User talk:Slaunger

Mite
Hi

Thanks for showing me the mite pic. The first thing I have to say is that even given the Stellaria flowers to be pretty small (about 5 mm across I'm guessing?), that is one ENORMOUS mite! Far far bigger than any I've seen with my own eyes. My guess would be Trombidiidae as well but beyond that I am a bit lost. I will have a bit of a dig, I'm sure such a large, brightly coloured species must have some mention somewhere! Richard Barlow 07:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Mm, it is definitely an arachnid and the shape suggests a mite. Spiders always have the body clearly divided into two sections and all the harvestmen I am aware of have much longer legs than this and tend to be more drably coloured but a body length of 3 mm is seriously huge for a mite. I shall carry on digging! Richard Barlow 11:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. Sorry I've not been in touch, not had much chance to dig! I'll get back to you soon Richard Barlow 08:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Upernavik edit
Hey. Have posted an edit at Picture peer review/Upernavik. Have a look and see what you think. --jjron (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, if you want to email me, we can figure out a way to get the full size TIF to me and Ill certainly work on it for you. Go to my website and you'll find my email address. Mfield (talk) 01:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I have tried sending it for the last two hours via my gmail account. I have now aborted the operation since there was no reports on progress and I am doing a retry. The file is 114 Megs... -- Slaunger (talk) 10:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Slaunger, it's too big to send directly, you will need to send it to me via Yousendit or similar. Mfield (talk) 15:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but I wont bother with yousendit. I am just now doing a restitch of the hole thing using the newest bleeding edge version of Hugin and I plan to upload that in an unprocessed state in the highest jpeg quality possible once I have cropped it. Oh, and then I also intend to do another edit try. Previously I have never come further than selective Gaussian blur when it comes to noise removal, but today I have bought myself a fancy pro noise remover and I am impressed by some intial tests and i want to try using that on the image. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Upernavik
Hi Slaunger,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Upernavik evening panorama edit4.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 21, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-06-21.  howcheng  {chat} 23:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Valued Pictures Proposal
Hi Slaunger. Thanks for your comments and vote when this went through FPC talk. There was a pretty clear consensus for Option 2 which involved setting up the project here. I have developed a trial version at User:Jjron/VP Trial. I have put up a discussion at PPR talk - Wikipedia_talk:Picture_peer_review for comments. Feel free to drop by and give your thoughts, especially as regards ideas for how well this integrates with the COM:VI stuff and whether they could work together. --jjron (talk) 17:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Jjron, thank you for your notice. I saw you had published your proposal a few hours ago. I will go study it right away. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re VI/VP. Heh, I just left a comment at Commons VI Talk re naming. Not meaning to butt in though, there's too much there for me to absorb... --jjron (talk) 14:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Nevertheless your comment made sense. Thank you. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Good luck and best wishes for the VI launch tomorrow at Commons. I know you haven't done it all yourself, but I think it's fair to say you've been the driving force behind it. I look forward to dropping by to have a look. Cheers, --jjron (talk) 09:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. It is a little exciting I must say (here 45 m before the opning). It has been a lot of work by me and many others, and I am anxious if the reviews will be sufficiently qualified. That aspect, is for me, the largest risk in the project. I certainly expect that in the beginning there will also be a learning curve for the reviewers and nominators, and it will be interesting to see if the guidelines are too complicated, or what else happens. -- Slaunger (talk) 23:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello again
First, please accept my apologies for taking so long to reply to your message on my talk page. To be honest, I had been getting a bit wikibonked about images processes and just couldn't put an appropriate amount of thought into it again at that point. Rather than working within your project on COM, I've decided to focus my meager efforts here on WP within the FPC and PPR processes, but I wanted to drop you a few lines to let you know, first, that it was not in any way my intention to ignore your request out of spite or apathy and, second, to offer you my admiration for the sheer amount of work you've done with images here and on COM and the amount of energy you've expended toward making the entire project better. While we're going ahead in EN in a different direction than I suppose you were looking for, your well-thought out arguments and civility helped shape things for the better. For your effort, please accept this, the barnstar of civility. Matt Deres (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Matt, Thank you so much for this barnstar of civility! Previously, I have gotten barnstars from users who share approximately the same views as myself, and I consider it a special honor to get one from a previous opponent in a heated debate. For me, that you get back to me in this spirit represents an exquisite level of civility in itself. Actually, I had completely forgotten about that notice on your talk page, and upon reading it again, I must say I am not too proud of the underlying sarcasm I also had in that post along some portion of good intentions. I guess I was pretty much taken aback by the opposition to what I considered an absolutely brilliant idea (at the time). I think that now I have a more nuanced view on the relations and differences between EN and Commons. It is something I have learned to appreaciate more after nominating three images at FPC with a featured rate of 2/3. I respect that you want to focus on FPC and PPR work on EN. It is correct that I had hoped a higher degree of synergy between EN and Commons were to prefer, but my pragmatic approach now is to realize that the projects are just quite different implementations of basically the same goals. The civility thing means a lot to me, as my ways were recently considered incivil by a Commons admin (who has now retired) which saddened me. So getting this barnstar is a nice cancellation of that other incident. I am now again mainly focusing on COM:VI, which will be go live June 1 at 0:00 UTC. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 24, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-10-24.  howcheng  {chat} 22:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The project goes live for nominations on 10 November, 2008 at 0:00 UTC
This Wikipedia Valued pictures project sets out to identify and encourage users' efforts in providing valuable images of high encyclopedic value, and to build up a resource for editors from other Wikimedia projects seeking such educational images for use online. The project also provides recognition to contributors who have made an effort to contribute enyclopedic images of difficult subjects which are very hard or nigh on impossible to obtain. The project will run alongside the existing Wikipedia Featured pictures and Picture peer review projects.

Please visit Valued picture candidates to nominate an image, or to help review the nominations. Anyone with an account on Wikipedia is welcome to nominate images, and also to take part in the open review process.

Elucidate (parlez à moi) Ici pour humor 17:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

'''I flagrantly stole the countdown timer from you. No regrets, though. Thanks a load. We hope to see you at the nominations page soon.'''
 * You're welcome to reuse the counter template. But I am not too keen about you reusing the Commons Valued image logo for WP:VP though. I fear it will lead to confusion as the two projects are slightly different:-( Could you reconsider that part of it? Besides that I wish you the best of luck with the project. You are working very fast. -- Slaunger (talk) 18:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought you would raise that objection. I'm not happy about using the seal myself. I have, however, requested a special seal for the Wikipedia Valued pictures department. The Commons illustrator, LadyofHats will hopefully be designing the personalized seal for the project. I thought it could show the VI seal on an open book, or something like that. She's busy at the moment, but hopefully will be able to design it as soon as she has time. In the meanwhile, I'm just getting the project going. I have contacted several administrators as well as frequent Featured Picture and FPC contributors, and notified them about the project. I have also done the same with the Wikipedia Signpost and WikiProject Photography. If the Signpost does an article on VP, it'll be great for the project's publicity. Elucidate (parlez à moi) Ici pour humor 18:50, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Then, since you do not intend to actually resuse the COM:VI logo, then I really think you should start out without a logo at all (or be a little more patient). Be careful with logos, they have a strong effect, and the current logo is mesleading. -- Slaunger (talk) 18:54, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll fix up the pages that link to the logo now. Its a shame we don't have our own yet: the Commons VP seal is both attractive and eyecatching. Elucidate (parlez à moi) Ici pour humor 19:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree the COM:VI seal is attractive and eyecatching. It was also a long process involving several iterations which finally led to the logo. Thank you for modifying pages which link to the logo. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:16, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Mirage
Hi Kim, May I please ask you, if you've ever seen a mirage? They should be common in Greenland. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Mila, Unfortunately, I have never seen a mirage, or - at least I have not been conscious about seeing one, if I have ;-) I have been in Greenland twice. First time in June-August, 2007 in Upernavik, but there the sun never set or rose for the first 2.5 months. The second time was late October, 2008, but was only one week and work related (I was busy working). The weather and visibility was bad as well, so no... -- Slaunger (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I asked about mirages because few days ago I saw a really nice few: Image:Fata morgana of the ships.jpg. I see mirages of land few times per year, but mirages of ship much more rarely. BTW I found out that few of my images were used in California Academy of Sciences. Yesterday I got two complimetary tickets to the Academy. Kim, I'd be missing you. May I please ask you to come back to Wikipedia as soon as possible? Best wishes and good luck with whatever you're doing.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi again Mila. Thank you those nice new photos. i like the one in the lower right very much. It is as if the conatiners are floating. I work with radars including their propagation. Similar effects can sometimes be seen in radar, and sometimes you can see far over the normal radar horizon due to ducting. I will come back to Wikimedia Projects, just do not know when. Perhaps when I get myself a better camera;-) --

Litoria subglandulosa
Hey mate,

Sorry about the late reply. I didn't realise I was signed out of wiki for so long. I have added an approximate location for the species. Thanks --liquidGhoul (talk) 06:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

New Mandelbrot zoom


Some time ago you asked the user Zom-B if a new Mandelbrot zoom-in could be created at twice the size of the current one. I've created a new zoom in at twice the size (all though it doesn't zoom in as deep). I just wondered if you think this is featured image worthy? --Simpsons contributor (talk) 00:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Will the featured image status be automatically transferred to WC or do we have to vote again there? --Simpsons contributor (talk) 23:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think owing to the large number of support votes on Wikipedia it'll certainly be featured. It seems an awful shame to delete it. Can't we have the image on Wikipedia and Wikimedia? --Simpsons contributor (talk) 10:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Can the image be featured on Wikimedia Commons AND Wikipedia? Can the same image be "double featured"? --Simpsons contributor (talk) 11:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Also I'm moving on to arbitrary-precision (emulated floating point numbers) and I might be able to zoom even deeper than this. Too bad it'll probably take a month to create each frame. --Simpsons contributor (talk) 15:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia probably has enough Mandelbrot-related featured images now, but I want to ask for your opinion on this image nonetheless because I think it's the most fantastic rendering of the set yet. This one is not based upon escape time but how close the iterative function orbit passes to two lines and a single point. These "orbit trap" shapes are than projected across the image in a distorted form (distorted lines and points can be seen). Maybe I should try making a Teddy bear Julia set too! --Simpsons contributor (talk) 06:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Mavericks
Hi Kim, You've asked me about Mavericks. Today we went to see Mavericks competition. The waves were far, far, far away, against the sun, and the conditions were rather hazy. There were many people there File:Maverick's spectators 1.jpg, File:Maverick's spectators 2.jpg. We could have gone to other location, but I do not think it was much better. We saw the waves alright from where we were, but surfers were too tiny. Here is 4-frames image of a single wave. The surfer is seen at every frame. Do you see him File:Mavericks wave breaks.jpg (please do not mistake a surfer with jet ski, which are seen much better. Photographing surfers in Santa Cruz is much easier and rewarding I'd say. --Mbz1 (talk) 00:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi mila,
 * Thanks for remembering my questions about the Maverick. So you went out there, eventually! Anyway, I see what you mean. It is really impossible to get good shots under such conditions. You need to be in a helicoptor or in a nearby boat to get better shooting conditions. I do see the surfer in your composite photo, but I am glad you told me to look hard, as he is really tiny. But, wow, that is one huge wave he is surfing on. It looks really crazy. From the news you send it seems like it was not without risk to be a spectator as well. Seems pretty dramatic. --Slaunger (talk) 21:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There are accidents with spectators almost every year, probably more than with the surfers. Today we went to a different location, the same beach that was hit by the wave yesterday. From the beach itself one hardly could see anything at all. There's is a hill to hike, but it is very steep File:Spectators are watching Mavericks.jpg and slippery because of the loose rocks. Getting up is hard, getting down even more so:File:Spectators are getting off the cliff after watching Mavericks.jpg. We still climbed that hill! The last competition few people got injured on that hill. Here's the video of what happened yesterday.--Mbz1 (talk) 06:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing your photos and experiences, (although I am amused that you do not share the photos with us at Commons, but uploads them locally, but please do not comment on that as I've seen that pattern so many times before). Was it worthwhile then, to climb that steep hill? --Slaunger (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, here's the image (4 frames image) that was taken from the cliff File:Mavericks and surfer 4 frames image.jpg. A surfer is seen in every frame. Here's one more File:Mavericks and surfer.jpg. Much, much better images could have been taken from both locations. My 300 mm lens is a very old, cheap and not good one at all, I used no tripod, I probably used a wrong settings, and I did not do anything to reduce the sun impact. Here's the image that somebody took from a boat File:Surfers at Mavericks.jpg, which is of course much better than mine. Still I believe that the images I took have EV on their own. IMO the images I took from the first location show what Mavericks is about, I mean Mavericks are not just big waves, they have a very special break. Here's one more photo-montage from the first location File:Mavericks wave breaks 4.jpg. IMO photo-montage might have some advantages because by doing it, I am showing the development and the break of the special waves. I'm thinking about taking a boat tour one day, but I am really afraid to get sea sick. --Mbz1 (talk) 22:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that making a photo montage seems like an adequate way to show the dynamics of a maverick wave. I see you point about being in a boat. I would perhaps be more worried about the personal safety than being sea sick. I have toured with danish naval vessels off the west coast of Greenland during storms in October and in smaller vessels in the Baltic Sea during a storm last summer. There are powerful prescribale medicaments available which can suppress seasick symptoms a lot. I have used them on those occasions and they really helped. --Slaunger (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, when we were going to Antarctica I took some medicine too, but even with the medicine I was only able to stay in the bed. As soon as I was getting up I felt no good. Of course the storm was absolutely tremendous. It was icebreaker File:Icebreaker Kapitan Khlebnikov in the Ross Sea, Antarctica from helicopter.OGG. Our cabin was at the seventh floor. In the first night we decided to leave the window opened. My husband told me: "Sure the waves would not reach here." Well, the waves did not, we reached the waves, when the ship was on her side. They have bed belts there. Mine did not work. I wanted to call somebody to fix it, but George said let's wait until morning. I wish I did not listen to him. In the middle of the night I was shout out flying off my bed :) I still cannot understand how come I did not hurt myself because I landed on the floor few meters away from my bed. Then we both knew: if bed belts are present you'd better use them :) Kim, I wanted to ask you, where in your opinion the waves were bigger in my images or in the one that was taken from the boat? Thanks,--Mbz1 (talk) 15:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, that is a dramatic episode at sea you are reporting from there. It have never experienced anything as crazy as that. It seems like the Antarctic waters are really dangerous. I read yesterday about two arctic cruise ships that anchored in Upernavik, when I stayed there, Fram (2007) and Ocean Nova. Both of them cruise in antarctic waters during winter and both of them have had serious accidents there. As I understand it, it is being discussed if cruising with passengers for leisure in (ant)arctic waters should be allowed at all, or if it is simply too dangerous.
 * So you are asking, which wave is the largest? My immmediate impression is that yours are the largest, but it is really hard to tell as the zoom and everything is deceptive in determining relative sizes of objects. At least the break in your waves seem more "violent". Do you have the answer yourself, or are you just asking for my oponion?
 * Yes, I was very lucky I did not hurt myself. The next cruise one guy had a very bad trauma. They should have returned back and take him out. The travel to Antarctica is dangerous. We've been to Antarctica two times. First time we went with Explorer File:Adelie chicks in antarctica and Ms Explorer.jpg. Few years later Explorer hit an iceberg and sank in Antarctica. Smaller accidents happen all the time, but IMO people, who want to travel there, should know what they are looking for and not complain. In Antarctica the weather could change very fast and in a very dramatic way. All the time we used a helicopter to go somewhere they first were flying out some supply because nobody could say, if when it is time to go back, the helicopters still will be able to fly. BTW about helicopters, it reminded me a funny story about our landing at Ross Ice Shelf. Using helicopters was out of the question because of a very bad weather. Zodiacs could not be used either because the Shelf is way too high, yet we still were able to get there. They used cargo containers to lower us down. The wind was strong. When I was down at the ice, and George was still on the ship, a strong gust got the ship few meters off to the sea. George gladly yelled: "Goodbye, I'll send you post card":) Then, when we walked the shelf, we've found a crevasse. It was slippery, but we sure had some fun File:Ross ice shelf.jpg.  IMO the only thing that could, and maybe should stop traveling to Antarctica is the concern about environment. BTW I was told that this season or the next one will be the last of operating tourists icebreakers in Antarctica because they were ordered to use special, very expensive fuel.
 * I have no my own opinion about the size of the wave. I asked you because I believe you know much more about the oceans and waves than I do.
 * I am afraid I am taking too much of your time with my never ending stories. Sorry and thanks. --Mbz1 (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem at all. As always I find your stories interesting to read. For a real wave expert you should probably consult a physical oceanographer. I once told a user called 2+2=4 where to find one in relation to stitching photos with waves. That is, before I knew that 2+2=4 already knew that user ;-) Speaking of related persona sharing the same IP, did you see commons:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard? --Slaunger (talk) 22:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * After rereading what I wrote yesterday evening it struck me that it could be considered a snarky comment. That was not the intention. It was intended to be humorous, and no hard feelings-like. --Slaunger (talk) 07:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's OK. I like jokes, but please be careful what you are asking for, I mean my travel stories. I could tell you a new story every day for few years :)--Mbz1 (talk) 15:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If that could distract you away from getting into problems editing Israel-Palestinian articles. I am all ears. I might adjust SlaungerBot into autoreplying with. "Really?", "Tell me more", "That's fantastic!", "It is very interesting. I have never seen anything like that myself!" and you can keep them stories coming into eternity. --SlaungerBot 10:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Kim, it is kind of you. Honestly after I was the subject of 5+ hours of unwarranted harassment, personal attacks, and very harassing SPI, I doubt I will ever again edit I/P conflict articles. BTW how much are you aware of what happened to me on January 25 here on English wikipedia? --Mbz1 (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

(indents reset) I followed it in its aftermath and know all the details of what happened afterwards. I noticed it when I saw your page was blocked with the you-know-what scary summary. --Slaunger (talk) 21:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Reference Desks
Hello Slaunger! Thank you for your question on the Science Reference Desk. Your question is more likely to attract a prompt and quality response from the Mathematics Science Desk. For that reason I have deleted your question from the Science Desk and posted it on the Mathematics Desk. (I see it has already attracted one short reply.) See the WP:Reference Desk/Mathematics. I hope you eventually receive a lot of useful information. Best regards. Dolphin ( t ) 00:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Featured
Thanks for that, I'll go over there and vote too. Simpsons contributor (talk) 23:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Slaunger,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Naajaat panorama 2007-08-09 2 cropped USM downsampled edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 17, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-10-17.  howcheng  {chat} 20:36, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks Howcheng. I have tried to make a few improvements to the caption and also suggested some improvements on Talk:Naajaat. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Slaunger,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:OY-DIZ SAI KZ IV landing Danish Air Show 2014-06-23.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on August 4, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-08-04. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Slaugner,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Viborg Katedralskole Symmetrical.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on September 9, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-09-09. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:37, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Slaunger,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Alhambra evening panorama Mirador San Nicolas sRGB-1.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on October 22, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-10-22. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:48, 8 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Chris Woodrich. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:01, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Slaugner,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Kongensbro gravel pit 2014-09-17 Diliff Reprocess.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on December 21, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-12-21. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)