author.

The tiff file will be available at a dl.Free.fr location. (I'll update it when the upload will be complete). (31 mb size)

The same can be done for any image of the album, if you are interested in another tiff.

esby (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you can get me a .tif that'd be great. With a good high resolution file 10MB or more this should be restorable. Durova^Charge! 15:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The url I linked contains the tif file. If you need that I put it somewhere else, just ask. esby (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since it seems the licensing of the image is in order now, I'd like to make another nomination for featured picture of it. Is this tif-file something I may need to include? Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Shoki2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Segregated cinema entrance3.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ase o fuku onna2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just glanced through this to understand what you meant by a request for cleanup. Nice work and kudos. I'm also a photographer (since '71, now on my 7th camera and 5th Nikon), though I do very little professionally.

I just found Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography/Guide for Professionals and added some info to it. One thing that bugs me is the no-derivative works issue. I've uploaded very few images to Wikipedia but I would probably never upload one with people in it for that reason. Any thoughts? RoyLeban (talk) 07:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks. Your point about the no derivative works issue is understandable. It can be a hurdle, and how you choose to manage it is up to you. One thing some photographers have chosen to do is to upload a relatively low resolution image and retain full copyright over the full quality file. That's what the Bundesarchiv (German national archive) recently did with 100,000 images from its collection. There isn't much that can be done with a 150KB image in terms of subsequent editing, but it's good enough resolution for a lot of encyclopedic purposes. Would you consider that? Durova^Charge! 17:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I wrote two separate FAQ items for the page. For me, there are three classes of images:

1. those that I don't care about or took for Wikipedia -- no problem
2. those that I care about and may want to sell, etc. -- low-res upload generally solves the problem
3. those with people or other content where I cannot allow them to be modified, for example, images of non-famous people where a model release was used -- I can not upload any image if derivative works are allowed

RoyLeban (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, one thing I'm hoping to bring to the attention of more professional photographers is the example at right. Jerry Avenaim happens to be a Wikipedia editor and had uploaded a low resolution version of one of his portraits. Someone admired it enough to nominate for featured picture consideration, where it nearly failed on size requirements until I contacted Mr. Avenaim. He was very flattered by the attention (imagine such a successful photographer being flattered :) ) and provided a file that met requirements. Featured picture status qualifies it to run on Wikipedia's main page, where it will receive an average of about 7 million page views as a main page feature and in the neighborhood of 25,000 direct clicks to the hosting page.

Professional photographers may find it advantageous to place a selection of portfolio shots under copyleft in proportions that qualify for featured picture consideration. It helps the encyclopedia gain access to high quality material, and the project is glad to return credit and a link back to the photographer's website from the hosting page. In a competitive field that may be something more photographers should consider seriously. Durova^Charge! 21:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is cool! Perhaps the guidelines should discuss this issue specifically, including giving the minimum res for featured image. RoyLeban (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion on deleting Deceased Wikipedians. Since you've been involved in the page before, I hope you will consider commenting at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians (2nd nomination). Best,--SouthernNights (talk) 02:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up; will have a look. Durova^Charge! 03:04, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, been a while since we've chatted. It's good to see you still going strong around here. Best,--SouthernNights (talk) 23:27, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note so you don't miss it in the flurry of everyone's posts at WT:MILHIST: I've responded at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#A free-form comment. Maralia (talk) 22:40, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. :) Durova^Charge! 22:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to neglect the broader issue in my reply; surely we can do more...somehow. For starters, I discovered that our monthly newsletter has never listed new FPs along with other promoted content. I brought this to the attention of the other Coordinators, and began adding new FPs to the next newsletter. If you have more ideas, I'm all ears. Maralia (talk) 05:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just pinging in case you've missed my comment above. Maralia (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen User:Thatcher/Quis custodiet ipsos custodes and its related talk page? If not, please read it. I stand by every word I said. If that means you feel the desire to open a new RfC because of it, that's your decision to make. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. With notice posted at ANI and the Community Bulletin Board. Durova^Charge! 01:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... since doing an image on Wounded Knee was kind of my idea, I don't mean to... oh, nevermind. Sorry to bother. ;) Ceran^→//forge 02:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was? I hadn't known. Was doing a LoC search for images of South Dakota (primarily for other reasons) and chanced upon that along the way. Durova^Charge! 02:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, I'm only kidding. I'm just being a 'conceded' person Ceran^→//forge 02:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:) Durova^Charge! 02:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Amsterdam Centraal Station2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Wounded Knee aftermath3.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 07:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Zaandam2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This FPC that I just created is causing my trouble. Um, do you think that the current upload has been converted to a drawing format, it doesn't look like a typical photograph. Ceran^→//forge 21:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it looks halftoned. I wouldn't nominate it that way at FPC. How does the original look at that resolution? Durova^Charge! 21:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, I gotta go somewhere, so I'll come back in say, two hours. Sorry for the inconvenience, Ceran^→//forge 21:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When you have time. :) Durova^Charge! 21:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can always just revert to the earlier version and nominate that, correct? Ceran^→//forge 03:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The earlier version isn't high enough resolution. Durova^Charge! 03:29, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the link. Unfortunately, I can't review the images now as my final exams start on Monday and will keep me occupied for around 2 weeks. I will check them out then. Regards --Muhammad(talk) 06:37, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:Could you check File:Baba stone.jpg out? The original version in the file history is a large res image. Would it be possible to get to FP status? --Muhammad(talk) 06:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC) Ignore that ;) --Muhammad(talk) 06:46, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No rush; best wishes on your exams. Durova^Charge! 06:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to ask you about a Triple Crown for the Baseball WikiProject. I'm sure there are users other than myself that qualify. I would be able to make the crown image myself, but I don't want to step on your toes. Let me know at my talk page if this is something that's feasible/possible/doable. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:45, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a really nice map you put on Fort Ticonderoga. I'm not any good at cleaning maps up; if you want to have a go at this map, I at least would appreciate it. (I also have another map-related idea for Arnold Expedition: if you or someone you know would be able to depict the actual geography of the area depicted by a portion of this map, since this one was, to Arnold's detriment, inaccurate.)

Cheers! Magic♪piano 22:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look at it. The format is JPEG2000, which tends to get compression artifacts. Will follow up after a closer look. Durova^Charge! 20:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the good news is that compression artifacts aren't the problem they might have been. Bad news is that the map itself is in considerably worse condition than the Ticonderoga map. I've put about an hour into it; it's restorable but it would be a big job. Is there a priority to this? An ongoing featured article drive? Durova^Charge! 23:15, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would eventually like to get Arnold Expedition to a feature level. It's not high on my list right now, but having a nice version of this map, as well a rendition of an accurate map showing some of Arnold's troop movements (as I mentioned above), will likely be needed for it. (I'm also tempted to inquire at the LoC if this is actually Arnold's map; that would be really neat.) If it doesn't turn up for a month or two, no big deal. Magic♪piano 01:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll add this to the 'to-do' list. Am doing a few other maps currently, so may stretch this out a little. FPC reviewers tend to prefer variety. Please ping me if this becomes urgent. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 04:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've downloaded Gimp and Skype as you suggested at #Image restoration. I would have got back to you sooner, but Wikipedia pissed me off so I decided to focus my attention on writing an article and steer clear of the politics. So yeah, I have them both (I actually had Gimp already), but I need a microphone for Skype. My name on it is mmm.matthewedwards (as in "mmm chocolate"!). I don't have a phone number for it.

So. What's next? :) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've friended you and sent a message. Reply when you have the chance. :) Durova^Charge! 20:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested PR to rephrase a comment of his and I figure it might be worth mentioning to you. Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 15:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for mentioning it. Durova^Charge! 20:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was no response so I'm open to suggestions/intervention. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 02:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've asked politely. That's good. I hope the problem doesn't repeat itself, but in case it does you could try Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. Sometimes a fresh pair of eyes makes a difference. And sometimes people are more receptive to a few words from someone who isn't entrenched in a dispute. I'd hold off on further action for now, then try that route if the problem recurs. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 03:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup Newsletter

20:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by J Milburn, on behalf of the judges. 20:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand how d. sanctions lead to cabal creation... Could you elaborate on this there? Then I would likely endorse :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't say they lead to it; what I mean is that where a dispute has a certain threshold of participants, discretionary sanctions tend to be ineffective. Durova^Charge! 00:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Hotel Del c1900b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:First Manassas map2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 04:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Machine gun corps Gaza line WWIb edit2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 04:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Lotos Club3.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 10, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-10. howcheng {chat} 04:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! :) Durova^Charge! 05:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Due to some unforgivable confusion on my part, the meetup on Saturday the 28th needs to be rescheduled. Please see Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules#Rescheduling poll to vote for a day/time that works best for you. Thank you and I apologize for the inconvenience. howcheng {chat} 05:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 06:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe that WP:MILHIST now qualifies. Discussion: Wikipedia_talk:MILHIST#Crowning_the_project. -MBK₀₀₄ 20:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've made your job easier to see who is qualified: User:MBK004/Sandbox/MILHIST#WikiProject_Triple_Crown_Eligibility. I may be back in a few days with another eligible project, WP:SHIPS has some overlap and I'm going to trawl through our members to see if we have some more editors who qualify. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova! I'm really glad for your help to the article of Uinyeo. With your help, the article can be more accessible for readers who do not have knowledge of Korean history. I'm gonna expand Gungnyeo and Uinyeo articles because I think you had hard time understanding of those because those are quite short in length. I will be online for now, so please contact me if you think more clarification on terms within the article. Thanks.--Caspian blue 21:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For the immensely useful work and time you put into getting Uinyeo to have clearer descriptions, I, award Durova this copyeditor's barnstar. Thank you so much. Caspian blue 03:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. What a pleasant surprise! :) Keep writing those wonderful articles, please. They're highly encyclopedic and really eye-opening. Durova^Charge! 04:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment and question FloNight♥♥♥ 22:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your efforts to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia, but more importantly for your actions to maintain the freedom in the world that permits projects like Wikipedia to flourish, I award you this Barnstar Rlendog (talk) 03:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Golly, what a surprise. Gracias. :) Durova^Charge! 04:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came across this comment [5] by Privatemusings which I feel highly inappropriate. Not only was it clearly WP:POINTY it also was a clear cut BLP violation as Privatemusings must know well that there is no RS that he is Roy's son so it is not a genuine or valid question. While occuring on a user subpage talk page, so only a minor issue, I feel it is highly inappropriate for anyone who clearly knows it to be false and knows it is a violation of BLP policy. I have already informed Privatemusings of my feelings on this matter but noticed while there he had apparently been banned from editing BLPs by the arbcom and found out when I looked into it you were apparently one of the mentor appointed when the ban was lifted, so I feel your words may carry more weight if you agree with me. Nil Einne (talk) 10:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nil, thank you very much for your concern. Unfortunately Privatemusings's mentors resigned last November. It's likely your words would carry as much weight as my own, if not more. Is there some place a notice of the termination of mentorship could be placed to make that more clear? I appreciate your diligence and you're being conscientious. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 17:59, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nil, I would keep the diff tucked away for the inevitable day when Privatemusings is shown the door to this project, a move that will go far toward improving it. --David Shankbone 18:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I still hope things work out for him. But there's been a conduct RFC since the mentorship ended. That narrows down options for continuing solutions, but this diff really doesn't seem serious enough to resolve with any extreme measure. Durova^Charge! 19:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct. --David Shankbone 20:59, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It closed. Durova^Charge! 03:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, Image:Noble Sissle 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Intothewoods29 (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, Image:I'm Just Wild About Harry 1b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Intothewoods29 (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 18:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You were mentioned and thanked by Greg in his final remark (I just found about it today by accident). Read his post here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 03:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Military College of Chapultepec2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 02:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 03:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you been through the maps collection at the Library of Congress?[6] It's hit or miss what you'll find there, but when they're good they're really good. For example, this map of the water supply for Kobe, Japan[7] which is insanely high resolution. The subject might seem kind of boring until you notice who made it and when. I'm just not sure where to place something like that, but have a look and drop word at my user talk if you find one you can use. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 17:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link. I need to go through those and see if there are any I could use for any articles I'm working on. Cla68 (talk) 01:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you find something useful. It's difficult to figure out which articles would be appropriate for the ones that are most interesting from a graphic/restoration standpoint. Durova^Charge! 01:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just wondered if you could revert the vandalism here? Somebody else of course may do so before you do, but I thought it would do no harm to post this here. Bus stop (talk) 02:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. It's obvious vandalism. I've left a level 1 warning since it's the IP's first edit. Good catch. :) Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 03:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Durova. Bus stop (talk) 13:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, how are you m'lady? I would like to enquire if I was eligable for your WikiProject Australia triple crown? The DYK, GA and FC credits are as follows:

• Abraham, B.S.
  • DYK: Percy Statton (RA)
  • GA: Percy Herbert Cherry ([8] [9])
  • FA: Harry Murray (FAC)

Waiting in anticipation of your reply. Thanks/cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 07:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, a bit past midnight in California. Wrapping up a restoration before bed. Will get to work on crowns when I'm bright eyed and bushy tailed. All the best, Durova^Charge! 08:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Have a good sleep. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 08:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind, but I would also like to nominate the following editors for the same award: ;-)

• Nick-D (perviously known as Nick Dowling)
  • DYK: HMAS Jeparit (RA)
  • GA: Military history of Australia during World War II (nom & pass)
  • FC: Australian Defence Force (FAC)

• Backslash Forwardslash
  • DYK: Mount Wycheproof (RA)
  • GA: Australia Day (GAN)
  • FC: Bruce Kingsbury (FAC)

• Ian Rose
  • DYK: Ivor McIntyre (RA)
  • GA: Stanley Goble (nom & pass)
  • FC: George Jones (RAAF officer)

Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, I hope I'm not bugging you, but I thought I would just pop in and see whether the above nominations have been processed yet. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ticonderoga attack plan2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 03:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Think [10] this is worth working on? Spikebrennan (talk) 16:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks more like a valued picture candidate than a potential featured picture. Not impossible to restore at that file size, but images at that resolution generally have a tough time passing. Occasionally they make it, but reviewers tend to be tough on low resolution portraits. Durova^Charge! 03:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Attack on Harper's Ferrypass5.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 15, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-15. howcheng {chat} 03:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks beautiful. Is there a reason to run it in February instead of September? Durova^Charge! 03:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was its turn in the queue, that's all. howcheng {chat}

:O —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 18:27, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Vernon and Irene Castle2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 16, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-16. howcheng {chat} 01:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 03:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Lexington class battlecruiser2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. SpencerT♦C 02:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 03:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Biograph poster2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 02:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 03:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For your awesome (and disturbing) discovery of human remains which has since caused a part of history as I know it to be written I hereby bestow upon thee the barnstar of awesomeness. Congrats! TomStar81 (Talk) 05:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you very much. That's adorable; never seen that one before. :) Durova^Charge! 05:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its a unique barnstar, literally created by a user who wasn't sure how to create barnstars. We occasionally hand them out at milhist for awesome contributions, and I classify this discovery of yours as an awesome contribution, hence the barnstar. You have definitely earned it though, Durova, for this discovery and all of your other contributions as well. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova, that's amazing. Well done. How long until you find a treasure map? J Milburn (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. And um, soon as I've carried away the loot I'll upload it. ;) Durova^Charge! 22:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Durova. Is there a way to non-destructively add geo-tagging to an existing picture, or to the pictures page? I've geo-located another FPC, but would like to be able to add the information in some way. Is there a standard method for doing so? Thank you in advance for your insight. Best regards. --Chasingsol^(talk) 09:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could add geotag information to the central hosting page at Commons. Durova^Charge! 17:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the EXIF data using GeoSetter, and added the coordinate information using the {{location}} template. Hopefully I did everything correctly... Let me know! --Chasingsol^(talk) 18:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I have grown to consider you quite neutral and balanced in several matters, while not taking any sides could you judge my request here [11].

Kind regards, --Molobo (talk) 17:09, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. I've posted to the thread. Durova^Charge! 23:55, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Can you make it on Sunday at all? I need to take my daughter to a birthday party on Saturday the 21st, so that's completely out for me. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 19:31, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bump.howcheng {chat}

Hi, I can't guarantee it. Sunday is one of the worst days of my week. Durova^Charge! 20:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, A third moderator is required at WP:IECOLL to begin the solving the Ireland naming problem and I was wonder if you would consider getting involved. Thanks 21:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, don't think I can add this to existing commitments. Thank you very much for asking; have you contacted MedCab? Perhaps they can assist you. Durova^Charge! 02:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup Newsletter

23:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Harriet Tubman late in life3.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 18, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-18. howcheng {chat} 01:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note to say the story about you and the Wounded Knee picture (in the Signpost) was utterly inspiring. You must have found the whole situation very exciting - one of those moments you remember forever. Excellent work Durova, the picture is amazing (I looked at it for ages) and your discovery even more so. Hard work paying off a thousand-fold. sassf (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Would you like to learn restoration? There's more material than I can do alone, and we're growing a team of people to share the undertaking. Please follow up if you're interested; I'll be happy to coach. :) Durova^Charge! 20:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I would definitely be interested in helping out with that. I can do a little bit of picture restoration (personal use, not wp things - damaged old photos), but have no idea if the way I normally go about it would be good enough for this kind of project. Pointers on technique, expectations etc would be most welcome and I suspect coaching me wouldn't be all that hard. Do you have a project page? sassf (talk) 23:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Media Restoration is our onsite outpost. For practical purposes, though, we do most of our collaboration via Skype. If you aren't familiar with that service already, it offers free text and voice chats and good file transfer capabilities. Email me for my Skype ID; I'll be glad to bring you on board. Best, Durova^Charge! 23:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that this category you created is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted, without discussion, in accordance with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. I'm notifying you in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding [[Category:Songs by Noel Coward]] to articles/categories that belong in it.

I blanked the category page. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of blanking and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to revert the blanking if you wish. However, doing so will not prevent deletion if the category remains empty.

If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with {{db-author}}.

Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 23:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created it about half a year ago for an article I found during stub sorting but didn't watchlist. Perhaps the underlying article has been deleted. If there's a need to recreate it the category could be made again. Thanks for the heads up, and best regards. Durova^Charge! 23:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. And by the way, congratulations on all your FP achievements! --Stepheng3 (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aw (blush), thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 23:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Gaucho1868b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 01:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 02:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Jerusalem panorama early twentieth century2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 01:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 02:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Montreal from Mount Royal4.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 01:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 02:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you were the first to oppose the FPC above for "bad artifacting", and many have since agreed with your oppose. As I am no picture expert I did some research (as I did not know what artifacting was). I guess that artifacting refers to having compression artifacts. If this is a result of image compression would I be right to assume I can't be undone from the compressed image. Assuming that is true I guess that the particular image nominated cannot be saved. In that case, I looked and found a 31MB TIFF original here (direct download). Could this image be used to create an image that wouldn't have artifacting? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could? Yes. Easily? Not at all, and it would have other problems even after the work was done. That file has an extremely shallow depth of field and very extensive surface scratching. Durova^Charge! 19:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it has been speedily closed now but thanks for taking the time to reply. All that sounds way way beyond me, which is a shame as I thought I'd found a good'n. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Root told me to come here when I asked him about FP (I don't recall why I did, but he said that you were the best person to ask). I have some pictures from a one shoot from a while back which might be FP material, but my worry is that I am potentially completely wrong and will make a complete fool of myself if I nom them. Would you be happy to take a quick look over them if I were to link to some, and get some feedback? Thanks. :) — neuro^(talk) 17:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you may want to present them at picture peer review WP:PPR. It's set up for that purpose. :) Durova^Charge! 18:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't know about that -- thanks! :) — neuro^(talk) 23:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Based on participants' votes, Wikipedia Loves Art LACMA has been rescheduled to Saturday, February 21, 2009 starting at 1:00 PM. Unfortunately, I have a prior commitment and cannot attend. I will need someone to be coordinator for that day. Let me know if you are willing. Thanks, and have fun! howcheng {chat} 17:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What does it entail? Durova^Charge! 18:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Making sure everyone has a scavenger hunt list, kicking off the event when people arrive, organize a dinner if people want to eat afterwards. The LACMA staff will help you out, and I actually still might be able to go (I'm waiting to hear back from some people). howcheng {chat} 04:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if I can make a commitment to do that. Coming up two counties through SoCal traffic it's dicey to commit to a given arrival time, even on a weekend. The 5 tends to get clogged a lot, and that's the only really viable artery for most of the distance. Durova^Charge! 04:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Jayen466 noted on the page, I am involved (somewhat) in the Prem Rawat controversies. For example, I was a party in the ArbCom case, and commented in the recent enforcement page discussion. I followed Jayen466's pointer to the request for Arbitration, but didn't see any place where it seemed appropriate for me to chime in, since I am not listed as a party. I would like to join in the proceedings and/or feel I have some useful knowledge and experience of that situation to add. How would you recommend that I proceed? Thanks, Msalt (talk) 18:02, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can certainly start a subsection and add comments without being named as a party. Durova^Charge! 18:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if we are being a bit too persistent about this. -MBK₀₀₄ 18:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"someone who contributed at least ten line citations to an article" - That sounds rather soft, I've done that to a lot of decayed FAs..... YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Selected that as a verifiable metric for the difference between a minor contributor and a significant contributor. Part of the reason the threshold is there is to encourage collaboration, especially by new editors moving up to their first GA or FA, while preventing drive-by copyeditors from exploiting the awards. Do you think the metric should be upgraded? If so, would we grandfather people in? Durova^Charge! 03:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Full copyedits are actually quite difficult. Anyway it also depends on whether you need to count distinct citations or the same ones repeating over and over, like a data sheet. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The assumption has been that someone who adds double digit numbers of citations has probably done other work as well. Could you propose a better metric? Durova^Charge! 03:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An objective metric? Well apart from % of prose contributed or something.... YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there's a difficulty measuring that, and also an incentive to flood the article with minor copyediting--which can be very challenging to do well but trivial to do badly. Btw I do count multiple citations to the same source. Durova^Charge! 01:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		For incredible graphic editing skills that have had significant ramifications - both on and off of Wikipedia - as part of your work on File:Wounded Knee aftermath3.jpg. Cam (Chat) 05:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! :) Durova^Charge! 06:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just found this and needed to think of someone to give it to. Then I thought of you and couldn't think of anyone better :P

·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 19:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Durova^Charge! 20:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you read for WLA this Saturday? Here are some last minute preparations you should do before you arrive.

1. Be sure you have a spiral bound memo pad or notebook (and pen) to take notes and to use for writing the accession numbers, which you then have to photograph (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules for details).
2. Be sure to print out the scavenger hunt list at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules/list. You may also wish to visit http://collectionsonline.lacma.org/mwebcgi/mweb.exe?request=onview1 to make a plan of attack.
3. Since tripods and monopods are not allowed in the museum, consider making a string tripod (not as good as the real thing, but better than nothing).

Additionally, we will plan to eat out afterwards at a nearby dining establishment (TBD) -- hope you can join us for that. And finally, I was able to make arrangements for my daughter so I will be able to attend after all. Looking forward to seeing you there! howcheng {chat} 19:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notes! Durova^Charge! 20:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I had not heard of Template:Did you know before. Might take me a bit to think of how to submit an article. Thanks for the information! Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Hey Durova. If you have time, do you think you can improve this picture's quality? I'd like it made larger without making it blurry, but I have no idea how to do it. iMatthew // talk // 13:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At 3KB there wouldn't be much I can do with it. There's a graphics improvement lab somewhere around. Durova^Charge! 14:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As many know, during Lent, a sacrifice is often made. I am considering not editing Wikipedia during Lent. I saw an article that some Facebook users are not going to use Facebook during Lent, which prompted me to consider my plan. It's not a boycott. Chergles (talk) 16:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest instead of that, perhaps sacrifice your regular editing interests to serve important but neglected areas of Wikipedia? I've just filled in a redlink for Thika River, and was surprised to discover it supplies most of the drinking water for the capital of Kenya. The new article now has seven sources and is up for DYK. Next will be Densu River, which supplies half the drinking water for the capital of Ghana. There are a lot of important gaps in African geography, and it would be a useful type of sacrifice to spend several weeks filling them. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 17:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Durova. You commented two this on this nomination. IMO it is not titled. May I please ask you to take another look? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Durova^Charge! 18:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Ramallah woman2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 22, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-22. howcheng {chat} 19:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. File:Discovery of the Land1.jpg follows on February 23. howcheng {chat} 19:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I'll have a peek. Best, Durova^Charge! 19:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz ^talk 21:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Episode 70 of the Wikipedia Weekly, I heard you mention a WikiProject on image restoration. Could you give me a link? ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I found it. :P Could you possible mentor me? ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would love to. :) We do most of our image restoration via Skype; it's free and it's a very good client for this type of work. Email me and I'll send you my Skype ID and bring you on board. Thanks for your interest! Durova^Charge! 02:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I most likely won't be able to do much for at least a couple of months (swimming, school, the spring musical), but I'll be able to be active in May-June. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, look me up and I'll find a fun restoration you can work on in odd moments. :) Best, Durova^Charge! 22:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Canada WWI l'Emprunt de la Victoire2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 02:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 02:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Snake charmers2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 02:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 02:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're the 23rd result on Google when searching for "image restoration" :) Gary King (talk) 03:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who, me? :) Durova^Charge! 04:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 17:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome!  :) Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup Newsletter

21:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Durova

I'm recruiting User:Mohammad adil as a general creator of battlemaps for MILHIST. In my opinion he did a great job at Battle of Yarmouk, but he could sure need some help. He'll be back in mid-March doing some maps of the Greco-Persian Wars. Can you review his contributions and give some advice? Thanks Wandalstouring (talk) 09:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His work looks very good. It's outside my area, though. Restoring historic maps is quite a bit different from creating vector graphics. Durova^Charge! 09:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:St Alexander's Church2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 24, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-02-24. howcheng {chat} 17:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I made a little tweak to the description. Best regards! Durova^Charge! 00:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:McKinley's last address wide2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Wronkiew (talk) 18:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 00:54, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Be a major contributor to a good article. Out of true curiousity, I was wondering if you would also like to include good topics onto this statement. Just a suggestion. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually that's an interesting idea. How would you work in good topics? Durova^Charge! 00:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't? It was just a suggestion, since it has "good" on it. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 03:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it makes sense to let each Good Topic count as one Good Article. Gary King (talk) 16:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion concerning the reliability of rehosted content on the Prem Rawat evidence talk page reminded me of some examples from the rickross.com page (422 links in article space) which I thought it might be useful to share with you here (just so the info does not get lost if I get run over by a bus tomorrow).

In this Chicago Sun Times article on Scientology, the Rick Ross version misses the words "Criticism fades, but some still see it as a money-making cult" in the headline:

• 'TomKat' casts spotlight back on Scientology: Criticism fades, but some still see it as a money-making cult (Chicago Sun Times original on Wayback)
• 'TomKat' casts spotlight back on Scientology: Criticism fades, but some still see it as a money-making cult (Highbeam)
• 'TomKat' casts spotlight back on Scientology (rickross.com)

The rest of the article text seems to be accurate and complete, except for the little "Scientology at a glance" info box, which is missing on rickross.com.

Here is an LA New Times article on Wayback, and the same article on rickross.com –

• "Scientology's Revenge" on newtimesla.com (Wayback)
• "Scientology's Revenge" on rickross.com

If we compare the two versions, we find that the version on rickross.com contains a number of POV-motivated edits to the text. Some of these are:

• an Ohio woman who sued a cult-deprogramming organization named Wellspring, whose executive director also sat on the CAN board. (newtimesla.com)
• an Ohio woman who sued a cult-[recovery rehabilitation retreat] named Wellspring, whose executive director also sat on the CAN board. (rickross.com)

(Note that Ross is or was professionally associated with Wellspring, which often took in deprogrammees after deprogramming for further treatment.)

• "Jason Scott -- who had been kidnapped and deprogrammed from an evangelical Christian sect" (newtimesla.com)
• "Jason Scott -- who had been kidnapped and deprogrammed from [a church affiliated with the United Pentecostal Church International]" (rickross.com)

In the case of this AP article, rickross.com has both unmarked deletions and commentary when compared to the text given on cesnur.org, a scholarly site, and various other sites (I was unable to get a Wayback link for this item):

• "Supreme Court Denies Appeal By Anti-Cult Group" on CESNUR
• "Supreme Court Denies Appeal By Anti-Cult Group" on rickross.com
• "Supreme Court Denies Appeal By Anti-Cult Group" on "youthofamerica.org"
• "Supreme Court Denies Appeal By Anti-Cult Group" on Apologetics Index, with deletions marked in the correct places

Among the material deleted on rickross.com is the fact that "Scott was abducted by three men, bound, gagged and blindfolded, and held for five days."

Generally, it seems advisable to look for a Wayback version for research (and linking). Jayen466 02:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is Rickross.com being used for this purpose at Wikipedia? Durova^Charge! 02:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's linked to by lots of articles (which is a copyvio problem in itself, since all the material on the site is unlicensed, and some of it is for sale by the rightful owners). I am also sure many editors use the site for research. I have done so myself, and it can be useful for that, as a first port of call. Jayen466 16:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The raw number of external links to a site doesn't necessarily reveal whether Wikipedia has a contributory copyright infringement problem. For an extreme example, take song lyrics sites. Nearly all of the content on those places is copyvio, but occasionally they also provide public domain material: patriotic songs, older jazz standards, etc. So we keep external links to that legitimate part, even if it's only 1% of total site content. Durova^Charge! 16:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine, but whenever we link to a specific newspaper article reproduced on rickross.com, it's a WP:LINKVIO. There are many such links. Just the first article in the search results page, Community Chapel and Bible Training Center, has 22 of them. The proper way to list them would be by giving just the unlinked titles and publishers; readers can always google for those headlines if they want. Note the rickross.com copyright disclaimer in this regard: "Warning -- All META tags, page titles, keywords and other content descriptions used throughout this website are only intended to assist search engines for research and locating purposes. This in no way, shape or form is intended to mislead anyone by implying any official representation and/or relationship exists between this website and the owners of any trademarks, service marks and/or copyrights, which may contain the same keywords and/or titles. ... Any publisher, Webmaster or news service (i.e., official and legal holder of copyright) that objects to their material being included in this archive may request that it be removed and/or that future material be excluded. An official written and signed request sent via fax or regular mail made by the copyright holder and/or their legal representative on company or legal letterhead will be honored. Some of the material hosted on rickross.com is for sale online by the legitimate owners. Example: [12] [13] Also see Fair_use#Practical_effect_of_fair_use_defense, L.A._Times_v._Free_Republic. Jayen466 01:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to bring this up at a noticeboard, that's your perogative. Durova^Charge! 01:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done [14] Jayen466 12:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I notice that I seem to have gotten carried away here. The "Cricism fades" half of the headline mentioned above is also missing on wayback; it is only present in Highbeam and in this article mentioning the headline. Curious, but probably not Ross's fault. Jayen466 12:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your thoroughness in following up. Durova^Charge! 16:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. I just didn't want it to get lost. Good luck. Staib (talk) 12:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't upload from the computer where I'm currently located. The full-size version of [15] is 2025 x 2482 and appears to be pretty free of jpeggery. It is an illustration from a 1911 edition of Treasure Island so it's PD. Spikebrennan (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And Flickr has a hiccup right now. Looks great, though. As a former sailor I approve. :) Durova^Charge! 20:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This looks wonderful! I couldn't resist running sharpen edges on it. Would you like me to upload? It's your find; you'd nominate of course. Durova^Charge! 17:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, I just sent an email to whatever address is linked to this account. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. Durova^Charge! 03:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-MBK₀₀₄ 05:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I saw your edits on Kobayashi Kiyochika. The image of 百撰百笑 is not bad, but he is notable for his traditional landscape prints with a Western touch. I don't think the current image represents his style. So could you please add [16] or [17] to the article? And the current image seems too big to me. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 08:25, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those are both very low resolution. Would this work? Otherwise, sure. Durova^Charge! 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your recent edit. I still think the 百撰百笑 image is too big and the bridge image should be bigger and be on the top. As I wrote above, Kiyochika's best known works are landscape prints, especially of night scenery. Please read [18] and compare the prices of landscape prints and 百撰百笑. [19], [20] and [21]. This is an award winning book on Kiyochika and the cover is one of his best night scenery prints. Do you still think the 百撰百笑 image should be the bigger image on the top of the article? Oda Mari (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know the artist and the style quite well. How about you arrange them as you think is appropriate? Please bear in mind that the other one is a featured picture candidate. If it gets promoted, an example of Kiyochika's work will spend a day on Wikipedia's main page, with a link to his biography. Its principal encyclopedic value is at Russo-Japanese War of course. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 16:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the image size and order. Please take a look if it's OK. I know the satire image is a featured picture candidate. I hope it gets promoted too. Sadly I found all the images except Forces returning and the bridge at commons:Category:Kobayashi Kiyochika seem to be copyvio. The source of all the landscape images is this page. It's a gallery site in Japan. The prints themselves are not copyrighted, but what about the photographs? The uploader uploaded many ukiyoe images and I think they are all dubious. What do you think? Oda Mari (talk) 06:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you make File:Légionnaire romain Ier siècle av JC.jpg look a bit more professional? Thanks Wandalstouring (talk) 12:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try Wikipedia:Graphic Lab. Durova^Charge! 19:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can also help. Do you want it restored for FP, or just improved? Ceranthor 19:25, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt this one has FP potential, but perhaps it could become a valued picture? Thank you for stepping forward, Ceranthor. :) Durova^Charge! 16:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova, I just wanted to stop by and say that I am very impressed with, and intrigued by, the wonderful restoration work you do. I think what you achieve with historic images is of great worth. Oh, and I'm thrilled to see that your boss is a cat—good man woman! Maedin\^talk 19:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much (although I'm a woman and not likely to be mistaken for anything else, face to face). :) Would you like to learn restoration? Durova^Charge! 19:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I did look, honest, but couldn't find anything definite on your gender, one way or the other.

I would like to learn, but afraid my budget doesn't extend to fancy software and I would therefore probably have my hands tied, :-( Maedin\^talk 19:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GIMP is free, and quite good. Several of our restorationists use it. NP about the gender issue. I used to joke what enlightened times we live in, when people assume a man would choose a username after Nadezhda Durova, the first female officer of the Russian Army. ;) Best regards, and let me know what your tastes are. This morning I've found a World War II photo of three Spitfires flying in formation over the North African coast. It might make a good starter project. Durova^Charge! 19:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've had GIMP installed for a long time; I tried to learn how to use it about a year ago and got nowhere. I am not too picky about what my starter project is; I tend to avoid war-related themes, but the plane is British, so I'm game, ;-) Maedin\^talk 07:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here goes.[22] If you'd like assistance, we can go back and forth here. Or else it's much quicker to email me for my Skype ID. Durova^Charge! 16:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Skype works well for me. I've e-mailed you. Maedin\^talk 17:26, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I went over the manuscripts but many are too damaged. The others are like letters and will probably receive much opposition as your nomination of Nixon letters. IMO, the following look like the best. 1 and 2. The others are too small. Sorry for the delay --Muhammad(talk) 03:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your attention; there's no deadline. :) Unfortunately those are both very long works: 12 pages and 40 pages. I seem to recall an Egyptian manuscript from the other calligraphy collection. Might add that to the wish list. For some odd reason it's easier to find potential featured picture material from the Mediterranean coast than from the rest of Africa. Your contributions countering that systemic bias are incredibly valuable, and I think I'll give you a well-earned barnstar for it. :) Durova^Charge! 04:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just doing my bit. Thanks for the barnstar. Your restorations are much harder work than my pictures though ;) --Muhammad(talk) 15:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about that. Air fare to Africa is pretty expensive from California. :) Durova^Charge! 16:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Currier and Ives Liberty2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 16:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I cropped and rotated this image, but I can't upload .tif to Commons...so the dumb question is, how do you go from .tif to .gif, .jpg or .whatever? —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, click 'save as' in your software and select the format you want to save as. .jpg is probably appropriate for that image. JPEGs degrade, though, so the conversion should always be the very last step before uploading. Best, Durova^Charge! 18:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It won't let me change the format (it's grayed out)...is it just that Microsoft Office Picture Manager sucks? :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch. Try GIMP? It's a free download. Or if you aren't that ambitious hop onto Skype and send it to me. Email me for my Skype ID. Durova^Charge! 18:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol :) I'll download GIMP after class and we'll see then. Thanks! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks!

And if you aren't busy with a project, would you be able to restore this (is it too compressed?)? If you have anything you want/need to do, this has a priority of about 0.00001, but it'd be cool to have two beautifully restored pictures in Lexington-class battlecruiser. —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 01:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whew, you send big jobs my way Ed. The last one took three days and this would be a bigger job. But if you'd like to try your hand I'd coach you. Might want to start with something simpler. Durova^Charge! 01:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Point A: forget it then - I didn't know whether it'd be a big job or not (which is why I asked!), and there's already a FP in the article. :)

Point B: well, after thinking about it between this and the last time you offered, I'd love to learn, but I honestly fear that I will then try to article-build and image restore, which would take up wayyyy to much of my time that should be going towards college. :) Maybe this summer sometime?

Random: for future reference (mainly if I want to request restoration of a different pic, I'll know whether I should or not), what distinguishes an 'easy' restoration from a 'hard' restoration? And what formats (.jpg, .gif etc) even can be restored? —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 02:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very good questions. I'm getting people tugging at my sleeve to write more of this out for easy reference. First, of course, take care of your studies. If you get curious I could find material that would go much faster than this. A few basic tips: look for files around 10-40MB in an uncompressed format such as .png or .tif. Avoid halftoning and extensive dirt and scratches. There are other less obvious problems that would take a bit longer to explain. I'll be around when you have time. :) If you're into military history, though, one really good place to start is the Office of War Information material at LoC from WWII. It's US Government public domain and a lot of it is fairly easy to work with. Durova^Charge! 02:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dirt + scratches I get, but how do I check for halftoning?

I noticed that OWI was on that specific pic that I uploaded (File:USS Nevada leaving for repair edited.jpg), but I didn't realize that they have a bunch of stuff from them. :D Thanks! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 03:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Halftone. Blow it up and look for dots. And yes, they have a lot from OWI. Much of the black and white material is low resolution, but also quite a lot of larger files mixed in. Keep clicking until you find a gem, and try not to get hung up about the near misses. :) Durova^Charge! 03:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Barnstar for embroidery. I really appreciate your appreciation. - PKM (talk) 21:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was well deserved. Overdue, even. Durova^Charge! 01:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy Onassis2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Wronkiew (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 14:34, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, File:Psalms Scroll.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. jjron (talk) 12:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 14:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Durova. the Ed17 found some PD photos on the LOC website that would be useful for articles on Wikipedia, but some of them are pretty small. He suggested I contact you (since you "probably know the LOC like the back of [your] hand") to see if there's a way to request larger versions of the images. Thanks for any help you can provide. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 13:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is, but it's a minimum $20 fee. Still interested? Durova^Charge! 14:36, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly does it work? Would they send me hard copies? Parsecboy (talk) 03:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently they'd send it to you on a CD. Here's their price list and information sheet.[23] General summary is here.[24] For additional questions they have a phone number and email at this page.[25] Durova^Charge! 03:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not looking for conflict. If you can't accept my views, that is nobody's problem but yours. And it would be good if you could be more serious at discussions in future. Thank you. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your views I often agree with; it's your manner of presenting them that causes concern. Durova^Charge! 17:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this would be a good FPC, but am having difficulty decidingw hat articles to put it in. Any suggestions? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you expanded the Warsaw Ghetto article it could go there. Durova^Charge! 18:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Butting in: it may be appropriate in the persecution of Jews article, perhaps in the Nazism section. Also, the article for The Holocaust itself mentions the Warsaw Ghetto a few times, and includes a section on ghettos. Maedin\^talk 19:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I don't normally check my e-mail unless someone tells me they sent one. :) I have skype downloaded, and GIMP. I may have an issue with Skype, since I use a cell phone to edit, and I won't have a microphone for a few more days. Synergy 20:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. Refresh my memory: do you have an image to restore yet? :) Durova^Charge! 20:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. How about this. Do you think you can show me an area (pertaining to articles) that needs an image? I'd love for these to be used in articles. Synergy 22:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Three areas where it's pretty easy to find good starter project material are WWII photography, Japanese woodblock printing, and photochrom prints. Which interests you most? Durova^Charge! 03:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've given it some thought, and photochrom looks very interesting to me. Sorry for the late reply. 5 days out of the week I only spend about 4 hours reviewing and making edits, the other two I usually have free time. Synergy 02:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. Not sure what your tastes are, but here's an idea for starters: the Gallery of Machines at the Paris Exposition of 1889.[26] Suggest working from either the 26MB version or the uncropped 60MB version. I'm writing a Wikiversity course on restoration, which may give some tips to get started. Feel free to email me for more assistance. Skype and Gchat work well for this. Best, Durova^Charge! 02:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I'm on Skype now, as WikiSynergy. Synergy 02:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tear down this wall

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Reagan Brandenburg Gate speech.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Xclamation point 21:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Ford Vietnam clemency remarks

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Gerald Ford Vietnam clemency speech.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Xclamation point 21:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! (goes to get more) :) Durova^Charge! 21:36, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ready to relist soon? If not, you can simply renominate when ready. Thanks, Spencer^T♦C 22:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right; too much on my plate lately and I've been treading water. Give me 24 hours and a swift kick in the pants. If it's not ready by then I'll start from scratch another time. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 23:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Ursa Major2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 2, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-03-02. howcheng {chat} 23:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Brilliant caption; I wouldn't change a thing. :) Best, Durova^Charge! 23:58, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So be it! Xavexgoem (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, WP:NOCLUE needed a counterpoint. There are few things more frustrating at this site than interaction with another editor who refuses to suppose one has as much clue as one actually possesses. Durova^Charge! 03:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not going to finish this restoration tonight, but thought I'd upload what I have done so I can ask you about the issue this image has.

This image is somewhat awkward, as I have to stitch three scans for it, which don't correspond to the three pieces of paper used to make the poster (Augh!) I've managed to fix most of it, but could use another set of eyes - what am I missing? Is there something I should be doing but haven't yet?

Also, if you want to help out with smoothing out that stupid background, I won't say no. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I've suspected with some of these older posters is that they never quite aligned perfectly in the first place. You've gotten the central figure to line up very nicely, except for a small gap at his elbow. I'd shoehorn the border into alignment: clone stamping small areas that don't quite fit. For larger areas, especially on poster borders, I've had luck copying a specific area into a separate file, then pasting it back as a new layer and moving it into place. Tedious but effective. Durova^Charge! 16:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Well, I'll admit that part of the reason it looks like it lines up properly is that, by that point, I had gone and pasted over most of the joins. There were slight misalignments in most of the connected regions, but not so bad that they couldn't be carefully removed. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On February 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thika River, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 09:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 16:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova, I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong in this case. I realise that these are new restorationists, but I really don't think they need defended against constructive criticism, particularly where if I didn't speak up about the problem, when it could be easily fixed if pointed out, I would feel I was acting unethically, as it changes the artistic intent slightly.

These long conversations have a tendency to drive voters away, so would you be willing to just throw out our last two comments? We can throw it in one of those {{hat}}/{{hab}} boxes if another version is provided. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shoemaker, it doesn't come from the motivations you suppose. When he first started work I checked the crop with exactly the same concerns you articulated. Upon comparison with the original it became clear that he had done the best he could with the available material. Since the signature itself is fully legible, the loss of a small portion of the signature frame is a negligible element. It may have been the artist's mistake to paint too close to the edge of the canvas. Durova^Charge! 21:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But the LOC version has half an inch of paper outside the edge of the painting - are we looking at the same image? I'll admit I haven't looked at the TIFF, but... Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right. The beveled paper is part of the framing and obscures a small part of the signature box. He can't restore data that wasn't scanned. Durova^Charge! 00:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, Durova, I still don't follow you, as I can see more of the signature box in the LOC image than in his. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 04:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try cropping it yourself. That isn't a true vertical. Durova^Charge! 04:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well... I'd rather have it just show some of the outside paper, but I'll archive the discussion, with a mention of it. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw from the arbitration enforcement page that you were critical of Joachman. Can you please review this? I gave him the name of the checkuser who confirmed it and I told him to contact him. Joachman's behavior is starting to look like as stalking, and personally I fail to see his problem, for an information that everyone involved in AA1-AA2 already knew. Can you read my request and answer if it is indeed legitimate? I've read and reread myself there and I am clueless, the guy even added my name to the checkuser request. His implication has taken disruptive proportions. Damn it, it was simply an insignificant checkuser request. VartanM (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There would probably be someone else better than me make an evaluation of that request. Not knowing the lay of the land in the underlying dispute, it would take a while to get up to speed. And if I succeeded there would be the risk that--as happened at AE--someone may come along and read in bad faith. Surely there's another person who's more familiar with the background and respected on all sides? Durova^Charge! 03:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety ^talk 02:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 03:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know why someone would have added a speedy deletion tag as a corrupt or empty image to this file? It seems good to me. Rlendog (talk) 04:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image was hosted on Wikimedia Commons, so the only reason for a local version of this file is to note its featured picture candidacy. That image wasn't promoted, so the local version got deleted. It's still available via hosting; the local file was only for housekeeping. Best, Durova^Charge! 04:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 04:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice. Durova^Charge! 05:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup Newsletter

17:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 17:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --KP Botany (talk) 03:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) Durova^Charge! 03:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Carter and Sadat White House2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:First parachute2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 06:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've found another possible source, though it doesn't look entirely reliable. Here's what I've pulled from it:

recently been the subject of experiments at the Ministry of the war by a Roubaisian, M. Desbouvrie with swallows travelers. We asked our correspondent Roubaix us in this regard the statements and documents of interest to our readers. He sent us a photograph of the hirondellier that reproduces our engraving, and the following article which gives curious information on the attempt of Mr. Desbouvrie. What antithesis that title! Swallows of war, and yet it is fair.

This nice bird, which leaves us with melancholy in us leaving each fall, and whose return is greeted with a cry of joy every spring, could become a military messenger.

A Roubaisian Jean Desbouvrie, found the secret of breeding swallows, to tame. They leave their hirondellier, returning just as the pigeons, and live in both winter and summer. There are nearly forty years that Mr. Desbouvrie responsible for developing and tame birds which are known to be resistant to any domestication. From the most tender age, the young Desbouvrie, loved birds and especially birds, taming it to the point that whenever he went out with his father, he was always accompanied by a certain amount of swallows fluttering around him and coming to his call to land on his shoulders or his hands. Since then he has never stopped them. Hirondellier Mr. Desbouvrie. According to a photograph Mr. Samuel Elkan, Roubaix.

The great difficulty to keep birds in the winter was the first food, the Swallow feeding exclusively on insects. Mr. Desbouvrie has a secret he did not reveal to anyone to feed it gathers young swallows in their nests where they have a few feathers. Once high and capable of flying, food change, and then he gives the recipe for people that buy its residents. There are two kinds, one for amateurs, for aviaries or zoos and acclimatization. The others are the swallows travelers. It is the latter that we occupy.

Nothing curious as inside the hirondellier, located on the first floor of the small town that is our burning and is built in the hamlet of Vine, on the edge of the canal linking the Scheldt to Deule, through Roubaix. The window opens onto a balcony corridor communicating with a room converted into a large aviary, where they frolic at ease about Mr. Desbouvrie. They all have a particular name, which is the color of silk thread attached to one of their legs. It takes 15 to 40 days for the dresser, and one, are in three weeks, while others need a few more days.

Mr. Desbouvrie proposed to Ministry of War to experiment with its swallows. On 7 September, on the Esplanade des Invalides, in the presence of several persons, he dropped two, having circled a moment, disappeared towards the north. Dropped 4 to 15 hours, at the Esplanade des Invalides, they were at their hirondellier 5 hours 30 minutes. They therefore had traveled over 150 kilometers in 75 minutes.

Ceranthor 13:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, not sure about the reliability of that source either. It's too bad they didn't name the original publication. Durova^Charge! 16:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the welcome Durova. It was very kind of you to do that. I now have to figure out how to work on wikipedia. I'm sure I'll manage it in time. Thanks again Little Tuck (talk) 20:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Here's hoping it's the start of a productive and happy editing career. Durova^Charge! 20:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at Timeline of young people's rights in the United States and there are a number of wonderful (poignant) images there, particularly those young Jewish girls. FP material? If I create an article for newsboy for the image there (and the one in Newsboys Strike of 1899) I'll let you know. Thanks again for all restoration work you do, it's sincerely appreciated! Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those girls could have the potential to become a featured picture. I'm racing to keep up on my own commitments (working on a DYK for a national park in Tanzania, plus troubleshooting a featured sound candidate) but have been coaching new people who want to try their hand at restoration. The girls would make a good starter project. If you don't have Photoshop, GIMP is free. Interested? Durova^Charge! 01:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Once I reinstall Ubuntu (probably this weekend) on my home PC I'll look at GIMP again, and if I have some spare time in the next few weeks I'll be back to let you know. Cheers. Mostlyharmless (talk) 00:19, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this needs cleaned. I cannot, however, do it: I have a slight headache, and you pretty much have to remove the pops before removing the noise. Listening to that buzz off and on for the hours it will take will only make it worse. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I've had strange problems with conversion. The source file doesn't have any of those glitches. Re-converting with a different program atm. Durova^Charge! 02:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:The Journey2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 06:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 06:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This could use an edge sharpening, though I doubt it's particularly featureable. Not unless we cut out all the image elements and pasted them onto some non-posterised paper, while giving it a sharpen good enough to make it look decent. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 12:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when you have a featured candidate ready to go. Durova^Charge! 15:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, realised there were a few more things I could do. It's ready now. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you were tricked by the selective darkening I applied to the lettering - the women's uniforms ended up looking really faded, and the histogram was kind of bizarre, with everything clustered over at white. There were also a few places where my fix and your fix combined to make bad artefacting, like the words "Victor Herbert". Can you try that again starting from this one before my last edit? It'll probably get better results. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've noticed with your work on chromolithography that often it doesn't correct for border darkening. Here there was also a relative shift toward red toward the edges of the image. So I took the liberty of those corrections also. The focus issue was extreme--more than an edge sharpening could really handle. So if you don't like my edit, feel free to revert. Durova^Charge! 18:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aye. It's a little awkward, this one. Maybe I'll just skip it at FPC and do Shakespeare's King John. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I make a suggestion? Try feathered adjustment layers to alter the brightness a notch or two, resampling as needed. Sometimes it takes a couple dozen layers to achieve an even brightness. Then another set of adjustment layers for uneven color. Paper usually dries and ages more at the edges than at the center. So half an hour on those corrections can make a great difference in the final result. Best, Durova^Charge! 21:30, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:DuckandC1951.ogg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 6, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-03-06. howcheng {chat} 22:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. :) Durova^Charge! 22:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EmilEikS. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 23:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is the release given correct? It isn't an image in the public domain due to copyright expiring. It is a modified version of such an image. (In fact it just occurred to me that we should possibly add for the general PD message a note that the image either has expired copyright or is so old that it was never copyrightable, but that's nitpicking). JoshuaZ (talk) 00:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{:PD-old}} doesn't necessarily imply that the work was ever copyrighted if the work itself predates copyright laws. But the alternative is PD-art which seems less appropriate. Durova^Charge! 00:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know it implies that they just be old enough to not have been copyrighted, but we don't actually say that. Hence my comment that it would make sense to possibly add that to the general PD note. In any event, this is all nitpicking. I'll go back to work now. JoshuaZ (talk) 00:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to create a new template if you want to. Durova^Charge! 01:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I should have followed my first instinct and contact you before I made the last post. I'm so glad you've been watching and realized the same thing. I was dreading making up the checkuser or sock case because this is so much all over the place. I'll add what I posted on Mae West and see what else I can find readily. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I kind of knew when it first came up that this was what was going on. I will add a comment at AN/I. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Thank you for being patient through those months when it wasn't being addressed. Must have been frustrating; kudos for your patience and perseverence. Durova^Charge! 04:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ping. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already ponged. :) Durova^Charge! 05:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. A nom will be forthcoming shortly. -MBK₀₀₄ 06:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've uploaded an Audacity converted file (if you weren't using Audacity, I'd strongly suggest considering it next time). I think I'll also do a slight edit to reduce the remaining buzz. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Would you like the original? The audio was clean. I've been under the weather so was a little behind on that. Durova^Charge! 20:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I presume I did use the original - it's the one at the source link, right? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 20:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. :) ty very much. Durova^Charge! 20:15, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Durova, could you direct me to the policy regarding translation and copyrighted derivative works? Since I have used many foreign language sources, I think I need to be more familiar with the guideline, but I failed to find it by searching...--Caspian blue 23:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's ever been written up, although it should be. Durova^Charge! 23:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks, but I found this description from Wikipedia:Plagiarism is odd and contradictory "Material that is plagiarised but which does not violate copyright does not need to be removed from Wikipedia if it can be properly sourced." I thought plagiarism is a form of copyright violation. --Caspian blue 23:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism isn't always copyright violation, but can be. The two are separate concepts that often overlap. Durova^Charge! 00:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to recruit editors who can write about a cautious guideline on "direct translation" from the copyrighted text. Thanks!--Caspian blue 00:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Coles Phillips2 Life.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 15:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can probably do the spots in the John Paul Jones engraving fairly quickly, and you can probably do the Japanese boat faster and better than I could. Would you like to swap? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 17:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. :) Let's conominate. I'm not sure about the boat, but those black and white etchings aren't my strongest suit. You're the master there. Best, Durova^Charge! 17:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're ready to be an admin. Anyone watching this page, please agree now. Synergy 21:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't make me template you.... ;p Synergy 21:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]