User talk:Muhammad Mahdi Karim/Archive 1

Your "Kaaba Mirror" Photo
I am using this photo in a video I am making for a school project. My name is Aatif Sayeed and I go to Centennial High School in Corona, CA in the US. This video is for a "Personal Project" i am required to do. Very nice picture, by the way. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.155.193 (talk) 20:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. Muhammad (talk) 08:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Makarim.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Makarim.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 17:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Jakaya Kikwete
You uploaded a picture of Jakaya Kikwete - and class it GFDL. Did you take the picture ? Where did it come from ? Wizzy&hellip; &#9742;   16:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Peacetv.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Peacetv.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 12:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Tawaf
Thank you again for uploading the image of the Kaaba, it's very beautiful. :) I have two questions:  (1) Do you remember the exact date that it was taken?  It would be a good addition to the image file, to include both the Western date, and the Islamic calendar date.  And (2) Do you have any other images of Mecca or the surroundings?  I am currently working on the articles about Mecca, the Kaaba, the Hajj, and some other related subjects, and would love to see any other photos that you have.  :) --Elonka 22:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Beautiful, thank you. Was this taken on the same day as the other picture?  And is it alright if I move the image to the Commons, so that it can be used at other language Wikipedia projects, too? :) --Elonka 17:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, one small point. When you took the picture, it was of people doing the Umra, but it was not actually during the Hajj, correct?  If that's true, we should probably either remove the image from the Hajj article, or state in the image caption that it was taken at a different time. --Elonka 21:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar Thanks
Thanks kindly for the Barnstar.

BTW I thought your Kaaba pic was through, it's a shame that missed out. I didn't want to mention it at the time, but I was wondering about the rarity of this photo, and the fact that you took it on a phone camera. Obviously I assume you took it while you were there, but was wondering why there's so few pictures of such a significant place.

Are you not meant to take photos there? And if so, are you likely to get in any trouble for doing so? (Sorry, I read a short history of Islam earlier this year, but am really pretty ignorant about it all, so am just interested in this type of thing). Cheers, --jjron 12:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, well done on getting the photo out then! Glad you're not going to get in any real trouble for taking and publicising it. --jjron 13:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Dragonflies
Hi Muhammad,

I wouldn't bother too much with Image:Hawker dragonfly holding twig.JPG; there seems to be a lot of blown out areas there, probably a result of flash reflection. It appears you've used flash in the other one too, but it's not as bad. If you can, avoid using the flash, because it tends to give these nasty reflections.

I quite like Image:Hawker dragonfly.jpg. I've done a bit of an edit to it which I think considerably improves it - see Image:Hawker dragonfly-edit1.jpg. Unfortunately its body seems slightly bent and the back wing on the right seems slightly raised, which meant I couldn't get it completely straight in the frame. In rotating I also lost a bit of space off the bottom, which means that is fairly tight now down there. It could well be worth nominating at FPC. BTW, how come this one was uploaded to Wikipedia, and the other one to Commons? They recommend uploading to Commons if you can, and providing as much useful detail as you can in the image summary (e.g., what it is, where and when it was taken, etc).

I would question its identification as a Migrant Hawker, going on the description and distribution given in the article. How confident are you of this identification? The species ID seems to have been an issue with pretty much all your nominations, so try to get that straightened out before nominating. I'd also recommend where possible making sure the images are fairly prominent in at least one, and if possible, more than one article. At the moment this is just a secondary image in a stub article, which limits its encyclopaedic value.

I don't know how it would fare on FPC, assuming you get the above sorted out. I like it, especially with the detail on the wings, and would support, but there is tough competion there. Have a look through Featured pictures/Animals/Insects if you haven't already.

You're competing against people like Fir0002 who's shooting with a really good DSLR and dedicated macro lens; using your Coolpix puts you at a distinct disadvantage before you even start. Whether it's fair or not, the sort of images Fir0002's uploading are setting the standard against which all are judged, and at the end of the day, no matter how well you take the photo you're going to be limited by your camera. Probably your biggest advantage is living in a unique location (at least from the point of view of most of us on English Wikipedia).

Anyway good luck with it and hope to see it on FPC soon. --jjron 11:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

DSM Beach
Hi Muhammad,

My honest opinion is that the DSM beach pic wouldn't pass on FP. The main reason being that while it's a nice beach shot, there's not really much to distinguish it from a beach shot that could be taken anywhere else in the world.

The cloud formation is rather interesting, and what look like dhows out on the water do add particular interest to this shot. Also the land out on the horizon could be interesting, but is really too far away. I have seen quite a lot of shots like this of beaches, lakes, etc roundly opposed simply because they're too generic, despite voters recognising that they are nice photos in their own right.

As a suggestion though coming out of this photo, I assume you live near this beach. If you could get a really good detailed close-up shot of a dhow with a nice background, I reckon you'd have a really good chance. Something like the lead photo in the dhow article, but with better composition and less clutter behind.

Are you considering giving that dragonfly photo a try? Cheers, --jjron 08:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey. No, I'm not a taxonomist, I have a bit of a background in biology, but don't have access to all the reference sources, etc, needed to do classifications of these type of things. You could try Wikispecies, but I don't really know much about it, or whether you can get someone to help classify what's in your photos.
 * Perhaps it would be worth asking Fir0002 what he does. He uploads lots of insect pictures correctly classified. He may be able to suggest what you can do, if you ask nicely. I don't think he's on much at the moment, but should give you some ideas when he is. --jjron 08:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The new dragonfly photo is pretty good. The lighting seems to be quite even, there's no really bad flash glare or anything. The background is perhaps not the most attractive, I'm not even sure what it is. I don't know whether people would oppose for that or not.
 * Getting it ID'd is the thing. I noticed Fir0002's reply below, I thought he did something like that. I'm not sure whether those places would be able to identify the mainly African species you'd be photographing, but if not there may be similar organisations in Tanzania (or perhaps those Australian places could suggest to you who to ask in Africa). --jjron 06:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Bouncing ball FP nomination
There is a new extremely professional re-edit from my original RAW file by Richard Bartz, and I'd urge you to vote for this instead of my own imperfect Photoshop efforts. Thanks very much to Richard for the work he's put in. Please consider voting or amending your vote at: Featured picture candidates/Projectile motion. --MichaelMaggs 17:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * done Muhammad Mahdi Karim 18:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Help please
Hi Muhammad, Thanks for the compliment :) I send my photos to the entomology department of the CSIRO centre and to the Australian Museum and Victorian Museum (they have emails where you can send stuff to be identified). I've found them extremely helpful! --Fir0002 22:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * These are the emails I send my stuff too - ento-ident@csiro.au, SAND@austmus.gov.au and discoverycentre@museum.vic.gov.au - but don't overload them or they'll stop doing my pix! ;) --Fir0002 21:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Flower pic
I haven't looked at the second one fullsize, but my gut feeling is the one you nominated was better; the main thing is that big dead-looking yellow leaf in the second one is a bit unappealing. Do you think I should redo with a bit more width as Jeff Dahl suggested? --jjron 06:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That's OK, I've done it. It didn't take long as I basically remembered all the settings I did yesterday, it was just choosing a different crop. I'll put it on as Edit2. --jjron 10:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * At the moment voting is 5 support, 2 oppose. That means it has the four supports required, and currently has greater than the 2/3rds majority required. Additionally the main concerns of the opposers have been at least partially addressed in the edits. I would suggest at this stage that it should get through.
 * I would just leave it as it is at the moment. Heading towards the bottom of the page with lots above it, it shouldn't get much more attention now, new version or whatever. If it doesn't pass, then you could consider nominating the other version as a new nom, but doing so with the current candidate will just introduce confusion and seems pointless.
 * Re the new one, I think they're pink flowers in the background of the new one, which are a bit distracting again if you did come to nominate it. Remember to check your background if you think a picture may become suitable for FPC - for example in the original nomination if you had just quickly removed three or four dead leaves before taking the picture, it would have lessened people's concerns with the background. On the other hand, the flower itself in the new version appears to be in slightly better condition. This would be FP #1 if it goes through wouldn't it? --jjron 13:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Eid Mubarak
Your friendly neighborhood Muslim.

If you object to the above message, please remove it, accept my apologies and notify me on my talk page.

Picture of Dastghaib Shiraz
Hi,

Someone had added a template to the image to say that it was too big for 'fair use' so I reduced the size of the image. See WP:FU for more info on fair use. On a practical level, the large image had no fine details in it anyway, so I don't think anything has been lost in the process. -Iain 21:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Hymenocallis speciosa flower

 * Congrats on your first FP! Hopefully many more to come. And thanks for the Barnstar. Cheers, --jjron 07:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Portrait of a Turkish Woman
Hi, thanks for your comments, but if the caption was changed to specify the woman in the photo was not wearing hijab but simply traditional Anatolian dress would you support its nomination as an FP? Kitkatcrazy 16:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Logoask.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Logoask.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Moringa
Hi Muhammad,

I had looked at that image. To be honest, I tend to find photographing flowers like that a bit frustrating as it's so hard to get anything where the composition doesn't look messy. I usually end up just deleting the photos, or never uploading them because I think surely I should be able to get a 'cleaner' composition.

The quality, and even the beetle in your image seem OK to me, but for the reasons I give above I'm a bit put off by overall composition, even though it's probably going to be hard to get anything better. For that reason I was fairly neutral, so hadn't voted. If I did vote, it would probably be a neutral. I'll cast a vote on that if you like? --jjron 08:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
Salam alaykum, As I saw you'd made several articles about Shia scholars or improved them. Thus I invite you to participate in Shia task force and add your name in here.God bless you.-- Seyyed(t-c) 06:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Tortoise FPC
Looks like jjron has started that ball rolling. I made some touch ups as well, hope it helps. Good shooting =) Ryo 14:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. Let's hope the tortoise kicks on from here. --jjron (talk) 15:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Leopard Tortoise FPC
This is what i mean by an 'average shot'. I am a photographer, and I don't really find anything in the photo that would make it anything special from many others. The use of flash rid the turtle of any contrast and washed out the colors while created dark shadows under the shell. The composition is pretty average, all I can say about it is that you centered the turtle. It looks like you just relied on the auto settings on the camera and got lucky. All in all, it's a photo anyone could have taken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lipton sale (talk • contribs) 23:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, as mentioned on the nomination page, I'd like to let you know about Wikipedia Picture Peer Review, which I think you would benefit from, the next time you feel you have a photo worth nominating for Featured Picture Candidates. I noticed a large number of changes to the nomination which suggests perhaps the nomination wasn't prepared as well as it could be. The peer review is a much more constructive (as opposed to deconstructive!) assessment, suggesting a number of ways you could improve your image's chances before you nominate it for FPC. Hope to see you there! --mikaultalk 09:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not much of fan of withdrawing nominations; personally I'd just leave it run its course, unless you really want to finish it off early. It seems unlikely to get through, but I doubt there'll be many more votes now so low down on the page. Mikaul does raise a valid point about there just being too many options in this nom. If you don't like the idea of using PPR, one thing Fir0002 used to do was run a quick straw poll of some friendly FPC folk to get an idea on which was the best out of a set before nominating (and sometimes would not nom at all after that) - see here for example. It can be a bit of an impost on the other users though, and he was far more established at the time than you are (i.e., it was probably easier for him to find people to help out). --jjron (talk) 07:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please check my latest comments on this nom - what do you think? --jjron (talk) 12:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sudais.jpg
-- Avi (talk) 15:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Bounce flash
Hi, I'm sorry, I mis-read your camera model as one with a flash hot shoe. Basically with a tilt-head flash you can direct it at a reflector like a wall, while pointing the camera at the subject. You can get the same effect with an ordinary light, but you might need a tripod. Built-in flash is generally very unflattering and snapshot-like & probably not "special" enough for FP, is all. I've noticed a lot of your shots have very front-on lighting; maybe experimenting more with side lighting might work for you. Best wishes, --mikaultalk 23:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Schand.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Schand.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Delisting featured images
Hi there. It's important task to nominate for delisting images that no longer meet the featured picture criteria, but please make sure you notify the uploader (and creator, if that person is a Wikipedian) of the delist nomination. Enuja (talk) 06:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Opps. Please disregard the above message.  I didn't check carefully enough; I was actually notifying someone who edited the image, not the original uploader nor the nominator.  I see you've already got the message out to the right people.  Enuja  (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No probs. Muhammad Mahdi Karim (talk) 07:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Frog image
One of my favorite parts of my job is to dissect living animals, and your frog image horrified me. I have done survival surgeries, collected data as we were sacrificing animal, and been in charge when students were removing muscles from frogs in order to experiment with muscle stimulation and contraction. I can't image any reason why what I'm assuming is a student dissection would have to be done with living frogs. If any experiment is done with a living animal, there needs to be a way to continually administer an anesthetic throughout the experiment; if one is using a anesthetic that needs to be inhaled by an animal, there needs to be regular artificial breaths. However, if one is simply dissecting a frog, why not anesthetize it and then pith (remove the brain stem) of the animal? The animals is brain dead, and won't wake up or feel pain, but the heart keeps beating and the rest of the organs look perfectly normal. Because students in the lab I've supervised just need the muscles, we anesthetize the frogs with what is honestly a lethal dose of MS-222 (in the water), and then have the students cut out of the heart. They even get to look at the heart as it continues to beat out the animal, so it's both instructive and completely safe, as exsanguinating a vertebrate is a fool-proof way to kill it. The students then dissect out the gastrocnemius, and the muscle is quite fresh and living to be able to contract (when stimulated) for hours. When I've seen students dissect frogs for anatomy, the frogs have always been quite well and truly dead (and even preserved). Sometimes people around me are frustrated by the rules of our Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, but after seeing that picture, I am very glad we are always required to use two methods to kill any animal. I honestly don't see any use for that image of yours except for anti-vivisection propaganda. I do sincerely hope that whatever institution was responsible for that living frog has been closed, no longer supervises animal experiments, or at least has instituted completely new procedures for responsible animal care and use. Enuja (talk) 02:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The incident shocked me and the only reason I took the picture was to share my experience with the others. I know it may not be the best thing, but I dont understand the reaction of many users. If dead, mutilated, bloody bodies of humans can be uploaded what is wrong with doing so with a frog's? I must impress that this incident was an accident and this does not normally happen. Muhammad Mahdi Karim (talk) 16:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, there is an article death that has an image of a dead person. That's encyclopedic.  However, animal testing already has images of mammals that featured in animal testing controversies, which show both "bad things that can happen" and "propaganda anti-vivisectionists have promulgated".  When your image gets picked up by an anti-vivisection group that's notable enough to  have its own Wikipedia article, it can go in that group's article.  (From your license, anyone using your image has to also release it under your license, so propaganda using your image would still be free content).  If your image starts a controversy that is notable, then the image can go in that article.   I am not addressing the issue of whether your image should be deleted from commons; I just don't think there is currently an article in the English Wikipedia that this image can be encyclopedic in.  - Enuja  (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

FPC
I think your photo may be relatively rare... but... we usually use that for photos that will be really hard to get or we are very very unlikely to get in the future. I think for any hajj related photo it's hard to argue that since million of people go each year and cameras are only becoming more common. It represents Muslims in ihram but it doesn't represent the mountain or hajj that well for me. And, I think for it to be features it would have to not cut off his foot, be more centered since the stairs on that angle are a little distracting... Sorry. Are you on hajj this year or did someone send that picture back to you? If you are I hope it's a great experience for you :) --gren グレン 14:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Seasons greetings
Hope you have lots of fun over the festive period and best wishes for the new year, thanks for the festive message --Hadseys (talk • contribs) 12:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
I'm actually not a Christian, but I certainly appreciate your well-wishing with the greeting! Enjoy the holidays and the upcoming year (6 days!). thegreen J     Are you green?  19:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Same here. I'm not a Christian, but the most important part you remember about me. Please have a very nice and plesant holidays.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the Christmas wishes, and a happy holidays and happy New Year to you! --Malachirality (talk) 20:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, is anyone around here a Christian? ;-) Seasons greetings to you as well, and all the best for 2008 (the year to add to that FP count) . Cheers, --jjron (talk) 08:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind wishes, and a belated happy Eid to you and your family as well. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Belated thanks for the Christmas greeting! Hope your holidays were pleasant. CillaИ &diams; XC 14:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Flower
(Nearly didn't see that way up there on my talkpage).

Doh! How did you find that out? And are you definitely sure it's correct now?

Ideally something like that wouldn't happen, but mistakes can happen to anyone. I have also corrected the species names at Featured pictures/Plants, Featured pictures thumbs 09, and Wikipedia Signpost/2007-10-22/Features and admins (not sure if I'm meant to change that one).

As far as the FP itself goes, I think we can just leave it, however I would probably put a note on the image talkpage detailing what happened (i.e., if anyone goes to it, and sees it's in a different article than its FP nom they may wonder why; leaving a note on the talkpage would indicate you weren't just trying to hide it all away). As far as the nomination itself goes, I think we just have to leave that one as is. (Oops, sorry, I wrote that before seeing you'd already made changes to the nomination - nonetheless, I'd still leave a note on the image talkpage.)

Ethically maybe it should go up for a delist and renomination, like that lizard did a few weeks back, but realistically I don't think that's necessary. It's hardly like we're drowning in photos of either of those flower species, and presumably the nomination would have gone the same either way - the photo itself hasn't actually changed. OK, take care, --jjron (talk) 07:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Image edit
Hey, the background's 'fixed', but perhaps a bit artificial. It also looks a bit odd where it joins into him, especially around his beard, like you can sort of tell it's been edited in, I think that may get a hard time at FPC, especially when people have seen the original. Perhaps his shirt looks rather artificially smooth, especially around his right upper chest. It just doesn't gel with the creases elsewhere on his shirt, like on the pocket. --jjron (talk) 02:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Muhammad,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Flower with pollen-Edit2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 9, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-02-09.  howcheng  {chat} 23:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hi, Muhammad, Thank you very much for the barnstar; what a nice surprise! May I please congratulate you with the flower image, which is going to be POTD on February 9. This is one really amazing flower. I'd also like to thank you for uploading high quality images of rare plants and animals.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: FPC Again
Hi,Muhammad. I'm afraid I'm not interested in FP process any more. It has nothing to do with your great image, but I do not vote at FP. Sorry and good luck!--Mbz1 (talk) 14:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC) reason#3 reason#4. I could provide you with many more like this.Best wishes.--14:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi,Muhammad. Here are my reasons: reason#1reason#2

Arabic text request
Hi, I'm working on redrawing some images that include Arabic text but I can't quite figure out what they say. I'm hoping you can read them for me. For example on Image:Egypt1 copy.jpg I can see the bottom says مص but I can't tell what the top part says. I don't really need the translation, just the spelling of the words would be awesome if you can help me out. Thanks, Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 06:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Any chance you can tell what is on this one: Image:Muslim Scout Association of Lebanon.jpg? Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 22:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

FPC
Sorry I could not vote for it on time. I see its a bit too late now. My apologies once again. H92110 (talk) 06:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Head shots
We actually had a discussion about this a while ago. Some of the results are contained in this document, which I hope can be developed into a guideline for animal or general macro-organismal photographs in the spirit of WP:WIAFP. Feel free to discuss it with me or other people. Discussion so far can be found at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_picture_candidates. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)