User talk:Jnpet

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Michaelas10 (T|C) 14:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Redirects
Hi Jnpet, I notice that you are assigning Categories to Redirect pages. I don't think this is correct - there is no content to these pages. I may be wrong about this, & if I am could you please point me to the Wiki policy on this. Thanks. GrahamBould 08:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Scorpionfish
I just wanted to give you thumbs up on your recent edits to the Scorpionfish article. I went through today and made a page for EVERY genus. I was going to try and straighten out the page tonight but it looks like you have it pretty well under control. Thanks. Dark j e  di requiem  09:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 05:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Striated frogfish
Great news about the photo (& I suspect you have a bunch more?). There is no need to decide 'drawing or photo', you can have both in the same article. Actually, because this species has such varied colouration, it would be very good to have at least 2 pictures. How about you upload your best photos to Commons, let me have the links, & we can discuss then. GrahamBould 08:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Your article, pygmy seahorse, was selected for DYK!
Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 22:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

the fish portal - Picture of the Month
Thanks for pointing out. I have corrected the credit. It's a great picture, by the way. --Melanochromis 01:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Dash-and-dot goatfish, was selected for DYK!
Thanks for your contributions!  Nish kid 64  16:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The Fish Quiz
Dear my Fish Portal comrade, I just want to let you know that the Fish Portal now has a new exciting feature - The Fish Quiz!! Come try to win the game and have your name honored in the Hall of Fame, and have a fun break from editing wikipedia. Cheers --Melanochromis 08:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Fishes
There is a new proposal on naming conventions for fish being discussed at WikiProject Fishes. As a member of said project your feedback would be appreciated at the WikiProject Fishes talk page here. Cheers, David. MidgleyDJ 07:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Fish Portal nominated for featured portal
Hello my Fish Portal fellow, I just want to let you know that I nominated the portal for the featured status. Feel free to comment and vote here. For more information about featured portal, see Featured portal candidates. Thanks and cheers, --Melanochromis 23:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Mishpachah Lev-Tsiyon
Hey, thanks for the translations! They are much appreciated! Drumpler 16:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I left you a barnstar on your user page. If you'd like to move it elsewhere, that's fine, just felt you needed to be awarded for your efforts. :) Drumpler 16:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pterois volitans Manado-e edit.jpg
Hi Jens,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Pterois volitans Manado-e edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 18, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-04-18.  howcheng  {chat} 23:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI
Hi, Jnpet. Please take a look. Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi again.When an FP image on English Wikipedia is nominated for delisting, the creator of the image required to be notified about this. For some unknown to me reasons Commons delist process does not require the creator of the image to be notified, which IMO is wrong. I also like to let you know that you do have a right to vote to keep your image. Your vote counts. It is a very good point about a kid, who was prompted to learn more about nudibranchs after looking at your image. I remember myself, when I saw my first nudibranch. I had no idea what it was and where to look for the information on it. IMO the best quality FP image could have is not the quality of an image itself, but rather its educational value. I'm very glad you've got some of your underwater images to become FP. I had no such luck. If you have a time, please, take a look at only one of mine failed nominations. I'd like to thank you for your contribution of wonderful underwater images.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I wish I could have given up on FP as you did. I feel absolutely the same about this. Thank you for offering your help, but I will not bother you with my nominations. I'm sure you have more interesting things to do. Best regards and good luck with your pictures. I hope nudibranch would stay.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Your message on my Commons talk page
Hi, Jens, I saw just now the message you left on my Commons talk page. I'm once again in process of trying to avoid Commons and their FP process all together. I was able to never even look at Commons for almost 2.5 months! Few days ago I came from Hawaii, where I've taken quite a few underwater images and every time I tried to focus on my subject while fighting strong currents I remembered Lycaon, who once said about your underwater image:. I wish I were able to forget this statement of his, but I cannot. The guy is a Marine Biologist, who opposed an underwater image taken in Antarctica! I believe it says it all. I do not think he's ever taken an underwater image himself, and he has a tendency to judge his own images much more softer than some other people work.IMO both the Commons and Wikipedia FP rules were not very smart to begin with and some reviewers do not even want to follow whateever good is in these rules. IMO they are doing everything possible to prevent the knoledge of something new and different from reaching Wikipedia readers.I'm afraid they would rather promote twelfth high resolution and high quality image of an Western honey bey than, for example, your amazing image of a scorpion fish.Anyway I wish you good luck in swimming in the waters of Commons FP. IMO it is much more dangerous and much less plesant than swimming with the sharks. If you wish to respond the message, please respond here. I'll check on it. Best wishes, and I'm sorry I cannot help you with your FP struggle. Mila.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Mila, I think you are right. It is a bit unpleasant at Commons. And you're smart to stay away. I even tried Valued Images, but even there Lycaon voted against one of my images. It's really no fun at all, and I think I'll stay away. At least for a while. Hope you came back with some great underwater pictures from Hawaii!

Cheers, Jens Jnpet (talk) 16:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Pygmy Seahorse
Hi, Please see this and if you can (I'm lucky enough to be able to read it, this) - pygmy seahorse is now used to describe a whole group of small seahorses - This article needs to be changed accordingly. I was perhaps a little quick to redirect it - I'll start a new article at User:smartse/pygmy. Please feel free to help. Smartse (talk) 15:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Chromodoris willani
Hi Jnpet. I saw your edit to the article Chromodoris willani today whereby you switched the photos around. I am not saying I disagree with your choice, but I am curious as to the rationale to your change. The other image that was there previously seemed to be much crisper when zoomed. Best wishes. Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  07:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Jnpet. I didn't mean for you to change the image back again, as you know no-one has ownership of any article here at wikipedia. I am relatively new here so was just curious as to what everyone was upto and to why the switch was made. Either photo works well so change it back again if you wish. Cheers and see you around Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  14:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Your question on the Creative Commons talkpage
Hi there, I am responding to your question about Creative Commons licenses from that talkpage here, as that page is more for discussion of the article rather than asking specific questions. In future if you have copyright questions about wikipedia, it would be better to ask at the copyright help desk.

To answer your question, there are a variety of creative commons licenses and some of them permit commercial use and some do not (those with a NC or non-commercial tag). However, the non-commercial usage licenses are not used on wikipedia. In regards to the image you uploaded the GNU Free Documentation License (and the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license) that this image was uploaded under, explicitly permits commercial usage, provided that the use conforms to the other license requirements. So there is no way to stop a commercial firm (or anyone else!) producing prints of this image. This is not a new ability caused by the Creative-Commons license, it has always been allowed to make commercial use of images and articles on wikipedia. However, the old GFDL license is really meant for text (software manuals) and it can be cumbersome and difficult to understand it. Because the creative commons license is clearer and easier to understand a few years ago we went through a legal process of "updating" (see Licensing update for more details about this) everything under a GFDL license to a compatible creative commons license to make licensing on wikipedia easier to understand. It sounds like you may not have fully understood the implications of the license you originally gave to your work, and part of the reason for the update was to help make it easier to understand the license permissions.

I hope that this won't dissuade you from continuing to upload such fantastic images to wikipedia though, they are a real pleasure to look through and great contribution to the encyclopedia. There are very good reasons why we allow commercial use of our images (for example to allow people to create print versions of encyclopaedia articles and I hope you will continue to upload and contribute images. If you would like to learn more about the creative commons licenses that we now use - the creative commons website has an excellent FAQ Ajbpearce (talk) 09:25, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * It seems I misunderstood the original license. Back then, I did understand that it could be used commercially as a collection, such as an encyclopedia, but not outright commercial use such as the printing company in question. I stand corrected. Thanks for the clarification, much appreciated. Jnpet (talk) 09:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Rhinopias frondosa images
Hi Jnpet, I'd like to make a change in the photo locations and captions on Rhinopias frondosa but wanted to discuss with you first as some of them are your contributions.

The distinctions drawn between R. frondosa and R. eschmeyeri in the 2006 study by Motomura and Johnson cited on the page strongly suggest the taxobox image is of R. eschmeyeri rather than R. frondosa. According to the authors, R. eschmeyeri "differs from R. aphanes and R. frondosa in having two tentacles on the underside of the lower jaw (vs. 12-18 tentacles in R. aphanes and 9-24 in R. frondosa), lacking tentacles on the frontal below the eyes in anterior view (vs. 2-4 tentacles present in the two species), lacking distinct tentacles on the lateral surface of the body above the lateral line (vs. present), having short tentacles, without distinct branches along distal margins, on the supraocular and posterior lacrimal spines (vs. long tentacles, with distinct branches) . . . and having head, body, fins, and tentacles usually without distinct pigmentation or markings (vs. with elongate black-margined white markings each with a central region of yellow, green, or brown in R. aphanes and with numerous distinct circular dark-margined spots in R. frondosa)." The taxobox image has uniform coloration without the circular markings of R. frondosa, no tentacles frontally below the eye, and unbranched tentacles above the eye, and seems to have few tentacles under the lower jaw.

I suggest the image in the taxobox be exchanged with the one on left of page and the caption on the left indicate it is of R. eschmeyeri, shown for comparison. (See the Rhinopias eschmeyeri page for converse of this image combination.) Jason Marks (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)