User talk:Mattbuck

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
ATTENTION: Please use this talk page rather than emailing me. I will also most likely reply here rather than on your talk page.

File:Lenz_theodor_friedrich_carl.jpg[edit]

Hello, I contact you concerning "Lenz_theodor_friedrich_carl.jpg" "This media file has been nominated for deletion since 26 October 2015." I'am not the author of the photo. The author is unknown. It's a 'family-photo' which is in my possession. Friedrich Lenz is my great-great-grandfather. I hope this information can help to classify this photo.

MaBlida —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.3.185.37 (talk) 13:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@194.3.185.37: thanks for responding. I've copied your comment to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Lenz theodor friedrich carl.jpg where the discussion about deletion is taking place. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Low Newton-by-the-Sea MMB 08.jpg[edit]

Hi, please may you confirm when this photograph was taken? I think I recognize the dog. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 5.148.31.242 (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

@5.148.31.242: the date's on the page and it's correct to within a few minutes. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:51, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Use of COM:Nudity[edit]

You may be interested in the outcome of Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Male_erect_penis.jpg. It is a case of a photograph on Commons for 6 years being deleted because it was overwritten by a newer photograph. The people involved are experienced, so this is disappointing. -- (talk) 04:18, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Hooray, early morning penis! -mattbuck (Talk) 07:44, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Uploaded a file of yours to wikimedia[edit]

Good evening,

I uploaded a photograph of yours to Wikimedia. I'm just letting you know so you can change the title to your naming scheme as per last time. I've had a go, but I've no clue what the MMB part is.

Thanks, Jcc (talk) 19:43, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jcc. Thanks for letting me know. The number after MMB is just the number of the photo on Commons, so generally it'll be the next one numerically in that sequence, in this case 04. I've sorted out the categories and such. I think you probably made a better picture with that crop than my original. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:29, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Permission for the photo of Klausbernd Vollmar File:PRFotoGlas.jpg[edit]

Please send permission for File:PRFotoGlas.jpg to OTRS

Hi Matt, I have a permission from Konrad Lenz for the use of the photo. What do you want me to do? Should he contact you personally to conform it? Best regards, Leserin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leserin789 (talk • contribs)

@Leserin789:, if you follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS you will see an email address you can forward your correspondence to and an OTRS agent will guide you the rest of the way. If you could also reply at Commons:Deletion requests/File:PRFotoGlas.jpg to explain to anyone looking at the deletion request that you're contacting OTRS, that would be great. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:59, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
@Mattbuck: I have followed your instructions and I have sent Konrad Lenz the E-mail to use. I hope it works out alright! Leserin
Leserin789 thanks for that, the OTRS team should be able to sort everything out. Oh, one more thing, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~ - this automatically adds your username and the date/time. Happy editing! -mattbuck (Talk) 22:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Clarification requested[edit]

... here. I assume that by "you" you mean the person who nominated this for deletion, not me. I took the photo at a conference where I photographed as many panelists as I could; I barely know the person in question and don't live in the same part of the country. - Jmabel ! talk 18:00, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Well get out your x-ray megatelescopic zoom lens, Jmabel! -mattbuck (Talk) 19:23, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Updated/archived link needed[edit]

Hi Matt. The link on File:Virgin Trains East Coast logo.pdf is dead. Can you update it or find an archived page so I can review it? INeverCry 20:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

INeverCry, see [1], second row, mouseover it and it shows CC-BY. They seem to have uploaded more stuff, I might be transferring some of that soon! -mattbuck (Talk) 20:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done I've updated the link and passed the review. If you upload more stuff from there, tag it for LR so I can get it reviewed. I usually get reviews done within a day or so. INeverCry 21:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

User:Fæ/BLP overwrites[edit]

This report caused a crash (apparently), it's unclear why after such a long history of running without a problem that the queries became long to run. It's been set so that queries cannot run in parallel. As a user of the report, if you notice a loss of utility from the lag between image overwrites and the report being updated getting too long, do drop me a note. Thanks -- (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


skull versus skeleton[edit]

File:Portsmouth MMB 08 Royal Naval Dockyard - Mary Rose Museum.jpg A skeleton is when the whole animal is visible. On this photo only the skull is visible. No one who is searching fo a skeleton will use this image. --Kersti (talk) 09:28, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Kersti Nebelsiek, you mean apart from all the skeleton visible behind the skull? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:28, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
This would qualify it only for "dog bones" as it in not a whole skeleton. Additionally it is not very useful as it doesn't show how the head is articulated with the vertebrates. the skull is the part which is visible in a usefukl way. --Kersti (talk) 10:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

FGW/GWR[edit]

Hi. I'm currently trying to update all the categories associated with FGW/GWR, with the ultimate aim that there are sub-sections for the First Great Western livery. If the only category you would prefer changed is Train liveries of GWR then I will happily rename that as Great Western Railway (train operating company). Cloudbound (talk) 20:46, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

@Cloudbound: Well, the trains by livery section will always be split into "First Group Dynamic Lines", "First Great Western Local Lines" and now "Great Western Railway" categories. I don't object entirely to renaming them, though FGW was already a stupidly long TOC name and "Great Western Railway (train operating company)" is twice as bad. My point is that there is no such TOC as "GWR", so whether the categories get renamed or not, that is clearly wrong.
I also reverted a few changes you made which removed date categories. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:51, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
No problem with the date categories - please do what is best. I'd also prefer to get away without the full title and disambiguation for sub-categories, but if it's better to stick with FGW then so be it. As you say, the livery section is split, so that will not need to change. Cloudbound (talk) 21:19, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
We need to be consistent, if only because the template used for categorising rail images, {{ukt}}, relies on the "train interiors" and named TOC being the same. If we rename it, it has to be to the full disambiguated title, as in principle one could create categories for train interiors of the original GWR, though that would probably have a the in the title. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
In that case they can stay as they are for now. Another user has created Category:Great Western Railway (First Group) with every photo on here taken after the company rebranded. I think it's best if they are brought into the main category that I renamed. What do you think? Cloudbound (talk) 21:32, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I'll redirect the lot. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:54, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
@Cloudbound: I've deleted all the fGWR categories created by Geof Sheppard (sorry Geof) on the grounds that they are the same TOC, albeit renamed. I think a similar situation is "One" being renamed to NXEA - while we keep livery categories named the same, everything else has to be renamed en-masse. The top level category should certainly be as on enwp, "Great Western Railway (train operating company)". The question is can we get away with just "Great Western Railway" for the subcategories. There is some precedent for that sort of thing, but the issue is consistency. Clearly no class or livery categories are problematic, but line and interior ones may be due to the original GWR. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:12, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I've been working through the sub-sections, but have kept the "(train operating company)" disambiguation as there are some existing categories for the original Great Western Railway and I'd like to keep things consistent. Cloudbound (talk) 22:15, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

However, I'll need to go without the bracketed toc suffix for the train class sub-sections or it will look a mess. Cloudbound (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
{{ukt}} requires that the following categories use the same format:
British Rail Class Xs of TOC
Trains of TOC on LINE
Train interiors of TOC
-mattbuck (Talk) 22:39, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I must admit I'm not happy with where we are at present. For excample, File:Coombe Junction - fGWR 153333 arriving from Liskeard.JPG is shown as a Class 153 of Great Western Railway (correct) but a Train of First Great Western on the Looe Valley Line (incorrect). As Matt pointed out, the toc needs to be the same in both categories for the templates to work - and these really speed things up when you're categorising images.
It can't be moved to Trains of Great Western Railway on the Looe Valley Line as that is for steam trains photogrpahed befere 1948. Note that the pre-grouping categories do not use 'the' so as to be consistent with more recent categrories.
Then what are we going to do with the livery category? We'll need to distinguish from Class 57s in lined-out heritage colours as opposed to First's new plain green.
I still think that 'Great Western Railway (First Group)' is the shortest that we can do this without getting tangled up with the 'Real' GWR which was, afterall, around an awful lot longer than this reincarnation is likely to be. It also future-proofs us against some other TOC using the name again in the future.
Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
For the livery, how about First Great Western Railway? Ideally that would be the TOC name too. The old GWR colours appears to be Great Western Railway green currently, but yes, something needs to change. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
I would second Geof's proposal for GWR (First Group). Unless there are any objections, I would suggest moving the current structure across to this name. It would avoid the awful Category:British Rail Class 57s of Great Western Railway. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Just so long as we're clear we are using "Great Western Railway" not "GWR". -mattbuck (Talk) 22:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
For the TOC I definitely meant "Great Western Railway (First Group)", however the repainted trains use a GWR logo plus First Group strap line so I wouldn't complain if we settled on "British Rail Class 166s in GWR (First Group) livery" etc. as that is probably how a non-expert would describe it. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

I have a concern here - the rebranding of FGW as GWR is not retro-active. File:Devonport 43122.jpg shows a train operated by "First Great Western" in a FGW livery, and at that time GWR solely meant the historical entity. These should continue to be identified as First Great Western.

IMO it would be better to treat FGW and GWR as two separate entities, as if it was a new franchise than to muddy the historical stuff. Of course, in the transitional period there are GWR trains in the FGW liveries...--Nilfanion (talk) 16:12, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@Nilfanion: while you're correct that earlier trains were FGW, we have precedent for this, for instance National Express East Anglia was originally called One, and while we have categories for the "One" livery, all trains are listed as NXEA. It's still the same franchisee. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:35, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Maybe so - I'm aware its a re-branding rather than a new entity. IMO it would be better to distinguish between FGW and GWR - for instance by having FGW as a sub-cat of GWR. Its seems very wrong for categories like this to be wholly populated by FGW trains, and when we have images of actual GWR trains they should be easy to spot in cats like that.
I'm going to have a scan round and see if I can find other precedents for re-brands to see how they are handled.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:42, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

wich station?[edit]

Crystal Palace 2011 4.jpg

I cant remember wich station this was. It was on the same day I visited Crystal Palace but clearly not that station.Smiley.toerist (talk) 23:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

The sign reflected on the window of the train has "Crystal Palace". Bidgee (talk) 02:42, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Smiley.toerist, this is the higher level platforms at Crystal Palace, on the south/east line rather than the north/east. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)


*** Happy holidays! *** 2016! ***[edit]

Christmas Barnstar.png * * * Happy Holidays 2016 ! * * *
* Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!
* Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année!
* Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!
* ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!
* Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом!
-- George Chernilevsky talk 18:20, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year![edit]

Brownie transparent.png Classical, but still... thank you for your work on Commons! Yann (talk) 13:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

The traditional greeting[edit]

Silesian - Moravian Beskids in winter 2014.JPG Dear friend
Happy New Year and best wishes!! Christian Ferrer (talk) 22:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Downloading Ducati di Savoia[edit]

Hello Mattbuck, Thanks for your response. I don't know if I found myself to the right place here to reply. I tried again, several times, with the same result. It opens in a new browser window but does not appear in my downloads. I tried several times with Safari, and got the same result. I don't know what I might be doing wrong. I click on Downloads, then Full Resolution. I haven't had this problem before, but haven't used this site either.

Djmladen —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2602:306:CC67:6200:B824:F568:F997:C235 (talk) 18:31, 03 January 2016 (UTC)

Djmladen, I don't use Safari, but the image you are looking for is at [2] - just open that link and save it. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:34, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

QI Tunisia training[edit]

As part of the project Quality images training in Tunisia, the Wikimedia TN user group is looking for a Wikimedia commons User able to organize a training about Quality images, featured pictures, Valued images and Graphic Lab/Photography in Tunisia from February 18th to 22th, 2016. To participate please fill this form --Touzrimounir (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

2008 train pictures[edit]

I have added pictures in the stations Peterborough and Jewellery Quarter.Smiley.toerist (talk) 14:33, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

They should pop up on my list tomorrow. I sorted the Manningtree/Harwich ones earlier. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I continued adding. I am not certain about File:Manchester Piccadilly ramp.jpg. In the other Manchester Piccadilly pictures I dont see any old ramps. I suspect the old ramp has been replaced. Or could it be another station?Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Smiley.toerist, I'm not entirely sure, I've only been there twice. It certainly COULD be Piccadilly, but if so I think the ramp's likely been replaced with a travelator. I'd check your images by time - if the ones on either side are Pic, this one probably is too. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
These indicate Piccadilly, but the time marging is large but they exclude anything not in Manchester. By the way the day times are offset by several hours as my camera didnt have the correct time set. If I can find a station clock I can calculate the correction needed. This is why I avoid using the time in the classification and sorting information. In the meantime I have a mystery with
SPT livery train in England.jpg
. I put a message in the Village Pump.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
For questions such as that, take it to en:WT:UKRAIL, they're most likely to know. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

The ramp was not in Manchester but in Preston. I mistakenly put the other pictures around the same time in the wrong station.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Brighton MMB 34 West Pier.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Brighton MMB 34 West Pier.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brighton MMB 34 West Pier.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:고등학생의 발기된 성기2.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Commons:Deletion requests/File:고등학생의 발기된 성기2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this project page, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文（简体）‎ | 中文（繁體）‎ | +/−

Wonjh0409 (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mattbuck
commons.wikimedia.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-07
79977
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:ZG2IUUPDTTAQJO3UMSOWAI4FZUXGGYJY
<urn:uuid:4bb71aa6-b262-48c1-946b-e970aacfc246>
2016-02-13T13:39:01Z
208.80.154.224
sha1:RHA6KEK6UB4Y7FYHXW7CN23CIHVNTDVA
<urn:uuid:1a8fe59e-73b4-44a8-8915-e7b692381d87>
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mattbuck
response
<urn:uuid:352e55d9-fdce-49e9-8964-23b23ed4d9e5>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-236-182-209.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-07
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for February 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf