User talk:Crisco 1492/Archive 61

File:Temistocle Solera.jpg
Would you accept this as being public domain in an FA review?? Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Tough call. The format suggest it would have been published before 1923, but I generally look for proof. If we knew who the author was, that would make it much easier. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:46, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The annoying thing is there doesn't seem to be a single other image of him save for variants of that one (the standard stuff - some don't have oval mounts, one has that fancy photographic effect where it fades out at the borders of an oval, etc. I'm going to guess it's because he died before photography really took off. I'm tempted to cut the image, but it would weaken the article to cut a lyricist. But it seems absurd to fair use an image that old. It's basically down to the first four images at https://www.google.com/search?q=Temistocle+Solera&num=30&tbm=isch&imgil=ifMMj0lBDN3B4M%253A%253B1PwfksZHXyxTBM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.snipview.com%25252Fq%25252FTemistocle_Solera&source=iu&pf=m&fir=ifMMj0lBDN3B4M%253A%252C1PwfksZHXyxTBM%252C_&usg=__PjkqNqbCZ5EUMcI5KSyr3QtnHT0%3D#imgrc=ifMMj0lBDN3B4M%3A&usg=__PjkqNqbCZ5EUMcI5KSyr3QtnHT0%3D adnd one r two others. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Actually, would it help if I could show it was in multiple museums? Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, yes that would indicate publication. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Huh...

Okay! I've got this. See file description in a moment. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Found http://www.immac.it/?page_id=798 which is a reproduction of a 1950 book. It includes Solera's image. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * So definitely PD-1996, at the very least. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:52, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep. Think that'll do? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Grand. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

:

 * Very unique. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Alert System
Ok, in my prior round of Request Edit requests I mistakenly said there was a lot of primary sources about Markmonitor on the Center for Copyright Information page, then said someone must have taken it off, because it wasn't there anymore. I explained that these primary sources were removed from the MarkMonitor page after consensus was established against it for obvious reasons, but the original author was quick to throw around COI accusations and defend their OR.

The mistake I made was that it was on the Copyright Alert System page that has a bunch of content about Markmonitor cited to primary sources. If you still have time to take a look, it would be appreciated. Sorry for the mistake! CorporateM (Talk) 00:34, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm going to be at a conference from Tuesday to Thursday, and probably won't have much internet access. Maybe after that. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Smart Sheriff
Crisco, this nomination has been stuck for several weeks on the issue of POV. Can you please take a look, and post your opinion of whether it is germane in this case and how it would affect the nomination? (If it doesn't, then perhaps you could check the article to see whether it is indeed otherwise ready for approval.) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm on a very spotty connection this week, so I'll have to pass. I'll be back home Friday or Saturday. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Since I very much doubt anything will be done before the weekend, it can certainly wait until after you've returned and caught up. I hope you'd be willing to take a look then, unless someone does beat you to it. Still, if it still doesn't appeal to you then, it can just continue waiting... BlueMoonset (talk) 22:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK needs a prep to queue promotion, if you're back
Crisco, we're over two hours overdue on the latest promotion, and the problem is that there's a centennial hook for July 31 (Wales) that is waiting to hit the main page. If there's any way you can do this—I think you said you'd be returning to better connectivity around about now—that would be wonderful. (No one seems to have responded to my DYK talk page overdue reminder, unfortunately.) Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:53, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. You got me just as I was getting ready for bed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Sweet dreams... BlueMoonset (talk) 15:17, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Hudson Soap
Would really appreciate a suspension. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * As nom, I don't think I can do that. Armbrust or someone else can, though. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Jashodaben Narendrabhai Modi
Crisco, this is an interesting case where the nominator commissioned a drawing of the article's subject, and has loaded it to Commons and is using it in the article and for the DYK nom. The artist's web page says she does work for hire (and charges extra for it), and the nominator has just submitted evidence that this is such a work to OTRS. Do you have any way of confirming the submission and that it is sufficient? Thanks for taking a look. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't have OTRS rights. MRG would perhaps be able to check. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:19, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I can see it at, but I don't do much with image permissions and don't know what the conventions are for works-for-hire. I think it should probably be okay, but I'd really prefer somebody who does more work there process it. I haven't done an image release in a loooong time. Does this need to be cleared quickly, BlueMoonset? If so, I can ask if the permissions team can expedite it. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Moonriddengirl, we have a Did You Know entry that's ready to go except for this one issue. If the permissions team could please expedite it, that would be great. Thank you so much! BlueMoonset (talk) 23:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Happy to, BlueMoonset! I've communicated the request to the permissions team, and I hope somebody will be able to handle it quickly. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Good to go, BlueMoonset, thanks to the kindness of User:Steven Zhang. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:36, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Image crops
Could you do me a great favor and do me obverse crops of these three images: this, this, and ? I was trying to find the way of uploading and tagging derivative works on Commons, but couldn't seem to find it. It's for Coinage Act of 1873. Hope you're doing well.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:33, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Why not use Template:CSS image crop? Maybe Godot13 could show you how it works. If you prefer hard crops, though, I can do that too. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:15, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Wehwalt- It really would be so nice to keep the obverse and reverse together versus creating separate images of both. I'm happy to help with css crops...--Godot13 (talk) 23:43, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, thx. Didn't want to bother you after you did so much work in DC. Thanks to you both.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Claude Monet
Chris, I was just looking at the latest edits to Claude Monet. I've been puzzling over this one: I don't remember seeing a caption in which both the foreign language title and the English translation were in italics. I've been searching in MOS for the specific guideline on text formatting when including both the original language's title and the English translation in a caption. MOS:CAPTION says:


 * The text of captions should not be specially formatted (with italics, for example), except in ways that would apply if it occurred in the main text.

I thought I had recently seen the guideline for providing the English translation for a foreign language title in the middle of the text, and it is to provide the English translation in parentheses in regular font; I don't know if that would carry over to a caption. (I'm not sure a translation is always needed for a painting title, either, especially if the title is well known.)

As I was looking at the various captions in the article, I noticed that they vary somewhat. Do you prefer the name of the artist first, then the title, or do you prefer the title of the work first, then the artist's name? Or does it depend upon the purpose of the image? CorinneSD (talk) 00:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The original French is not in the caption; if the English is being used in its place, it should be italic. I don't care much about the order. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:25, 2 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh, I'm sorry, Chris. You're right. I got mixed up. Upon going from the Revision History to the article, I forgot the actual name of the painting I should have been looking for (I see it's in the gallery) and saw the French and English of the first image in the article, Impression of Sunrise, or something like that. That one does have both languages, and that's what I was writing about. Thanks for your reply anyway. CorinneSD (talk) 00:36, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

G. Krugers
. Andries (talk) 14:31, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in an interview
Hi Chris, in the next edition of the Military History Wikiproject's newsletter The Bugle Ian Rose and I are hoping to run a group interview with some of the editors who have worked on military history-themed FPs, and I'd like to invite you to participate. If you have time, I'd appreciate it if you could post responses at WikiProject Military history/News/August 2015/Interview by 14 August. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:25, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your responses Nick-D (talk) 08:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Cute one
Hiii Cris,

Please try to add a POTD tag to this on 3rd February 2016. The cuties birthday on 3rd Feb. DreamSparrow  Chat   13:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, scheduled. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:18, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Many thanks Crizz... DreamSparrow  Chat   14:50, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Opinion, please
Talk:Red Skelton We hope (talk) 10:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Hudson's Soap advertisement
I've put up a restoration, could you review your vote at Featured picture candidates/Hudson's Soap advertisement and state which version you prefer? Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

TFA
Hi Chris, re. your recent notice at Talk:William Hely, did you see my note from yesterday at WT:TFAR? I was hoping to get some thoughts on that before we schedule any more military bios over the next month... I think the general public would find the 7 September suggestion more engaging than Bill Hely, no offence to his memory...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ian Rose, I can't say I did, no. I've commented there regarding the idea of running two bios. As for Hely: we have a sizable backlog of military biographies (including numerous Australian RAAF ones; you seem to write them faster than we can schedule them ), so I don't think we'd have an issue with one more military biography running. If you feel it would be better to run someone from a different country/force, I could schedule James Moore (Continental Army officer) or Jethro Sumner instead, and save Hely for next year. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Chris, I'd be happy to see Moore or Sumner and defer Hely if Hull/Hughes isn't out of the question. FWIW, I keep a list of preferred TFAs from FAs I've been involved with here, if it helps at all. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I will try and keep it in mind. (Sumner is now the 24 August TFA) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Request for TFA for Pather Panchali
Thank you for your comment supporting my nomination of Pather Panchali as TFA on August 26, in which you stated that the film's 60th Anniversary made it important enough to support the nomination, despite the selection of another film for TFA earlier in August. Thanks also for clarifying the rule about recent films. Dylanexpert (talk) 16:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK queues empty again; promotion now late
Crisco, if you're around or come back shortly, we're coming up on an hour late for the next promotion. Prep 5 is full, and Queue 5 needs a set for promotion to the main page. Many thanks. (I've just posted the usual "now overdue" addition to the bot notice, so someone might get there before you, but then again they might not.) BlueMoonset (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Crisco, thanks for the update. The bot is complaining about the image's protection; can you please check and do whatever's necessary? Thanks, and sorry to bother you again! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/August 23, 2015
I'm changing "QEW" to "the highway" in the caption ... not because I'm making a call on what the caption should be, but because I've rewritten so that "QEW" doesn't appear in the TFA. - Dank (push to talk) 20:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine to me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Public Storage
If you have a minute to provide an outside opinion here. The page has unfortunately attracted a lot of drama and could use an outside opinion. CorporateM (Talk) 04:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

JC's Girls
Hi Crisco,

I noticed that you cancelled JC's Girls from the August 21 TFA slot and left an edit summary when editing the article's talk page saying, "cancel scheduling owing to concerns brought up at FAC that still haven't been addressed". Considering that Ian closed the FAC by promoting the article to featured status, I had thought that all the actionable concerns had already been addressed. What issues do you feel remain to be addressed?

Neelix (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I took a second look at the article, and I found myself agreeing with Nick's comments that "The problem is that all of the sources are, unfortunately, fairly lightweight profiles of this organisation and its organisers/leaders which appear to be written by generalist journalists" and that there's a lack of critical analysis. For something as potentially controversial as this, I'd like to see some more expert opinions.
 * Yes, Ian did promote the article, but Nick and Cliftonian, two editors whom I admire greatly, had reservations about it; I think it best that such issues be handled first. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:55, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * As far as we collectively and I personally have been able to ascertain, this is not an actionable concern; all of the existing reliable sources that discuss this organization are already used in the article. Consequently, the issue has already been handled to the greatest extent possible. Is the article ineligible for a main page slot despite being featured? Neelix (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Something being "not actionable" is a criterion for FA promotion, not TFA. The concerns are still perfectly valid, and it is my hope that by postponing running the article, we can help reduce the TFA stressload on you and other Wikipedians by dealing with what may prove to be the proverbial "low hanging fruit".
 * I didn't say the article was ineligible. I said that "For something as potentially controversial as this, I'd like to see some more expert opinions." My reason is simple: to prevent potential conflicts based in a recognized issue with the article. If you would rather take your chances, I understand that, but it's not a risk I'm willing to take right now, at least not without feedback from the people who raised the issues in the first place. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And from the standpoint of writing the TFA text, I don't see much I can use from the current lead section, probably for the reasons cited by some of the FAC reviewers. If they are willing to give it another look, that would help, Neelix. - Dank (push to talk) 15:09, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What forum would you recommend? Reinstating the TFAR makes most sense to me. The article won't be eligible for a FAR for at least three months. Neelix (talk) 19:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Again you seem to be reading too much into my comment. I didn't say the article should be FAR'd, and I don't like the implications. There are articles, like this one, that are not ready for TFA for which FAR would be overkill. Sometimes the article's writer(s) determines this for themselves, sometimes not (from that list, see, for instance, Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands).
 * What I said was, to reduce potential stress on you and other Wikipedians, we should try and ensure that there are no low-hanging fruit (i.e. known questions about the article's presentation) that can be picked on by potential detractors. As Dank said, if Nick-D or Cliftonian are willing to give it another look, that would help. I want to run this&mdash;I find the subject matter really interesting, and its considerably different than anything we've ever run&mdash;but I feel it would be irresponsible to run it when several editors have had (and perhaps continue to have) considerable reservations. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The decision to promote was not simple. I have a great deal of respect for John and Nick too, and I'm sure that their comments, which I believe the nominator worked to resolve as best was possible, led to improvements to the article -- not every comment has to end in a support, and neither ended in an oppose. I also respect the reviewers who supported promotion and, scanning the article myself, there was certainly some critical comment of the organisation mentioned.  The final decision for a TFA must remain with the TFA coords but I have to stand by the FAC promotion, although I welcome any comment from Andy or Graham.  Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:33, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I hope I made this clear at the FAC, and I'll say it again now—I think David made an admirable effort with this one and, considering the sources at his disposal, did a fine job. With that in mind it did not give me pleasure to ultimately abstain at FAC. I do have reservations about the article, but I don't think this should stop it from running if it has achieved FA status, the nominator is willing to have it on the main page, and there are no obvious issues that can be feasibly resolved before it runs. The issues raised at the FAC by myself and others related to the lack of source material available for the subject. This isn't something that can be resolved through dialogue between editors and I think David has made exhaustive efforts to find new sources. I could be wrong but I think the source material just isn't out there for him to find.
 * I am not comfortable with the idea of having the article prevented from running on the main page simply because I am perceived to have reservations. If David is comfortable with having it as TFA, and there is no realistically actionable problem with the article, then I say run it. However I think that David should keep in mind that considering the subject of this article, I would expect a very high level of vandalism on the day and, given the nature of the issues already raised at FAC, not a great deal of constructive criticism that can be feasibly dealt with. It could become a bit of a mess (though of course I hope it doesn't). I hope this helps, and I'm sorry not to be more encouraging. Cheers, —  Cliftonian   (talk)  12:37, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, IMO it's up to Chris, and he won't be back till Sunday, but I'll say this: I have struggled with this one, and I don't know how to write TFA text for this that's up to TFA standards. If Chris does decide to run it, I'll leave it to the people who don't have the same issues to figure out how to massage that lead into TFA text. It's not a problem for me. - Dank (push to talk) 13:02, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The hotel, fortunately, has (basic) internet. Wouldn't trust it for admin stuff, but normal editing is fine. I'm still concerned about a couple things (some of the references focus on the organization's leader and not the organization; no word what they've been up to in 2015) but I really can't see the sources to address those concerns being available now. Neelix, is there a particular date which works best for you? In case this does end up with vandalism problems or talk page issues (but knock on wood that it doesn't). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * One more thing: when we have a date for this one, I'm going to have to leave a brief note at WT:MAIN that I won't be doing the TFA text for this one. Odds are those guys won't care, but I owe them the head's-up. - Dank (push to talk) 13:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I should be able to check in periodically throughout the day on either August 31st or September 2nd in order to address vandalism and talk page issues if they arise. I apologize for having implied that you wished to demote the article, Chris, and I appreciate your clarification of what you meant by low-hanging fruit, which I had misinterpreted. Neelix (talk) 17:34, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll schedule it for the 31st when I get back home. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:09, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK for The Kiss (Munch)
Thanks for helping Victuallers (talk) 04:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

FPC
Why aren't most of today's edits showing up under history? Sca (talk) 20:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Occasionally, the Wikipedia database lags. It usually resolves soon enough. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:42, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * For some reason yesterday's edits by User Rainbow Unicorn haven't showed up in history today either. (Nor have mine.) Sca (talk) 15:02, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That's just weird. Bug report it? Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ???? Sca (talk) 20:26, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Albert Reiss LOC ggbain-25651.jpg
Just to note, I did that restoration I promised. I just uploaded over. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/AVI Records
Crisco, I was wondering whether you could take a look at this and decide whether you think it's okay for DYK, and if so, to give it a tick? I'm no longer in the right frame of mind to decide on the lede's characterization. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:24, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look and commenting. I was wondering whether you could also look at Template:Did you know nominations/Saint-Quentin-Fallavier attack. It has had some issues, and I did a partial copyedit, but later realized that while making the narrative clearer I'd also made it a bit stronger in terms of who the culprit is. I'm wondering whether the whole article suffers from this, which I guess would be a neutrality issue. Is this a problem throughout, only a minor issue that's easily fixed? And somewhat related, I thought there were grammatical issues throughout, which is why I copyedited a section as an example. Do you think the article still needs significant work? (Should George ask GOCE for help?) I appreciate this. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:32, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Can you zap this?
File:81f3bdb9fe6761ea00e5e5711f14b419.jpg There was nothing there except a redirect to File:Strange Cargo (1940 film).jpg-nothing linking to the numeric file page. Maybe we'd better round up a consensus because this is sooo controversial. :-) Thanks, We hope (talk) 23:51, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Gone. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:54, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! We hope (talk) 00:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Potential Sock?
Sorry to message you, but just noticing a strange pattern on FP which might indicate something not-quite-genuine going on... I'm message you and Diliff as two of the more regular and knowledgeable editors on that page... I've noticed today there has been a lot of nominations by Alborzagros - in itself no MAJOR issue, even though most of them are (IMO) questionable... But under each one pretty much is a support from Rainbow Unicorn (with no reason given) and then a support from Jobas, again with no reason given... Again, no major issue with that, but notice the time stamps...

Just taking Jobas' time stamps they are as follows: Clevedon Pier - 11.22 10.08.15 Väike-Maarja church - 11.23 10.08.15 Taagepera Church - 11.24 10.08.15 3 cent US postage stamp ... - 11.24 10.08.15 Photograph of artist ... - 11.24 10.08.15 Irene Rice Pereira with ... - 11.25 10.08.15 Gillette Mach3 - 11.26 10.08.15 Sherman-Grant note - 11.27 10.08.15

Admitedly not all nominated by Alb, but still... I have the fastest internet connection Virgin Media will give me, but even I can't assess and edit 8 nominations in 5 minutes! Rainbow Unicorn has a similar pattern but I won't go into any further detail for now... Does this seem a little odd to you too? If nothing else, this seems to be someone supporting without actually looking at the pictures (I can't see any opposes from Jobas)... This surely should be a reason for getting all editors to give a verifiable reason when voting?

I appreciate not a lot can be done about this, but just wanted to see what your thoughts were... gaz hiley 15:21, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Jobas has been running through FPC like that for several months now. I quite honestly can't figure out what the game is. Rainbow appears to be a new editor, at least based on the first edits. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:30, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * thanks for the reply... - glad I'm not the only one who has noticed this... gaz hiley 14:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

?
I was wondering if it was not possible to make an exception for FU images in  Sign? it is about the article, anyway. I mean it is illustrating the aricle, in a way. Hafspajen (talk) 13:01, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Nope. The non-free criteria are very clear on that point (NFCC #9) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, well. Hafspajen (talk) 14:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Move
Can you help me move Elizabeth Keawepooole Sumner to Elizabeth Keawepoʻoʻole Sumner? Thanks!
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Terjemah
Crisco, kamu bisa terjemahin kalimat ini nggak: The outbreak of World War II and the subsequent resource scarcity caused the British Raj to impose a limit on the use of filmstrip in 1943 to 11,000 feet,[58] a sharp reduction from the 20,000 feet that had been common till then. Erik Fastman (talk) 00:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Pecahnya Perang Dunia Kedua membuat sumber daya alam menjadi semakin langka, sehingga Kemaharajaan Inggris harus membatasi penggunaan filmstrip pada tahun 1943 menjadi 11.000 kaki (kurang-lebih 3000 m); sebelumnya, pembuat film diizinkan menggunakan 20.000 kaki (kurang-lebih 6000 m)." Mungkin bisa diperhalus lagi. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

FA schedule
Hello Crisco,

Hope all is well. The Istanbul article you scheduled for the main page has a lot of problems and doesn't appear to be in a FA state. There's way too many bare link URLs, dates aren't formatted properly (see for example ref #40 and 45), dead links, [full citation needed] tags, and bibliography sources that don't point to any citation (i.e. Bloom 2009 and Düring 2010). Shouldn't these issues be a cause for concern? Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sigh. And Tariqabjotu is pretty much nowhere to be seen. Should have run this last year. Pulled. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Doesn't appear to be in a FA state? Yikes, ok. I still come onto Wikipedia. I can review the article sources (not at this hour though). There probably aren't too many things to change, though, because this article is quite stable, maybe 150 edits this year prior to John's copyediting. --  tariq abjotu  17:32, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * (Still a lot more than what the average article I write gets). If you can fix the referencing issues, we can run Istanbul for Republic Day in October.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem. (And it seems like few edits for an unprotected article on a very large and important city.) --  tariq abjotu  02:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

New
Hey Chrizzz,

Added some of my new clicks, have a look, hope Haffy and Adam will also give their valuable comments.


 * K. Babu
 * Oommen Chandy
 * Dominic Presentation
 * Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan

DreamSparrow  Chat   15:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * They're all useful, but 1) the cut-aways detract a lot from the full-resolution images and 2) the noise is a big minus. I frankly don't know how you got that much noise at ISO 320. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * It was actually with very dull light and coz of this heavy security system, we will not be able to find out a better position. Somehow managing and I know its effecting very badly but still, I thought, something is better than nothing. I hope I will only add better quality ones in future but not sure. I understand the creepy crop of Oommen Chandy but as you suggested before, making a close up one, I have done this. Will try a better one for this too. DreamSparrow  Chat   16:28, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This is of good quality but I don't feel to add this to the article, what you think ? DreamSparrow  Chat   17:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The one you already put in the article probably has higher EV. The second one looks tense. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK overdue
Crisco, we're already a few hours overdue on a main page replacement; all that's available is a single prep. It looks a little long, but I checked how the main page would look, and the right side would still be longer than the left, so no worries there. If you can get to this in the next 40 minutes, we'll be in decent shape. Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the promotion. The bot, however, is complaining that File:Claudia Cardinale 1963.jpg isn't properly protected and won't proceed until it is; can you please take care of that? Sorry to have to bother you again, and thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:37, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The bot got it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * So it did. Why it didn't do so ten minutes earlier I don't pretend to understand. (I think this means I need to give the bot an extra ten minutes to see if it will take care of image issues.) As long as I have you here, do you think you'll be able to take on Template:Did you know nominations/Saint-Quentin-Fallavier attack that I mentioned the other day? If not, I'll try to find someone else. Thanks again for taking care of DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking. I think what I was most concerned about was BLP issues—whether the article was too strong in its depiction of the alleged culprit—but it's not an area I'm well enough versed in. If you didn't see any problems, then I'm not going to worry about it. There are a couple more old ones that I have in my eye, but I think one at least will be solved tomorrow; if not, I may ask you to give a second opinion. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Peleuli
Can you merge the history of User:KAVEBEAR/Peleuli and Peleuli?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

A Big Ask
Hi Crisco. About 19 months ago I was working on a page where I had a conflict of interest and I couldn't bring the page up to GA myself, because I was abstaining from a section that included content about competitors. You were gracious enough to do that one section yourself.

There's a similar issue on Invisalign, where most of the article is GAN-ready, but has expressed concern about COI influences in regards to incorporating the content of three MEDRS sources,   such as I attempted to do here.

Medical claims have always been a sensitive area of Wikipedia (though perhaps less so for dental claims) and some areas are more sensitive to COI than others. It doesn't seem productive for me to attempt to author this section with a COI. I know it's a big ask, but I thought if you had some time to spend doing this last leg of the article, like you did last time, it would be a huge help to all parties involved. CorporateM (Talk) 22:40, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * We have had a discussion regarding this on the talk page. Going from user to user is not cool IMO. Those three sources are already used in the article. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi CorporateM, I don't edit medical topics because 1) I don't quite understand WP:MEDRS and I thus I try to avoid violating it and 2) I wouldn't be able to write intelligently about medical/dental issues. Perhaps you could prepare a draft and Doc James could have a look at it to minimize any concerns over POV. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem Chris. I don't think there is any disagreement over MEDRS and it's just dentist stuff, as oppose to any more hardcore medical topics, but that's cool. I've asked Doc if he can tell me how he'd like me to proceed. I think he misunderstood what I meant on this post. Hopefully we can find some way to work it out. CorporateM (Talk) 01:32, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Here's hoping. @DocJames: CorporateM works by asking editors to review and approve content he's suggested / written, so that he doesn't violate COI policies adding potentially promotional or problematic content by himself. I've reviewed many of his contributions these past years, and he has taken to directly asking me if the requested edits template is taking a long time (several months) or if something requires more than adding a single sentence. I don't find this canvassing, but rather asking for help to do something which our policies suggest he'd best avoid doing himself. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:31, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Slight Change
Chriss.....

I have made some slight changes to this, what do you think about this ? I have a plan to nominate this, please do if there are any corrections. I hope nobody will object this based on EV, may be some of them will demand for the photograph with Ministerial actions, he he he DreamSparrow  Chat   18:49, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Noise is still a problem, as is the cutout (the angles are still too sharp). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ooopsss..... Then I should drop my plan for nomination... DreamSparrow  Chat   06:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Departures
Thank you for taking us to uncharted lands, celebrate great victories, hear of harrowing experiences, and cross the threshold between life and death, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:49, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gerda. I couldn't have done it without Curly. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:06, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK promotion of prep to queue
Crisco, can you please promote one? The current set has been on the main page for over 24 hours. The delay meant I just had to swap the lead hooks in Prep 5 and Prep 6, since the one that had been in Prep 6 needs to go up now (for August 16 in India). Many thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Departures
I'm not understanding this reversion as the source I added only seems to be cited for one sentence in that paragraph. Please explain. Andrew D. (talk) 14:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've already replied on the talk page: "This and the other two references apply to both [the] quoted sentence and the one after it. WP:CITE does not require each sentence to have a reference immediately after it, and implies ("An inline citation means any citation added close to the material it supports, for example after the sentence or paragraph, normally in the form of a footnote.", emphasis mine) that the current set-up is acceptable." — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:03, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, WP:CITEVAR says you should use the format already used in the article for any new sources; that was not done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Abdul Rahman Saleh (physician)
Maybe you can do something with this, Crisco. Drmies (talk) 00:26, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I haven't been able to get around to scanning the pictures of Nadar's Hermaphrodite series yet, despite having the book for six months. RL has been busy as heck. Two translated books in as many months and a new baby. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh. Yeah, babies. They take up time. Drmies (talk) 16:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That they do. But they can be a cuteness overload.. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:16, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Rename
Chris, Marine Drive, Kochi is now Dr. Abdul Kalam Marg. Have a look at this. Is this the right time to rename the article or need to wait ? I have no idea about the procedure, if you could help me for this, I will change it or you may please do it. DreamSparrow  Chat   20:57, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You'd need to update the article first; right now it's not mentioned at all. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Archive
Archive me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Departures
I only just noticed it was promoted the day of the Bon Festival last year—exactly a year. How did you time that? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:57, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I noticed that too. It was a coincidence. :) A very happy one. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:59, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A bit disappointing, though—I'd assumed an Oscar-winning film would get a lot of hits, but at 12,000 page views it's the least popular TFA I've been involved with. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:07, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Still better than average for the articles I've written. Well, it's not anime, so most of our readers probably don't care. Taiko got more or less the same amount of hits. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There was the manga, though—shoulda put it in the blurb. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:22, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Now, if we want big hits, we can get He-gassen or Let's Meow Meow! (ooh, a redlink) to FA. Of course, the latter may end up with us being charged with promoting a yiff agenda. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh God! I just did a search on that game with the kids in the room ... I don't think they saw anything, but I don't think I'll be able to un-see it ... Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 01:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I should probably have linked yiff... sorry. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea. Hafspajen (talk) 21:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors sounds rather interesting though. (This one's safe). Or these — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And I may have to do something about He-gassen—as I pointed out to Johnbod, the J-article talks about a number of such scrolls going back to the 12th century, and "Hōhi gassen" seems to be a far more common title given to them. I'll have to peruse the scholarly documentation one of these days. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 01:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ooh my. That would be an interesting FAC. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

List of current and former McKinsey & Company consultants
Folks at COIN said I should go ahead and edit the page directly, since it's a list article and my contributions are extremely mundane/tedious. However, I figured I should ask someone else to evaluate whether the tags are still relevant, given that removing tags is a common COI edit. At the time they were placed, the entire article was OR, but it now has 299 secondary sources. I would think removing them should be obvious, but no dice yet at COIN.

I hope you have time to chip-in at the Invisalign article at some point. We have a few people participating now, but in my experience a lot of people will just pipe in for a moment, then their attention will be drawn elsewhere, or they only participate from a specific angle to prove a specific point. CorporateM (Talk) 00:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do later today. I'm finishing up a couple translations in RL, and I really need to update the statistics in Birchington-on-Sea before it runs as TFA. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:47, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * CorporateM, lists like these should only include people with articles (since it's not a finite set). There are multiple redlinked and normal-text names here, as well as several DAB pages (John Cook, Julian Day, Ted Hall, Magnus Olsson, Carlos Watson). I'd also group the references at the end of entries. I'd also feel better if someone made sure all these links go to the right people. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hrm, now I'm getting conflicting advice, because I was told that red-links were the most useful part of the page. Categories only include pre-existing articles, whereas the benefit of a List page is that it can include red-links (or so I was told). I could be wrong, but I think it was that also made a comment to that effect at COIN. I can take a look at those disambiguations; I just might drag my feet a bit out of being exhausted with the article ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 02:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:CSC #1 (the one that applies best to this list) states "Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia. Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future". (odd, I only remembered the first sentence). However, considering the sheer number of people with redlinks (about a quarter of them) I think it would be preferable to reconsider just who is listed; individuals who started a non-notable company, for instance, could easily be excluded if they are redlinked. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I believe that red links in moderation are OK for a list article like this. At the same time, I suspect that a lot of these people, especially those now associated with non-notable companies, are not notable by Wikipedia's standards. So, my recommendation to is to consider weeding out the "less notable" red-linked  names on the list, leaving those for whom he holds a genuine good faith belief that the person is notable. Cullen328   Let's discuss it  02:34, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh man, you guys are killing me. I can't promise anything that thorough, but I will take a look! CorporateM (Talk) 02:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK overdue
Chris, the update is nearly five hours overdue, and the prep has only just been filled. In case you're around and see this, a timely promotion would be a wonderful thing. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:53, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Panulirus penicillatus
Crisco, could you please stop by here and see whether you think the hook is sufficiently interesting? One review passed it, then a second doubted its interest. I'd like a third opinion, and if you think it's good enough, perhaps a restoration of the original tick. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:49, 18 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking care of it. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:05, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Paul Lormier - Costumes for Hector Berlioz's Benvenuto Cellini (1838) - Un chef d'atelier (Bernardino). M. Ferdinand Prévost
I've responded to you there. Would you mind pre-reviewing the other two images from that set?

Anything you'd change? I'm not quite sure what the silver markings on their face are; I suspect they may have been lighter in the original, I've seen Alfred Waud illustrations where the highlights have gotten very stained due to the white paint of the time. But, as I'm not sure, I left it for now. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:50, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure if I can get behind something with so much cut out. I know it's not your fault, but I don't think we should get in the habit of promoting such things. I'll have to look at the others. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The thing is, there's no other copy whatsoever. This is a one-off artwork, after all. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:58, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * So, thoughts on the other images? Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The others look considerably better. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Help-

 * Help. Would you mind going through the article gallery Yarn bombing and removing a couple pics? Looks like a collection of every tree, sculpture and object in the universe that ever got yarned. Maximilien Luce (talk) 22:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the entire gallery should be nixed, to be honest. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:20, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, that would make everybody cry. Maximilien Luce (talk) 23:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Not me. :) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Removed like 50% and there goes the guy adding back his pic again.--Maximilien Luce (talk) 11:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Matthew C. Whitaker
Chris, there's a request that someone with BLP experience take a look at this nomination and article, since the hook talks about plagiarism and a demotion. Can you please take a look and see where this stands and what's needed? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Today, the article has been the subject of an edit war—at least five reversions on each side—between a new editor removing most (all?) negative material and inserting positive (and puff) sections, and the one who nominated the article for DYK. I put 3RR warnings on both pages 15 minutes ago, which seems to have stopped the immediate carnage, but I would appreciate the intervention of an administrator (I'm hoping you'll do it) who can deal with the issues and the warring parties in the manner that Wikipedia prescribes. There had been an Undue template put on the page a couple of weeks ago, but it was removed two days later by the primary author (who was the DYK nominator). This is definitely above my pay grade; please help. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:32, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Let the PROD run its course. In the mean time, I'd fail the article for stability issues. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:14, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Batavia, Dutch East Indies
Dear Crisco 1492, currently there is a discussion about whether the article History of Jakarta should be separated into Batavia, Dutch East Indies; the article currently has been separated, was reverted (merged back by Merbabu), but separated again by OrganicEarth. As of now, the article is very similar, a copy paste to be exact. Could you give your opinion on this? really appreciate your input.--Rochelimit (talk) 05:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Here
Here it is. Hafspajen (talk) 20:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK again overdue
Prep 2 is full, and the empty queue 2 should have been promoted hours ago, if only the set had been promoted. If you're around, a prep to queue promotion would be welcome. Thanks as always for all you do. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:28, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Second opinion on hook: is it too negative?
Chris, the Template:Did you know nominations/Jake Olson (gridiron football) hook was moved from Prep 2 to Prep 4 yesterday by Victuallers with edit summaries of "moved out too negative hook" and "too negative IMO". Since Prep 4 is likely to hit the queues today, I thought it was best to move it again to the latest of the six preps (Prep 2) while pinging both you and him: you for a second opinion on whether this is too negative for a BLP (and also whether the ALT hook, which talks about four season-ending injuries, is also too negative), and him because if the hooks are both unacceptable, then something more than just delaying the hook needs to be done.

If you think the hook is okay, or it isn't but the other approved hook is okay, please do whatever is appropriate, or ping me to do it. If you agree they're both problematic, perhaps I should just pull it myself. Fortunately, we now have plenty of time. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:56, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Question about aperture
Thanks for your comments at FP. You were right, of course, that 5.6 was too large an aperture, so I tried it at 11 and 22, and the results were much better, but I can't see to much difference between 11 and 22; except that the background blur is much better at 11. What would you advise? RO (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Stick with f/11 or f/13, max. When you get all the way down to f/22, aside from the shutter speed being ridiculously slow (assuming your ISO number stays the same) you get diffraction issues which make the subject blurry/unsharp. Aside from that, it's just a matter of focusing on the right spot, somewhere where the tips of the petals aren't all going to be out of focus.
 * If you have the resources and the wind allows it, you can look into focus stacking (example to the left). It's a bit hard to learn, and the equipment (software, tripod, etc.) is more expensive, but once you can do it the results can be pretty nice: more separation of background and subject, wider aperture (and thus more speed/sharpness), higher resolution, etc. This is an example of a flower shot done with focus stacking.
 * But it's just an idea, and not a "must" for FPC; both examples I gave at the nomination were single-frame shots. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What do you think of this one File:Russian sage by RO II.jpg? RO (talk)  00:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Considerably better! Not sure its quite up there yet, but a considerable improvement over the previous image. I'd probably rethink the framing a bit (the lowest petals are OOF, so maybe a crop or something would work) and if there's a way to get a less distracting background, you may want to go for it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:40, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, are you using manual ISO or automatic? If the ISO goes up, you'll start losing detail. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. Focus stacking looks very interesting; I'll have to give that a try. I had ISO on auto for this shot, but I don't think it ever got up over 1000. Should I set it as low as possible? RO (talk)  15:11, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Try to keep it low, yes. How low depends on your lighting and the shutter speed you're getting. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Is a 1/125 sec exposure about right? As far as backgrounds go, would you recommend a white or colored screen; or should I try to set it against a blue sky or something? RO (talk)  15:41, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Shutter speed depends on the wind, light, your lens length, and a few other considerations. If you can keep it steady and there's no wind, even 1/80 would work. Background is up to you. Most of the FPs in Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers have foliage (not broken by the sky) in the background. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I took another 150 pics today, and I didn't get any as good as File:Russian sage by RO II.jpg. Are you sure this one isn't up to FP standards, because I think it's about as good as I can get with the structure of that plant? RO (talk)  22:12, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Is File:Russian sage by RO IV.jpg closer to what you mean? RO (talk)  00:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Impressive! Yes, the composition is almost perfect. That might have a chance at FPC (I say "might" because there is some JPG artefacting. But the most recent set of FP reviewers haven't minded that much). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:07, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing your knowledge and encouraging me. This was so fun and challenging. I think I'm hooked for life! RO (talk)  16:04, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It is quite addictive! And every situation brings new challenges, so it keeps being stimulating. Adjusting for lighting, speed of the subject... it's something else alright. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I suppose I should start shooting in RAW now to avoid those JPG issues. Does this influence your technique at all, or is the execution the same either way? RO (talk)  16:19, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Shooting raw gives you more range to play with in post-processing, so you can generally make more drastic edits. But you won't be able to upload to Commons using your camera's raw format. It will have to be converted to JPG. Diliff is very well versed on technical aspects of photography; I learned almost all I know from him and Google. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:31, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ...you rang? /Lurch. Hi RO, happy to give you some feedback and advice on your photography too if you'd like. I can attest that Crisco's photography skills and results have improved in leaps and bounds over the last couple of years. I was just the other day looking at one of my archived talk pages and realised how far he's come. Understanding the technicals of photography is fairly important for making the leap to the next level. Having a keen interest in self-improvement is key. &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  16:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes please! I'd be extremely grateful for any help you are willing to offer me. This is my first experience with anything more than a point-and-shoot, and it's been exhilarating! How well can I remediate the JPG issues with just Lightroom, or has that ship pretty much sailed because I shot File:Russian sage by RO IV.jpg in JPEG only? RO (talk)  16:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Points
and this are, IMVHO, very pointy and bordering on disruptive, especially as you are only targeting images of my copy of the ticket, not anyone elses. Images of this ticket have been on commons since February 2011 without any question being raised as to their validity there. The issues was thrashed out at WP:MCQ and not found to be a copyvio, as you are well aware. Mjroots (talk) 14:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You really need to read up on the background. I didn't nominate the others because the baby was crying, and that takes priority over Wikipedia. No ifs, ands, or buts about that. If you don't believe me about the British threshold of originality (which is so low that signatures can readily be copyrighted), then feel free to ask someone who knows about copyright about it. Maybe Nikkimaria would be willing to take the time. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a Commons category to cleanse of copyvios. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:31, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Alright, done. Now, regarding the British threshold of originality: this logo was held to be copyrightable in England and Wales. Even though it is a single word, written in a basic font, the court held it was copyrightable in the United Kingdom. It is hosted on the English Wikipedia because the English Wikipedia only follows US law (see Non-U.S. copyrights; "While Wikipedia prefers content that is free anywhere in the world, it accepts content that is free in the United States even if it may be under copyright in some other countries.")
 * Now, extend that to train tickets, using one which is public domain due to age. We have multiple full sentences which could be expressed in another manner ("This ticket should be delivered up before leaving the railway", for instance), a specific font type and layout, and handwriting (even signatures can be easily copyrightable). All of these make the ticket cross the threshold of originality for the UK, though the ticket probably wouldn't cross the TOO in the US. I don't like it either, but that's what we have to do. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree with Chris on the issue of threshold of originality in the UK - probably a better bet to just upload these locally and avoid that issue entirely. Further, are you referring to this MCQ discussion? I don't think it supports the position that these images are not under copyright. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I was referring to that discussion. My position is that the images have not been proven to be definitely under copyright. They have sat happily on Commons for a number of years without challenge. Chrisco has now made a mass deletion nomination of railway ticket images at Commons without following the correct procedure for a mass deletion. The opinion so far is that the images are not copyrightable. I have copies of the image to upload to en-Wiki should it prove necessary. The two images in question are vital to the article and will not be lost from it. Mjroots (talk) 21:29, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I'm not arguing they should be removed from the article - if they're uploaded locally they can still be included. But the broader issue is that we don't need to prove they definitely are under copyright, we need to prove that they definitely aren't, and I don't think we can do that. See commons:COM:PRP. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Right. There is no need to "prove" that images are "definitely under copyright". The fact that images are likely to be copyrighted, based on former case law, is enough to render them non-free in the eyes of Wikimedia projects. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And the "correct" procedure for a mass deletion is hopelessly broken in cases this large. If I had tagged the whole category, it would have included obvious keeps such as the Titanic survivor ticket (which I cleaned up while tagging, though nobody seems to have noticed). The individual tickets are likewise diverse (File:Sheffield Supertram - ticket.jpg, File:SouthportAinsdale.jpg, and File:Network Railcard 5.png are nowhere near similar, and they all have different degrees of originality, and thus could conceivably have different outcomes). We'd be lumping oranges with apples and grapes and durians.
 * Perhaps the best procedure would have been a number of group nominations based on similarities (all of the files similar to the Ainsdale ticket as one, perhaps) but even then there would be at least 15 individual nominations, considering the range of tickets and degrees of originality. This ticket, for instance, has almost completely different issues; it has a clearly copyrightable image on the card, and thus is a non-free derivative work. It would not be a good idea to lump it with File:Ecclesbourne Valley Railway - Platform ticket.jpg. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:01, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd probably let 16-25 Railcard pass on the photo grounds, as the photo is almost certainly self-taken either at a photobooth or self-taken by the uploader, though I would prefer it if someone said so. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Oscar Niemeyer, Pic, 9 - Restoration.jpg
I don't do a lot of stuff from the 70s, for fairly obvious reasons - too recent to generally be out of copyright, but too old to be very much under the umbrella of the free culture movement, unless we get some relatively old photographers who wish to be helpful. As such, what do you think of this? I'm not quite sure about the colours, and it doesn't have much detail on the shirt, but... Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Strikes me as rather cool (blue) and out of focus. I'd probably tweak the exposure a little too. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:10, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Focus can't be helped much - I've rarely seen a colour photo from this era that's really all that sharp. Did think it was likely a bit cool, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I meant even for the age. File:Nichelle Nichols, NASA Recruiter - GPN-2004-00017.jpg is a bit sharper and from the same period. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:30, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That one's in black-and-white, though. Colour seems to cause more issues, particularly for 70s film. Also, how's it look now? Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:00, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Nice! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:02, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Shaquille Murray-Lawrence
Crisco, I was wondering whether you could stop by and give your opinion on how interesting the remaining ALT hooks are. There's currently a bit of a disagreement on which of these is an interesting hook, and when asked to approve one over the other, I found myself unable to do so. I think this needs a new point of view. It shouldn't take long. Many thanks for your help. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:28, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Page move
Hi, I just 5x expanded Bais Rivka for a DYK nomination. The page should be titled Beth Rivkah, which is the official name of the institution and the name that appears in most media reports. I posted a note for consensus on the talk page, and even the editor who moved the page to its present name agreed that it should be moved back. Would you kindly make the move? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Image use policy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Image use policy. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Angels

 * Lovely! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:54, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Maria Theresa
I'm reading the article about Maria Theresa, and I was curious about the image depicting her wedding breakfast, so I clicked on the image and was disappointed to see that there is no larger image. The image file says "No higher resolution available". Is there any way you could find an image of this painting that we could see larger and in more detail?

– Corinne (talk) 01:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Only found that one small-ish one. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Korrie Layun Rampan
Hello! Your submission of Korrie Layun Rampan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Cleveland Centennial half dollar
Would you be willing to do the DYK on this? Haven't seen one of your Indonesian cinema articles in a bit, possibly I've overlooked them, I tend to do that. Hope all is well.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Have been extremely busy with RL; I'll email you about that. Sure, I'll prepare a DYK. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Very gratifying to hear. I have two more, Huguenot-Walloon Tercentenary half dollar and Hawaii Sesquicentennial half dollar.  Have to keep the wolf from the door at FAC, and I was down to no articles in the hopper. My next politics article is still about two weeks away from peer review.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll see to it when I get back from work. I've got an FAC up, if you're interested in reviewing. Been very quiet, probably because I didn't PR first. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:26, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Mammillaria spinosissima
What do you think of this one: File:Mammillaria spinosissima by RO.jpg? RO (talk) 23:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Very nice! The DOF is just slightly too shallow. I'd go to F/13 and see how well that works. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I tried it at f/13, and I think I got much better focus throughout the front of the subject. I uploaded a new version of it at File:Mammillaria spinosissima by RO.jpg, so please take a look when you get a chance, and let me know what you think. RO (talk)  20:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Definitely worth a try. Some of the front spines are slightly OOF, but I don't think it will be a problem. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you mean those couple in the top right? Is it bad enough to require another round of shots? RO (talk)  23:31, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Top center. I don't think it will be too much of an issue — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, right where the cactus starts to turn away from the camera, and that's also where the clump of "red hair" begins. A super nice cloud came by and helped to create that lighting, and when I tried another round soon after this shot I was unable to get anything near as rich. That specimen is less than 1.75 inch tall, BTW. Thanks a lot for all the pointers, Chris. It's very generous of you to share your knowledge with us, and I'm really grateful for your advice. RO (talk)  23:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, those at the very top are unavoidably going to be OOF unless you focus stack. I was talking about the front-facing spines a little lower. But either way it's a great picture. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:58, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Dang, I see what you mean. It was so hard to get focus on both the side and middle needles. Do you think it's worth another try? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  00:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Give it a shot at FPC first, I think. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

TFAR problem
I have tried to transfer Halo: Reach from 14 September to nonspecific date 4, but it doesn't show up. Here is the recreated nom – can you see why it doesn't appear on the TFAR page? Please pimg me when you have a solution.
 * I possibly resolved this, or I possibly butted my nose in and did the wrong thing. Sorry if the latter. <b style="color:#00cc33">Harrias</b> talk 18:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, Harrias got it. I just fixed the table. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Can you identify the artist/painting?
Hi Chris- I wondered if you (or any of the usual suspects) could identify the artwork that this banknote portrait was based on? (Other portraits from the series by Dürer, Holbein, Bruyn, Beham, for context). It is possible the subject's name was "J. Mayer". Separately, does this portrait by Dürer exist on Commons in high res? Many thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 21:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Jakob Meyer zum Pfeil by an unknown "Master of Basel" Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Xanthomelanoussprog- You are good... Many thanks!--Godot13 (talk) 22:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I only see File:Portrait-of-a-young-man-1500.jpg for your second question. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Superb! Thanks Chris.--Godot13 (talk) 05:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

One last question in this endeavor. I may be pushing my luck... These images have been described as men wearing a Jacobite cap. Does this look like a particular artwork (sculpture, relief, drawing) you have come across? Many thanks for your (collective) expertise.--Godot13 (talk) 05:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Plato in a Phrygian cap is my guess (Socrates appears to have been bald) Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Aristotle seems to be portrayed with a squatter head and shorter beard. There's a Greek 2 euro coin from 2013 which has Plato in profile (no cap)- there's certain similarities, such as a slightly depressed expression. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Over linked article
Hello. I was wondering if you knew why Henry Hoolulu Pitman is linked to so many article like Talk:Boston. Do you know what to do to fix this? Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing it's from templates like WikiProject Massachusetts/to do. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Oceania
Chris - Is Indonesia considered part of Oceania? See discussion at User talk:Vsmith. Corinne (talk) 16:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Request part two
(So that the first half of the request can archive)

Probably Aida after this, then Liebersverbot. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Nice. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:32, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Y'know, I think knowing how to download these images might be a little dangerous. Expect the unexpected occasionally. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:13, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * In a country that recognizes the sweat of the brow doctrine, quite possibly. But I think the Coetzee case was a fluke, since he downloaded so many in such a short period of time. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:34, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I meant more me doing random things, instead of what I should be doing. Though I was somewhat good today. I used a different source file, though, as I found a higher-resolution, cleaner image. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Aye, that it is. It's addictive, though useful to the project. No worries about the source file; I noticed that when I checked out the article. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:56, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

What do you think of this? I think I did a pretty good job, but I'm not sure if it needs more done. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:47, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:19, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Mind ye, I did another two hours' work on it after asking . =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Might be a little erratic for a bit. Stressed out, so heavily favouring ones I can finish relatively quickly, because the hard ones can bog down after a bit. I'm still working on the harder ones, just whenever I get stressed about them, I do a couple easy ones to relax. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:38, 21 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Noticed the Verdi image project was running a bit low on Verdi of late. I have two Aidas half-done, but I also have two Aida FPs in the sequence, so jumping to Attila a moment. Probably get Simon in as well, to get the Verdi percentage up a bit. As I was stressed out all week, I'm allowing myself a little randomness and free choice. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:38, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You have mail, by the way. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Replied. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:16, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

And that's the second set featured (presuming no-one changes votes in an hour or two). Third set ahoy! Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:40, 29 July 2015 (UTC) Slight break for soap. Could you suspend the nom? Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Think the front'll be done tomorrow. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Good lord, that took forever. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And is also taking forever to get a quorum. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:20, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Right. Back to the opera grind! =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:13, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

And another done. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Think I'll fit Aida into the middle of Benvenuto Cellini. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Just pinging this to keep it up. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:00, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Slowly working my way throught he worst by far of the Benvenuto Cellini images. Will be worth it in the end, but... Sheesh, what did they do to this poor image? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Balducci? I suspect it involved buffalo, mud, and one of Belle's hatted monkeys. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Needed something easy today. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:06, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Getting poked for things this week... Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Conestoga wagon on Oregon Trail - NARA - 286056 - Restoration.jpg
Think this has any chance at FPC? It has some overexposure issues. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. It looks quite overexposed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Wondering if that's original, or a dodgy NARA scan? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - Madam Ada Castello and Jupiter, poster for Ringling Brothers, ca. 1899.jpg
Just to note, I did some additional cleaning on the image - removed some scratches, tears, - and most surprisingly - some stamps and notes at the bottom edge, etc, etc, and uploaded over. Obviously, if the image changes, I need to notify all voters of this fact. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

And one more, please
Lexington-Concord Sesquicentennial half dollar--Wehwalt (talk) 20:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Alright, done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for that and the ce. The bit in there about American schoolchildren being made to memorize the Emerson poem is very much from the heart!--Wehwalt (talk) 09:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * And one more, please, if you can spare the time: Norse-American medal. Getting all those good images makes me want to write about them...--Wehwalt (talk) 17:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll try and do this when I get home from work. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Done.` — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Perovskia atriplicifolia
After a less than stellar response at FPC I guess I need to try yet again. I did take a few more today, but they were all about the same as File:Russian sage by RO IV.jpg, maybe a little better, which makes me think that focus stacking is the next step. My question is: how do I achieve the best results given the structure of this plant? Should I focus one shot on the stem, another on the tips of the petals, and a third on the flowers? I still don't know how or if I can get the petals to the sides and rear in focus, so do I take two of the petals: one front and one back? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk) 22:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It will take a lot of experimentation. My suggestion is to start with a stationary object (i.e. one which does not move between shots) and get familiar with any focus stacking software you'll use (there are free ones available, like CombineZ) before you try something as difficult as a moving object. When I did the image of mealybugs at the left, it drove me half insane, fixing all of the spots where the images didn't line up, or where the bugs had moved between shots (at a scale like that, even a millimeter is too much). If you're doing something like that with software you're not familiar with, you'll get dispirited quickly. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes. I think that's been an issue with P. atriplicifolia, since even the slightest wind will sway it. I'll take your advice and learn the process with a stationary subject. Thanks again, Chris! RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Eagle beak sideview A.jpg

This is focus stacked from two images: File:Russian sage by RO.jpg. What do you think? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk) 00:55, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * DOF is better, but it appears blurry. Likely from the high ISO. Higher ISO = less detail. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:35, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/AVI Records redux
Chris, I asked you for a third opinion on this one a while ago, and I was hoping you could come back and see whether it's ready for the final tick. A new reviewer took it up, but it would be best if someone with more experience gave it a final going over. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

"A Riel Ugly Position"


Hey, do you think this image could be made FP-worthy? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 03:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * My experience with these kinds of pure B&W images is that they have some trouble at FPC. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:21, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 04:31, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * A lot of those Bengough images are fun. I used several of them in the Macdonald article but felt there were better ones than the Riel one.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Wehwalt: I've read your Macdonald article more than once—and have scratched my head over why any non-Canadian would want to tackle Diefenbaker . Well, I hunted down this cartoon because a couple of my sources called it one of Bengough's best known images.  I'm having trouble finding a lot of the images my sources talk about but don't necessarily reproduce.  The site I got this one from has a lot of high-res Bengoughs, but almost all of them are 2-bit black-and-white ones like this.  I keep hoping I'll find some place that has a whack of high-quality scans of Bengough's so I can put together a nice gallery. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

The problem of multiple versions
Featured picture candidates/Mulberry Street, New York City. Seems that version was swapped out here; obviously it's a good photo as everybody wants to edit it and feature it. Belle (talk) 00:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, crap — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Marie François Sadi Carnot
I'd be interested in your opinion at Talk:Marie François Sadi Carnot. Corinne (talk) 14:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Mulberry Street
I don't think we can reasonably consider this as even a competent levels adjustment. We cannot promote this as the best of our work. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You've made your opinion perfectly clear. I don't think anything's stopping an ALT from being offered. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:21, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

The Mermaid
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Mind taking a look at this?

 * FAC
 * File:Kurt Vonnegut 1972.jpg

This was licensed as pre-1978 because it was published in 1972. I've changed the license back to that because the "not renewed" license wouldn't be valid for the photo. We hope (talk) 20:15, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree, the current (Pre-1978) license is correct. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:45, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Just wanted someone else to have a look. Know they'll want to have this as TFA at some point; it would be a shame to have the license thing come up then and to possibly have the file up for DR when it started with the right license.  Thanks! :-) We hope (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

WP:ERRORS
I've been pinging you when someone brings up an image issue after I notify them about their upcoming TFA, and I'm not aware of issues with that. I'm assuming that you don't want a ping if someone mentions an image issue at ERRORS ... do you? (There's one there now.) - Dank (push to talk) 10:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I got the Wehwalt one this morning. I just didn't have time to leave a note. My parents just flew in today. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

A thank and a talk
Crisco, good evening (HKT); I would like to express my gratefulness in your previous useful assistance again - I just did it to have the Chinese counterpart of the article Asmara Moerni promoted as a GA few weeks ago (though I intend to nominate it as an FA only after a few months to a year, as per my discussion to another user, he said that articles about Indonesian films in zhwp are handful and it's not an appropriate time to do this). Then I would like to share a question: I was thinking of keep updating the article The Jakarta Post and prepare for an article of Antara news agency and Balai Pustaka, but not very able to due to my awful Indonesian ability (just checked the website of Antara, they only provide a list of cash flow [I think] in around 2013). So I would like to ask if you have an intention to update these articles - I'll not mind even if you're too busy to bother, as I do aware that now you are more focussed on FPC and TFA. (PS. in zhwp GAs lack w/ updates are always at risk for being demoted - we have less GAs, thus to find such articles is easy). It'll be great if I can receive your reply. Thanks, -- Spring Roll Conan ( Talk · Contributions ) 12:10, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I've actually been really busy with translation, so I haven't been able to update any information. Balai Pustaka is apparently still around (I've seen recent re-issues of old books by them), so I'm guessing the bankruptcy didn't happen, but I haven't looked for references. Haven't looked into Antara, either. That was mostly Arsonal, that one. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:50, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

A diamond in the rough
Hi Chris, I have a slightly rough Diamonds Are Forever (novel) which is at FAC for a final polish, should you have the time and inclination. No rush, given the many calls on your time. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 20:55, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK overdue
Chris, in case you're around soon, the DYK queues are empty, and we're over three hours overdue. Prep 3 is next for promotion; I've just had to remove a hook from Prep 4, but I'll see about moving up a hook from a later prep in case you have time to do more than one prep to queue promotion. There is a call for an admin at WT:DYK, but it hasn't yielded any results; if you do a promotion, you might want to note there that the call has been answered. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. <b style="color:#00cc33">Harrias</b> talk 15:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Harrias. You're a lifesaver. Chris, if you'd like to do the next set of preps so we're ahead of the game, that would be great. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:54, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Done two. The next one has one of my hooks, so I shouldn't touch it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That's great. I pinged both you and Casliber, so with any luck he'll take care of the rest the next time he logs on. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Move
Can you help me move User:KAVEBEAR/Pitman to User:KAVEBEAR/H. H. Pitman? I don't want my sandbox to keep appearing on google searches. Besides changing the name do you know how else to stop that? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * NOINDEX exists for that. Move done.

What is the function that allows you to view all pages beginning with a phrase such as User:KAVEBEAR/ ? Thanks!--KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This. (Contributions --> Scroll down to the bottom of the page --> Subpages) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Boroughitis
Would you most kindly look at the same, which I've laid at PR? As it's rather a local-themed article (I'm from one of the boroughs mentioned in the article), I'm trying for all the "outside" input I can.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I can't be too sure of that. My parents are in for three weeks, so whatever free time I have is for them and the baby (this goes for Schro too) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Understood, thanks anyway. Good luck!--Wehwalt (talk) 13:18, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cleveland Centennial half dollar
Gatoclass (talk) 03:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Korrie Layun Rampan
Gatoclass (talk) 03:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Echinocereus reichenbachii
I made an attempt at focus stacking four images: File:Echinocereus reichenbachii by RO.jpg. What do you think? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk) 22:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Very, very noisy. What ISO did you use? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:20, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yup. I was concerned about the lighting. It started to get very overcast. The ISO was at 12800 for these. The focus is good though, right? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hard to judge with that level of noise. I don't see any errors with the focus stacking, which is good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, good. That was the main thing I wanted to get right. I'll try again tomorrow with better lighting. What ISO setting should I use? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:37, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * As low as you can get it. A tripod may be necessary. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a new version: File:Echinocereus reichenbachii by RO.jpg. What do you think of it? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:50, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you look at the newest version yet? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, yesterday was a blur of RL work. Looks quite nice, except for the noise in the background and some blur around the bottom of the plant. The noise is fixable in photoediting software, mostly, but the blurry area would require a new stack (not a new shot) — Chris Woodrich (talk)
 * I made a new stack: File:Echinocereus reichenbachii by RO.jpg, and was able to get much more in focus. How does it look? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  00:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Very nice. Only issue is the noise in the background. I could probably do that once my RL work calms down (70 pages to translate in a week!!!) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * That must be painstaking, but interesting work. I appreciate the offer big time (if that's what it is), but I'm using Photoshop and Lightroom CC, so what can I do to remediate the background noise? RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It is, and (when orders come in) it pays well above the standard here... though admittedly my wages back when I worked at a Wendy's in Canada were also well above the standard here in Indonesia, so that's not saying much absolutely. If you're using Photoshop, you can try selecting the background area, and then open Filter > Camera Raw Filter, and then on the triangle-ish tab you just fiddle with the Luminance slide under Noise Reduction. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:37, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I assume it's always Indonesian to English, but is it ever the reverse? I made a new version with a cleaner background: File:Echinocereus reichenbachii by RO.jpg. Thanks again for your guidance. Photography is my latest obsession, and it's so helpful to get advice from those you know what they're doing! RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  23:42, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I do do English-Indonesian translations, but they generally take more time and are not intended for publication. That is one good looking picture. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The FPC is off to an odd start: Featured picture candidates/Echinocereus reichenbachii. I was hoping you'd comment there. RO <sup style="color:blue;">(talk)  20:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Can you ...
... do something here about the "honkers" comment from an unsigned user who has a history of puerile anatomical comments? Thanks,. I tried deleting but it was reverted. Sca (talk) 18:47, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Dennis Brown got it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

TFA baton
Over to you. The notepad and the date-related lists are complete up to the promotion of Moonraker (novel). I have one small job outstanding; following a brief and somewhat bad-mannered discussion here, I have agreed to replace Cucurbita on 19 September. I'll do that shortly. This was pretty much the only hassle in an otherwise serene month. Happy scheduling! Brianboulton (talk) 17:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ready! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Jim Morrison (2)

 * Is there any chance this could go as TFP for December 8-Morrison's birthday? Thanks! We hope (talk) 23:02, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Done, at Template:POTD/2015-12-08 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * A GIANT thanks! :-D We hope (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If things work out well, December should be a very musical month. We've started working on the Frank Sinatra article for his 100th birthday on December 12. ;-) We hope (talk) 23:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds like fun, though a pretty darn big challenge. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, we've made a start here. Need to start reading the books now. :) We hope (talk) 23:56, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Pong Tiku
Crisco, bisa tolong Anda tambahkan potret diri, foto patung, atau apa kek di artikel Pong Tiku --Erik Fastman (talk) 03:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Paling fair use. Saya belum dapat gambar bebas. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Huguenot-Walloon half dollar
Gatoclass (talk) 01:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Template:POTD/2015-10-04
I think this should probably be rescheduled to a Saturday. What do you think? Armbrust The Homunculus 11:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The thought did occur to me. Want to switch it with the one on the third? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, or just move it back to 10 October... whichever is easier for you. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hugging up the big monkey man
Is there a way to copy an image to a new file on commons without downloading it and reuploading it? I think this should be reverted to the uncropped version, but I can see that other language wikis maybe wouldn't want the English captions and we should give them the choice (even if it is the wrong choice). In case you don't get the section title Belle (talk) 15:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Not that I know of, no. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * That's annoying; it wouldn't happen if I was in charge. Thanks anyway. Belle (talk) 01:37, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Crisco. I'm just posting to let you know that National Hero of Indonesia – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for October 16. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 18:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Oscar winners markup and accessibility
Hi there,

Thisisnotatest has brought up a concern about the markup of winners in the Oscar ceremony articles at 87th Academy Awards featured list nomination. He or she has a concern that unknown IP users will ruin the accessibility portion by marking the winners solely with bold text. I currently use double dagger to mark the winners, but the more recent lists often are reverted back (and I don't want to start an edit war). Can you give advice on what can be done to solve this problem? I propose using both the bold text and dagger for markup. I don't want to be canvassing. I just want help on how to be consistent on marking up winners that pleases everyone.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 08:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The dagger is a pretty well-established symbol for marking out "exceptions" in lists here, usually used in association with a colour (colour mostly being the main cue for full-sighted readers, the dagger being for those with colour-blindnesses or using a screen reader). I figure it should be fine to use one here; if it's removed without rationale repeatedly even when it's clear what it's for then those removals are problematic and the editors should be addressed for it. GRAPPLE   X  12:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I am in agreement that putting winners in bold and ending them with double daggers (or some other accessible symbol template, if double daggers are not appropriate) is an appropriate solution. Thisisnotatest (talk) 11:03, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Anglo-French War (1778–83)
Chris, I'm copy-editing Anglo-French War (1778–83), and in the section Anglo-French War (1778–83), there is an image of a painting. I noticed that the date in the caption was in French. I clicked on the image to see the image file, and I can't tell whether the date was part of the painting's title or not. If the date is part of the title, I think it should be in italics. If the date is not part of the title, then it should probably be in English, don't you think? Can you figure this out for me? Corinne (talk) 00:04, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's definitely part of the title. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Any major issues...
I'm missing on this one? (The people and a bit of shadow aren't ideal). Thanks in advance for a quick look...--Godot13 (talk) 02:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Only other nitpick is a bit of distortion towards the edges. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hawaii Sesquicentennial half dollar
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

John Lloyd Waddy
Hi Chris, I'm travelling till early November so won't have time to check this one for dead links and so on, and I'm sure there will be several bad URLs as I haven't vetted them in a long time and the official history website -- for one -- has recently changed the URLs on most pages. If you particularly want to run one of "my" FAs before I return then the two latest at the bottom of this page should be pretty safe. Just a suggestion... :-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Oops, scratch that -- even the last two were promoted before the Australian War Memorial changed all the URLs on official history pages. I think best not to do any of mine till I get back in early November unless someone wants a lot of work reparing the links... :-( Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Not anymore; used the Internet Archive. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Heh, I didn't think it was possible to convert them to the archived links so fast -- is there a trick?! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Wayback Machine automatically trawls websites and archives them. For something as major as the AWM, there was no doubt that they'd gone over the pages in question multiple times. I just put the old URL's in the search bar at the website. I used checklinks to figure out which links were dead or appeared dead, and fixed only those that needed fixing. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Emha Ainun Nadjib
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/October 8, 2015
You're more than welcome to check links! But to let you know my process: my partner John runs through all the links when he gets a chance, then I go through after he does. So, it's not urgent. - Dank (push to talk) 10:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, I know. Just saw it as I was going through the pages. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)