User talk:Mbz1/Archive1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mbz1. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I love your photos! --Travis Thurston+ 05:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!--Mbz1 (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

On 11 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Novaculichthys taeniourus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 07:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I am happy to see you here again. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 17:19, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you,Invertzoo. I'm only half back and not sure for how long.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Still, it is lovely to see you, even if just for a few days. Invertzoo (talk) 23:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Me too, I'm so happy. You owe me some pics! —Ceran^(Sing) 22:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you,Ceran. Here are the pictures I took in Yellowstone. I uploaded about half of them to Wikipedia, but if you'd like to see the whole set please take a look on the link I provided.If you like mirages, you might find this image Image:Farallon Islands at inferior mirage no mirage and superior mirage.jpg interesting--Mbz1 (talk) 03:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The Bio-Barnstar I award this Barnstar to Mila for all of the countless beautiful images of hers that are gracing so many biology-related articles! Invertzoo (talk) 22:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For all the hard work improving many articles. Thank you! Travis Thurston+ 03:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mila, the shells under the rocks are a species of Isognomon, Isognomonidae, a cousin of the pearl oysters, but as yet I don't know which species it is. There is a similar species in the Caribbean that also lives under rocks like that. The Papua New Guinea image is fantastic! What colors! What shapes! And yes of course you deserve the Barnstar: you are a fountain of great images. Invertzoo (talk) 19:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, Invertzoo. It is great you liked my picture As you could see it was rejected, when I nominated it to get FP status on Commons for the very same reasons you liked it. I just like, when people are talking about colors of something that they have never seen in a real life, or even in aquariums, or even on the pictures.Whatever...So, I kind of got tiered of Commons reviewers and left Commons hopefully for good.That's why I upload my images now only to English Wikipedia and only about 1/10 of the images I used to upload before. I uploaded the shells only for you because I know you like the shells, otherwise these image would have been deleted without sharing them with anybody.BTW here's one more shell Image:Corals and shell.JPG from Papua New Guinea.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry they did not like "Corals sea worms". I thinks perhaps they don't like modern art either... Thanks so much for the shell pictures, I will put them into an article as soon as I can. I don't get to be underwater very often, especially in the tropics, and I love marine life, so I really enjoy your pictures. And anyway they are very beautiful and full of life. At least I think so. Invertzoo (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

On 24 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article tide pool, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you for all that you do! Royalbroil 00:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Albino Alligator.jpg? I think this could be Fp material with some editing. —Ceran♦^(Sing) 21:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm afraid I do not believe in the purpose of FP project, and would not like to nominate my image on FPC ever again. FPC to me is rather something like a good quality images photo contest. Of course most of FP images have great encyclopedic value too, but other which IMO should have been FP for educational and learning purposes fail.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I put one of your beautiful new images into the taxobox of this article. best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Your help is one of the very few positive forces that keep me going on Wikinedia.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome! Just now I made a stub for Isognomon so that I could put both pics in there, and also put the pretty worm picture into Spirobranchus giganteus. Invertzoo (talk) 00:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm so glad my worm image has found sach a nice and safe "home"--Mbz1 (talk) 04:27, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Well I think it's an amazing picture. Invertzoo (talk) 14:49, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mila, Nice image of a snail that we did not have represented on WP yet. I just now created a stub for subfamily Vasinae for that image. But I might have to ask the Graphics Lab to crop the image so people can see the snail better. Thanks again, I always like to see what you have seen! I assume you turned the snail over yourself? Invertzoo (talk) 14:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Invertzoo. I do not remember, if I turned the shell myself. It was four years ago. We were in Mombasa for 2 days. Both days we went to tide pools in a company of locals. Locals said they will find a stonefish for us, but they never did. On the other hand they were trying so hard to be helpfull that I assume they could have turned this snail for me. Have you noticed another cone shell in the upper right corner of the image? I'll crop the image myself later today.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah now I see it! Before I looked, but could not see a second one. I think it is a Cerithium species maybe... Invertzoo (talk) 15:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Would you like me to leave this one, when I crope the image?--Mbz1 (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

No, I think it's too far away from the other one. I think a nice crop that showcases the Vasum snail would be the best. Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 16:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Very nice thank you Mila! What a beautiful aperture the shell has, so many different colors. Invertzoo (talk) 17:27, 2 November 2008 (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.

The Wikipedia valued picture project has opened for nominations. Please feel free to nominate an image at WP:VPC today!

Welcome back Muhammad(talk) 17:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Muhammad,
Thank you for your message. I am only half back. I wish new project good luck, but I am afraid I am not interested in taking any part in the projrct.As a matter of fact I believe that if FPC worked as for a real encyclopedia and not as for high quality images photo contests, Wikipedia would nor have needed VP at all. --Mbz1 (talk) 17:56, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

On 7 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mirage of astronomical objects, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mila,

I remember your remarkable story of the Kleenex - or whatever blowfish commercial in the London tube, where you got some compensation for unattributed derived work of a photo of yours. I would like to share with you a slightly less remarkable, I had two weeks ago in Greenland, see here. It has some similarities with your story although not as striking. But nevertheless, since it was in Greenland, and I know you have been there, I thought you would be interested...

I, and many other Commons users are of course still hoping that, one day, you start uploading your images to Commons again. It may be that you do not fancy COM:FPC, but you have loads of valuable material, which all the other Wikipedias and Commons projects never even see because it is only on en. It is such pity that you do not upload them there?

Cheers,

-- Slaunger (talk) 22:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

• Hi Kim,
  It is one amazing story. Thank you for sharing. It is great your image was used in the museum. The image is very nice! I love kids. I'm glad you were able to settle. I wish I knew how many images from Commons and Wikipedia making their way around the world without a photographer knoledge. One of my images was published in Italy in a big astronomy magazine, and I found out about this only after my friend, who lived in Italy got the magazine, and e-mailed me. They gave me credit for the image, so I only asked them to send me the magazine, what they did.
  Best wishes and good luck with the great work you're doing on Commons.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you for your kind words. I am actually taking a Wiki-break for the time being. Don't know how long it is going to be, I just do not feel very motivated for WikiMedia projects currently, not because of anything annoying me or anything, just need a break. Currently I am completely hooked on to SciPy programming in relation to a computationally/numerically intriguing project I am working on. -- Slaunger (talk) 13:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, with regard to this image you uploaded to Wikipedia, do I have your permission to upload a version with a straightened horizon to Commons? Regards, — BillC ^talk 21:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. Please just give it a different name. --Mbz1 (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It is Image:Venus-pacific-levelled.jpg. Please feel free to amend the licences if I have not matched your wishes. I have referred to you as 'Mbz', which you may or may not wish to amend to your real name. — BillC ^talk 23:03, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll change my name in the description to link to my web site. BTW, please let me know, if you'd like me to upload original (not downsampled) image. I downsampled because the image is noisy, but if you'd like to give it a try, I could upload it.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it might be spoiled by noise. Sometimes bigger is not always better. — BillC ^talk 01:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

File:Chromatic abberation lens diagram.svg

I wouldn't call myself an expert on the physics of the matter. At first glance the image would appear to be CA. However assuming the picture was not a crop of a larger frame then the direction that the colours fringe would depend on which edge of the frame you look at (see attached image) and would tend to worsen at the edges. In the picture you sent me the blue is consistantly at the top and the red is at the bottom, which suggests it may be some effect due to changing Refractive indices with respect to wavelength from the water or air. Against this argument is the other version which doesn't clearly exhibit the same effect (though this may be due to lack of zoom). There is some clipping in the image, which can cause colour bleeding, but the effect is consistant in unclipped areas. My conclusion on the matter would depend on how the 2094×984 pixels were cropped from the original 3888×2592 or so Noodle snacks (talk) 01:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mila! Oh yes that is useful, thanks. I believe that the species of clam that the sea otter is eating is an invasive species introduced from the East Coast, Mya arenaria, the soft-shell clam, so I put one of the images in that article. By the way, if you are still in the area and if you know one of the park service naturalists, can you ask them whether they know if the soft-shell clam Mya arenaria has been recorded from their part of the coast? It lives buried in mud on mud flats. Invertzoo (talk) 15:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I also wanted to say: wow, all the amazing things you have seen! You are very fortunate. Invertzoo (talk) 15:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I live about 100 miles from Moss Landing, but the thing is I've never seen a naturalist there, and I mean never. The particular images with the clams were taken not even at Moss Landing itself, but just off the road next to Moss Landing. There's no one to ask anything.Here are three more close up with the clams seen better and opened: Image:Sea otter with shells 3.jpg Image:Sea otter with shells 2.jpg Image:Sea otter with shells 1.jpg. Maybe this will help you to do positive ID. BTW do you see the small yellow crab on the third and second image on sea otter chest? Any idea what it is? May I please ask you what you meant under "amazing things" I saw? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi again Mila, OK, I had to look it up, but I guess there might be someone at the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve who would know (perhaps). I could try to call them and ask I guess. To answer your question about "amazing things", it is just that you have been to so many different places on dry earth and under the water, and you have seen so many different very, very beautiful things, in the sea, on the land and in the sky. Wow. When I look at your photos I see what you have seen, and I am blown away. Part of it is that you know how to "look" ... which most of us don't know, but another part is that you and your camera have been to some really beautiful places. As for the yellow crab, yes that was clever of you to notice that: it is a pea crab, also see [1]. These little crabs live inside a lot of bivalves, They don't seem to do much damage and were considered to be symbiotic. Apparently now they are considered to be parasitic, however there is no real citation for that piece of information, but even if it is true, the clams I have seen that had pea crabs in them appeared to be perfectly healthy, so the damage must only be very mild. So I should put one of the images in the pea crab article too! Great! Best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 21:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me to ID the crab! I've never heard about crabs living inside bivalves. It is interesting!--Mbz1 (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's a strange kind of way to live. The pea crabs can't live anywhere else. They live in the mantle cavity. I guess it is a pretty safe place to live. Invertzoo (talk) 00:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Until a sea otter gets the host.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mila, Yes, I was having a lot of difficulty working out how many clams there were. At first I thought three, and then I started to think maybe it was only two. I wonder: do you think she must have brought one up in her mouth and one in each paw? I don't know how sea otters do these things. Invertzoo (talk) 18:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I also thought about this. I do not think she brought one up in her mouth. If I were a sea otter, I would have probably put the clams on my belly and hold them with both my paws. If we agree now on how many clams there were maybe we could correct the descrition in sea otter please?May I please wish you a Happy Thanksgiving?--Mbz1 (talk) 19:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I just changed the caption. I didn't do it earlier because I had to go to my back doctor, coz I threw my back out yesterday pretty badly, but now it is going to be OK. Happy Thanksgiving to you too! Invertzoo (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah what a great image! This image shows exceptionally well the byssus threads of the mussel. I think it has recently spun them, because they are so whitish rather than brown. The byssus is secreted by a mussel and is used to anchor itself to a solid substrate. The threads are not alive, they are more like hair or nails. The byssus threads are very strong and very elastic, as you will find out if you ever try to pull a mussel off of a rock. The round end of each thread is very strongly glued onto the rock, and each thread is strong and elastic. The waves can break very hard against the rock but the mussel will still be OK and will not be washed off. I will put your image onto the byssus article and onto the mussel article! Thanks that's a very useful image. You will see I could not find a good image of mussel and byssus for the byssus article. My back is a little better. Thanks all round! Invertzoo (talk) 21:23, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Mila, Was this taken at Ocean Beach, San Francisco? Because there is also an Ocean Beach in San Diego. Thanks. Invertzoo (talk) 22:49, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Invertzoo. You know everything! Yes, the image was taken at Ocean Beach in San Francisco.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Well I do know a fair bit in general about mollusks, and I would hope so, after all the years I have been interested in them! Best to you Invertzoo (talk) 23:30, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes I have been interested in mollusks since I was about 2 years old, so that's 58 years now! By the way, when people cook mussels, the byssus is known as the "beard", and you remove it before you cook them. Invertzoo (talk) 19:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am also very interested in mollusks. I like to eat them :=) (Of course I like to take images of them too.) I'm kind of jealous of sea otters. They have a great diet! Yesterday I took few images of one eating a crab Image:Sea otter consuming a crab while using his belly as a table.jpg, and I like crabs too. May I please ask you, Invertzoo, if mollusks have something to do with your ocupation?--Mbz1 (talk) 23:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I totally did not notice this previous question from you (above) until now, I am sorry. I guess you could describe me as something like a "semi-professional" malacologist, and also as a very keen and serious amateur malacologist and conchologist. A couple of times in my life I have been employed doing malacology, and I have also done a great deal of work on my own time and volunteering. I made major contributions to the mapping scheme of the British non-marine molluscs many years ago. I was more or less out of the field for about 20 years and then back in again more seriously since about 1999. I have about 20 published papers, and I am still currently writing some. However I have not had any kind of paid job for many years now. Before that I was self-employed for a number of years. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 19:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Re your message: I looked into this IP a bit more closely and it appears to be a shared IP for a high school in New York. I've tagged the talk page with a shared IP notice. I agree that the IP has not made many constructive edits recently, but the IP has not edited in over a week, so blocking is not necessary at this time. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, just an infomration: I have cropped one of your photos File:Conus pennaeus attacks pair of Cymatium sp.jpg to see the objects in detail. Your photos are very nice. --Snek01 (talk) 11:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mila. I meant to put that image back in, but could not locate it, so just now I did so at what I think is an appropriate point. You see, in the article as a whole I wanted to emphasize the original meaning of seashells: shells as they are found washed up on the beach (and thus tend to be a bit old, sun-bleached and beachworn) rather than the kind of fancy-looking exotic shells that were originally purchased (and before that were live-collected for the shell trade). The international shell trade is mostly very problematic in terms of its ecological impact, as almost all the shells that are for sale are "harvested" by being live-collected in huge amounts, repeatedly. This process often permanently damages the local marine ecosystems, has made several species endangered, and also exploits the local people who are paid next to nothing for their labors. Yes, I wish the image of the group of English shells was a lot higher res, but I was searching for images of groups of shells that were all collected in one area, preferably on one beach, and which thus reflects the biodiversity of a local fauna. These kind of natural groupings are known as "death assemblages" and are very interesting to biologists. All best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 19:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Well my goodness, you really have found a great selection of shells in your time! I apologize for thinking they were store-bought. I did correct the caption. If you mean the long shell in the middle which is sort of t-shaped, it is Malleus malleus, the black hammer oyster. That's a nice find. It is reasonably common in the Indo-Pacific, but they usually get broken up. We do need an image of that. I don't blame you for being ticked off with WP, it's hard to deal with, giving great stuff and then seeing it treated as if it were just another resource. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 20:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Royal albatros.jpg, an image uploaded to Wikipedia from this account in October 2007, is now available as File:Southern Royal Albatross in flight.jpg (Commons:File:Southern Royal Albatross in flight.jpg). — Athaenara ✉ 16:36, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, but who cares?--Mbz1 (talk) 16:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

When I delete local images which have been transferred to Wikimedia Commons with different file names, I don't like to leave the original uploaders in the dark about what happened to their work.

Similarly, File:Southern Royal Albatrosses.jpg is now File:Pair of Southern Royal Albatrosses.jpg (Commons:File:Pair of Southern Royal Albatrosses.jpg). — Athaenara ✉ 17:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I see, but I'd say that in this case you might want to check the links of the images and change all pages this image appears at, in case, if the original uploader is not around and cannot do it yourself. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)<br<Please accept my apology you did change the links in my gallery!--Mbz1 (talk) 17:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I think several more of your images were tagged {{NowCommons}} recently, so you may be getting similar notes here about them. — Athaenara ✉ 17:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Smock over Bay Bridge.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Smoke over Bay Bridge.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Smoke over Bay Bridge.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:01, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Smock over San Francisco.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Smoke over San Francisco.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I apologize if need be, but I couldn't resist your Pamukkale pic and nominated it here. Please, let it get some feedback at least. ₪Ceran →(cheer→chime →carol) 14:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing to apologize about. I'm glad you liked the image! I do not think it will pass, but I do not really care about this.I'd like to wish you a Happy New Year please!--Mbz1 (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hope 2009 is a great year for you!--MONGO 15:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Mongo! I consider myself really fortunate that I've got to know you! Happy New Year!--Mbz1 (talk) 15:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

It sure is gorgeous, but I have no idea what it is, and do not even know where to start looking in order to identify it. I am not good at fish really but I could maybe ask Geronimo who might have some idea maybe. I am assuming it was a tropical saltwater aquarium? Do you know what part of the world the fish came from? Invertzoo (talk) 21:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, Yes I think they are for sure alive, but my guess would be that they are colonies of cyanobacteria, or some such thing, rather than animals. A lot of interesting species of microorganisms live in volcanic hot springs. I will try to think if there is anyone I can ask about this. Invertzoo (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Hot springs of Pamukkale edit cropped.JPG, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Wronkiew (talk) 01:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I notice that you have been uploading some images to the page on the Israel-Gaza conflict. Could you please provide some additional sources for these images. What protest do they document? Why is this protest notable? Which mainstream media sources reported on it. These issues were raised in the talk page. I wont remove the images right now, but if someone else does, please answer these questions on the talk page before you put the images back. thanks a lot Jacob2718 (talk) 14:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. All images info is provided on their description pages. I tried to answer some questions on the talk page, but the images speak for themselves. In plain English they say what it is about. If they are removed, I'll put them back.--Mbz1 (talk)

Thanks for your interest in uploading images, but "If they are removed, I'll put them back" is not a constructive approach. Please discuss controversial images with other editors on the article's Talk page. RomaC (talk) 15:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

You must know by now that there is an editing war going on in this article. BE Bold!!--Tomtom9041 (talk) 20:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for your image contribution to the Crow Instability article. The reason I post here is regarding your comment that the image posted was not of the Crow Instability. I do research work on the Crow Instability and vortex moderlling at University, and I am nearly 100% certain the image was indeed of the Crow Instability (Showing all stages!). However i'm happy with the image you uploaded, as it complements the article very well!

Thanks again.

Captaincoxy (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I did not know you work on the Crow Instability. My contrail looked just like yours did at first, but later I got these "donuts". Please do replace my image with yours, if you belive your image is better for the article. May I please ask you what do you think about this contrail File:Contrail_and_tsunami_warning_sign.jpg? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

That's not a problem! The donut shapes are indeed a part of the Crow Instability (Although strictly speaking, they're a byproduct of the instability, as the instability ends when the two wingtip vortices connect), and your picture is a good example of those. I think your image is great where it is, and I may include mine further down the page! Cheers. Captaincoxy (talk) 11:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mbz1,

After a quick browse through the history of Sunset I've noticed you've previously edited the page. Your input is now requested in choosing a new lead picture here. Thanks for your time, --Fir0002 00:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Peter, I like your image very much, but I like some other images too. I'm afraid I cannot vote because it is very hard for me to choose. Sorry.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Please be cautious of WP:3RR? Even if you don't make 3 reverts in a 24-hour period, you could still risk being blocked for edit-warring. FYI, --Elonka 21:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Elonka. I agree, if I violated a policy, then I should get blocked. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, could you add more details on this pic you took? Like where it was taken, what particular beach (if possible), whether the turtle had just lain eggs, etc. Great pic, btw...it's rare to catch one of these babies on shore. Shrumster (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but this is not a baby. It is an adult turtle returning to the ocean after rest at the beach. The image was taken at Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park. Baby turtles are too light to leave a track. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be updating the caption if necessary. Hehe, I actually meant "baby" in a more colloquial and not literal sense. :P i.e. "Just got a new car, love that baby." :P Shrumster (talk) 00:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Will do shortly. I may ask a favor back if I ever do any featured pictures, since you seem to be pretty good at those. :-D -RunningOnBrains 17:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've only done about half the article so far, but I will finish it shortly. Glad to help, let me know if you need more help in the future.-RunningOnBrains 04:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I wanted to ask you, of that group of shells, almost all of which you collected yourself all over the world, which shell was the one that you did not collect? Was it the nautilus? Or another one? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info Mila. Do you mean the spiny one at the top left, or the spiny one at the bottom left? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 01:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Also:

I went through the whole thing working with the grammar and so on. I might take another look through it tomorrow too. It certainly is an interesting phenomenon. Invertzoo (talk) 01:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I went through it again this morning, polishing up the prose some more. The grammar seems pretty clear and good now. The article has a great deal more content than the old one, so I would say go ahead and put it up. I would suggest "merging" the two articles, because the old one has some nice stuff in its intro. I do think your new article needs more work, but I think it is OK to go up right now, and then other people can have a go at improving it some more. As for me, I am not used to working on articles of this kind. I know so little about this kind of thing that I am not really qualified to work on it except for the kind of prose polishing I have already been doing. Very best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. If you need help merging the old intro with your new intro, just ask me. Put your new one up and I have a copy of the old intro on one of my drafting pages, I will merge the old intro into the new one for you if you like. Invertzoo (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Okey-Dokey then, since it appears that the intro in the current stub article is all wrong, the photos are incorrect, and the rest of the article is incomprehensible, well, it seems pretty clear that you should simply substitute your article for that one. As I said, your draft has a few issues still, but get it up there and then it can be improved. At least now the grammar is good. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 19:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome Mila. If you need any more help just let me know. Invertzoo (talk) 13:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Mila, because you know so much about unusual atmospheric phenomena, I thought I should show you this post I got on my talk page. So far I have done nothing in reply to it:

"Hi InvertZoo

"I saw you edited part of the "Ball Lightning" entry in wikipedia I have rare pictures of this phenomena taken in Sassalbo (MS) ITALY If you want to add these pictures on the Wiki page you can contact me at gianlucafurno@libero.it

"Regards "Gianluca Furno (mshadow65) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mshadow65 (talk • contribs) 10:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC) "

On February 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dartmoor crosses, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 15:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I took the two images yesterday: File:Nudibranch in california tide pools 2.jpg and File:Nudibranch in california tide pools 1.jpg. Nudibranch was really small - around 5 millimeters. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I am by no means a nudibranch expert, but I looked it up, and to me this looks as if it might well be a very small juvenile of the yellow phase of Triopha maculata. There is a (not very good) image of a tiny orange one at: [2] and pictures of some orange phase ones without spots at [3]. Invertzoo (talk) 21:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC) P.S. If you like I will put one of them in the Triopha maculata article. It's good to have an image of a small juvenile. Invertzoo (talk) 01:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Susan! if you beleve the article will benefit from adding the image please do post it.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Crazywell cross 1.JPG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Play fight of polar bears edit 1.avi.OGG, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 05:53, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I did go through your new article a couple of times this evening, fixing it up as best as I could. I will look at it again tomorrow. best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for putting me on the DYK submission. Please feel free to call on me again if you want the prose improving on any articles. Invertzoo (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I didn't ment that the rainbow was out of place. It just doesn't look natural there. I know, rainbows can appear under many situations, however, rainbows look better when in its natural conditions (when it rains in a sunny location). Anyways, I prefer the original. However, I had to oppose because the event was not described in many details in any of the articles. ZooFari 23:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Please do not worry about this. It is fine with me that you had to oppose. I understand. This image File:Sulfur dioxide emissions from the Halemaumau vent .jpg might be better for VI, but it is not used anywhere now. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. The references look better now, but the best thing to do with references is to include info on things like the date it was produced, the date you accessed it, the author, the title, etcetera. This way we can avoid a lot of the problems associated with link rot, that is that the websites referred to disappears or changes location. For the best ways of providing all this information in an in-line citation go to Wikipedia:Citation templates and follow the instructions there. Best of luck. Manxruler (talk) 20:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I did a demonstration reference in the article for you. Manxruler (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, good luck on your continued contributions to the project. Manxruler (talk) 21:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure, add away. Thank you. :) Manxruler (talk) 03:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Nice photo of the chapel, by the way. Manxruler (talk) 03:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem. :) I do appreciate your thanks. If you feel the need to give some tangible, then barnstars are always welcome. Manxruler (talk) 04:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Grand Prismatic Spring and Midway Geyser Basin from above.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 03:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking in particular of your shark images. I rather get the impression that the contrast issues may be a scanning problem more than anything. Are you sure that your film can't be scanned better? Noodle snacks (talk) 04:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• I would have thought that with a high quality scanner you could get better results, the question really is how much better though, and doing so commercially may be rather expensive (I have no idea). Where about in Tasmania did you visit? I haven't really taken many landscape photographs here, but I've been meaning to get into it a bit more, there are many interesting locations to do so. Where in the world do you live? Noodle snacks (talk) 02:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I have been keeping up with what is happening there, and I think that in reality you still have a chance with the DYK, using the 2nd alternate hook about the "highest point in Brittany". No-one other than Hassocks5489 has weighed in the submission yet, but if someone else does look at it, they may approve it today.

If it happens that you do write another article at some point, please go ahead and ask me for input on possible hooks before you submit it or them. I can probably help you avoid getting hung up like this by smoothing the prose and avoiding any difficult hook content. Mentioning the content of a legend in a hook is very tricky, the wording has to be just so, and in general maybe it is easier to stick to purely factual things for a DYK hook. Even if this article does not make DYK, it still is a very interesting and useful article to have on WP, so all is by no means lost. All good wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 15:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I saw that you added back your DYK nom of Parc naturel régional d'Armorique. I removed it because it is already in the queue to be uploaded, although the hook may have been revised. Rlendog (talk) 17:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Mila, it is in queue number 4 at [4]. That means it has been OK'ed and will be used. It is in the queue waiting to be used. Invertzoo (talk) 17:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi – sorry I couldn't reply earlier (I've been at work). I see it has been checked and accepted by one of the others, so will be appearing soon (next 24 hours, I suppose). Going back to the original hook, the ref I was concerned about for reliabiliity was number 4 (Breizhvibes), because it seems to accept unchecked submissions from users (according to a notice at the bottom of the home page). The book ref is fine but did not cover all parts of the original hook. Anyway, the article will be on the Main Page soon. Sorry it's been a bit of a stressful wait! Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 18:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not Anonymous Dissident ;) I'm not very good with the new format of DYK, I'm afraid, so I'm pretty clueless as to what to do.  GARDEN  20:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Snowflake moray in Kona.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 01:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but we get lots more picture hooks than we can feature, and I see no particular reason why your pic should be featured in preference to somebody's else's. Gatoclass (talk) 03:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You are asking for preferential treatment. I can't consider acceding to such a request without a very good reason. Perhaps if you explained to me why it is "very, very important" to you that the image is featured, I might be prepared to reconsider. Gatoclass (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Look, I'm sorry, but lots of people here work hard and deserve recognition. If I give preferential treatment to one person, it means that some other guy misses out.

I note that Art LaPella opened a thread on this topic at WT:DYK. Perhaps you should take your concerns there instead. Gatoclass (talk) 04:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

On February 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Parc naturel régional d'Armorique, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 19:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I made mistake in the hook of this latest DYK. When I found out about this, it was too late to change. It was on the main page already. But now I believe it should be changed. Please, when you have a time take a look here and tell me what you think. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Well I think it is not really a problem. It was the fault of the source, not your fault. These things happen. I just now altered the prose so it takes this new information into consideration as you will see: Parc naturel régional d'Armorique#Mont Saint-Michel de Brasparts and the Chapel of Saint-Michel

Invertzoo (talk) 18:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome Mila. I like to help out on Wikipedia. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Just so you know, this VPC candidate has been replaced with a new version. While the new version is better, it's different, therefore not what you voted on to begin with. Just playin' it safe. :-) ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Steam Phase eruption of Castle geyser with double rainbow.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 02:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Your Valued picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for valued picture status, File:Childe's tomb 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. jjron (talk) 13:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I love your work on Wikipedia! Could you explain how File:Soap bubble sky.jpg was taken? It looks to me as though the sky is actually being refracted through the bubble, and you can see a fainter image of the actual reflection. If the sky is the reflection, it must have been a very difficult shot from above! (and I would have expected a reflection of your camera to appear at the very centre) Cheers, Bigbluefish (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bigbluefish, Thank you for your question. You are absolutely right about camera reflection. I took many images of soap bubbles and some of them have more prominent cameara reflection than another do. In this image you could see mine and my camera reflection:File:Reflection in a soap bubble edit.jpg well. The shot in question was not taken from above. I was staying in my back yard and the bubble was going through the open door inside the house. That's why I got a black background. Both reflection and refraction are present in soap bubbles. I'll ask a person, who understands it much better than I do to explain to us how it works. Best wishes.--mbz1 (talk) 15:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Did you do a "crop" trick? This is a great trick for photographers. This is usually done with flying birds as well. Photographers usually take the picture afar and then crop it to the subject. By the way, nice work. ZooFari 15:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you ZooFari. I did a normal crop in photo shop, but I do not know what does it mean to "take the picture afar". I like taking images of soap bubbles. It is very relaxing, and is a great help after reading FP reviews here and on Commons. :) --mbz1 (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Reflection is clearly involved. If you look closely, it's clear that one half of the patch of sky is a mirror image of the other half. You can see this more clearly in the "Reflection in a soap bubble edit" image, where the house in the center of the image and the tree are clearly mirror-imaged. The geometry isn't really clear here, but light can make multiple reflections inside a bubble. Very nice photo.--Srleffler (talk) 18:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for helping us out with this,Srleffler!--mbz1 (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Because the film is very thin, roughly 1 micron, refraction isn't a significant effect and reflections from the two surfaces of the film coincide. The upright image is from the near surface and the inverted image is from the far surface. Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

May I please thank you for this very interesting explanation of the image, Walter Siegmund? Best wishes.--mbz1 (talk) 19:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I was away traveling all yesterday from dawn to dusk, and now I am back there is a great deal of stuff going on on WP that I need to attend to right away plus I am a bit tired. So I will not get around to looking at and fixing up your article for maybe a few days, but I will get around to it eventually. This week will be a bit crazy for me in real life too, so we will have to see how much I get done in general, Best, Invertzoo (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I moved the article from my user space to Châteauneuf-du-Faou. I'm going to nominate it for DYK. I'll add you to the nomination. Thank you for working at the article! Best wishes. --mbz1 (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I had to shorten the hook you submitted because it was way too long (too many characters). I see someone else wrote an alternate, which also seems OK. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Where exactly is it Mila? I couldn't find it. Link it for me if you wouldn't mind. Invertzoo (talk) 21:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I can type a little bit, not very much though: I have to be careful. You can at least tell me where the article is. best, Invertzoo (talk) 14:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Lac de Monteynard Avignonet at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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!

DYK rules require inline citation of reliable sources for statements in the "hook". You can remedy the lack of sources relevant to your hook by adding sources, or by changing the hook. An alt hook could simply mention that this lake has a cable suspension bridge for non-motorized users; the photo then is the source. By the way, are horses specifically not allowed? If not, then it is a pedestrian / bicycle / equestrian bridge. I would like to see this article, and the photo, make DYK. --Una Smith (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

On March 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Châteauneuf-du-Faou, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

On March 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lac de Monteynard Avignonet, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 00:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Zanclus cornutus in Kona.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Zanclus cornutus in Kona1.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Zanclus cornutus in Kona1.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 09:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Western tent caterpillars Malacosoma californicum in Joshua Tree NP.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 02:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Albino Alligator 2008.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 10:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Cappadocia March 2006.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 18:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Where is the steam devil in this? Is it the semi-circle hanging in mid-air? Sorry for removing it, I missed that on first sight. Do you mind if I arrow the relevant part of the image? SpinningSpark 00:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your message, Spinningspark. Yes, this upside down arch is a steam devil, and I observed and photographed one quite a few times. So, I thought why not to add an image to the article that has none. This devil comes and goes in a matter of a few seconds. Usually I had a time to take only 2-4 shots before it was gone. It always created the same upside down arch. I cannot explain why it behaves in such a way. You could do with the image as you wish, but please do not overwrite my original, just upload your version and replace it in the article as you wish. I really do not care. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Drawing in Carstens Borchgrevink hut.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Drawing in Carstens Borchgrevink hut c.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Drawing in Carstens Borchgrevink hut c.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Mila, that is very kind of you! You know I always enjoy looking at your shell images. And yes, they are all interesting to me, thank you. And some I will be able to place in articles also. Best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 13:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

OK I will have a go at it. Where is it? Invertzoo (talk) 12:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll let you know, when I put it to Wikipedia later today or tomorrow. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi again. The prose is pretty good now I think. But I think that to make the hook acceptable for a DYK, you need to show a reference for the sentence: "Some historians however believe that the subject of this famous portrait is not Petter Dass at all, but the clergyman Oluf Mentzen Darre." And the citation needs to be inserted right after that sentence. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 01:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Susan. As a matter of fact the reference from the Dass museum talks in length about this portrait, but I did add one more reference as you suggested. Thank you for your help!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:51, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Well it did not make DYK, but it is a nice article nonetheless. Next time please ask me to look over the hook before you post it on DYK, I might be able to get an article like that accepted as a DYK by just writing a different hook before you submit it or giving an alternate hook or whatever. Best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 15:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not mind cleaning up prose on anyone's article, and certainly I do not mind doing it on any of yours. Don't feel badly about that, it's no problem to me. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 00:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Smallman12q (talk) 18:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Smallman12q (talk) 19:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Certainly, my pleasure. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want, yes, although the work is really yours - I just made some small corrections. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I forsee one difficulty with the hook: in the article you say (my emphasis): "It almost looks as if Dartmoor kistvaens were positioned in such a way that the deceased were facing the sun.[2]

Which is quite tentative, whereas in the hook you currently have (my emphasis): "...in such a way that the deceased were facing the sun".

Which is quite definite. The hook and the bit in the article need to be identical in meaning. What does it say exactly about this in the book you are using as a reference? I could not tell where to look.

Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 19:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. If the book is tentative about this point, then you could say in the hook: "...in such a way that the deceased appear to be facing the sun". Minus the italics of course.

Invertzoo (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it got in OK this time, using the Alt hook. Invertzoo (talk) 12:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

This one got in too, with a very slight re-write. Invertzoo (talk) 12:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! As you may know, there is another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In future, please upload media there instead (see m:Help:Unified login). That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view previous uploads by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'file' namespace from the drop down box (or see [5]). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Responded at the user talk page.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Giant Marbles in Joshua Tree National Park.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! wadester16 04:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Just so you know, there's a proposed replacement. wadester16 20:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

On June 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Homelessness in Japan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Backslash Forwardslash 15:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I wanted to show you this image if you didn't see it before which looks weird and appears to show an inversion layer near the horizon. I assume there is some kind of odd optical effect going on but I don't know which kind? Chicago is 50 miles away and the photo is taken at beach level. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan. Thank you for your message. This phenomenon is not considered to be a mirage. There's no inverted images are present as much as I could see. I believe it is looming and/or towering. Please take a look at my image: The image was composed out of the three frames taken from the same place of the same place (Farallon Islands). The difference in the appearance was kindly explained by Dr. Andy Young:
"Mila has an illustration, containing 3 different views of the south-east Farallons with different refraction conditions: the top image shows just looming; the middle, looming with towering; and the bottom, a 5-image mirage, with the uppermost erect image severely stooped. These pictures were taken at heights of 40 to 66 meters on Point Lobos, near the Cliff House (San Francisco). The nominal distance to the sea horizon from a height of 40 meters is just about halfway to these islands and rocks, so only their parts above about 40 m height should be visible. An eye height of about 150 m would be required to put the sea horizon at the islands, assuming standard refraction. Even from 66 m, the lower peaks, such as Seal Rock (the isolated feature at the left of the photographs), which is 25 m high, should be almost completely hidden. However, a picture taken from a ship near the islands shows that everything is visible in Mila's pictures, even the low flats a meter or two above the sea. So looming is present in all the pictures taken from San Francisco."
If you are interested to learn more about phenomenon,here's the page to read. Maybe one day I'll try to write a short article about that phenomenon, and then once again I might ask for your help with English. :) Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, looming, I did wonder maybe if that was it. I find the physics of these things rather hard to understand, but I will help you with the English of course if you do write an article on this. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 22:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, Geronimo did the article on this fish. Check it out. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 15:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I have blocked your account indefinitely per this request on ANI. Either you truly do want to be indefinitely blocked for personal reasons, or your account has been compromised - either way, an indefinite block is warranted. However, I declined to protect your talk page or disable your email. Tan | 39 19:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I am not happy about this block, and intend to discuss the matter on ANI. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Tan. My account was not compromised, and I am not drunk, but I am addicted to editing wikipedia, and cannot get out by myself. So I asked admin to do my job for me. Sorry about that. Thank you for granting my request and please do disable my email and my ability to edit my user pages. Otherwise sooner or later I might ask to be unblocked, and it is not good for Wikipedia, and not in my best interests.Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Theresa knott. Your message is very kind. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

• • • In response to posts on ANI. As I said I am very sorry I asked you to do my job for me. I know I should have done it myself, but I cannot. I would not like this to happen ever again. I already tried to forget my password, but I contacted developers, and it was set right back. That's why I am asking one more time to disable my email and my ability to edit my user pages. I am also asking everybody do not loose the time to discuss my situation at ANI. I am very sure that my case is unique, and you will never have to deal with another situation like that. And no, I do not want any user to get blocked except myself. Thank you--Mbz1 (talk) 20:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
      • But you still need to exercise self control. We cannot prevent you from making another account or editing anonymously. The willpower simply has to come from you. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
        • I cannot make account from my computer or edit anonymously from my computer, and of course I am not going to edit from other IP, and I have no access to any anyway. I do not have to exercise self control. I have not done anything bad, and was not going to do anything bad. I simply asked for help in getting out of Wikipedia as a nicotine addict is asking for help to stop smocking. That's it.--22:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila!

Great photos of cleaner wrasses at work. (Just where in Kona were they taken, btw?). I've captioned the two that didn't have captions, but have a couple of suggestions. I'm not an expert, just a long-time avid snorkeller, but I believe all the cleaner wrasses shown are Hawaiian cleaner wrasses - I've never heard them called rainbow. Also, the fish you identify as a dragon wrasse is the one I know as a rockmover wrasse. Its young were formerly misidentified as a separate species and named dragon wrasse, but that's no longer current as far as I know. I propose to make those changes unless you have an objection.

Best, Awien (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I made the changes - hope it's OK. Awien (talk) 00:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Shark has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment: This picture has been filtered, I should say too much. On the other hand changing that I-totally-faked-my-sky effect will reduce a lot the attention over the clouds and sky. I suggest cropping a good deal from below (almost before the woods) while leaving the sky that way. The reason is that in this picture the viewer is attracted both to the first plane and the clouds. This dichotomy is subconsciously uncomfortable for the viewer. You can see that there are two hard lines in the picture (the horizon and the one right after the foreground and before the woods) that divide the picture in three bands. The first and the third are highlighted in the picture while the middle (the woods) is not. The viewer's attention is split in two. Try now covering with your hand the foreground. All the attention is gathered by the clouds. At this point (after the cropping) I would try the filter of the sky in a more subtle way. The better composition now brings the sky as the point of attention without the need of 'touching' so much the colors. Maybe a little 'touching' is good but if people are noticing it is because it was too much. This is an example that tells us once again that cropping and good composition are far better strategies to get a good picture through edition than filters. Blurring is also quite useful but this picture (I think) doesn't require it. I hope this is useful Frank cheValier on a Pc (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, May I please ask, if you will be available to correct my English in the article I am going to write today or tomorrow? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC) p.s. Here it is w:Saint-Savin, Hautes-PyrénéesThank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:12, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I gave it one look over today, and fixed it up once, but I will also look at it tomorrow when I am less tired, and maybe fix it up some more. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Susan! I will nominate it for DYK, and I will add you to the nomination. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome Mila, thanks for including me in the DYK. Invertzoo (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Fort Baker and Angel Island.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 05:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'm requesting input the most active editors in this article, yourself included, regarding an edit dispute. I added the infobox template:Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel (which I recently created) to relevant articles, including this one. User:RomaC has removed the infobox, arguing that the image on it is emotive. Your input would be welcome and could prevent the situation from deteriorating into an edit war. Thanks, and good day, Jalapenos do exist (talk) 12:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I've done what I could, but IMO it is all but impossible to deal with those screaming people. There are many more of them than us here. I got tired and stopped editing those articles some time ago. I am afraid we are in no win situation. Best wishes and good luck!--Mbz1 (talk) 17:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I dont really want to get involved in the edit war thats going on between you and Axlq as i do not know that much about images or enough about the wind to comment, I have however have asked the Primary Author of the article to comment. Regards Jason Rees (talk) 14:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

On September 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Saint-Savin, Hautes-Pyrénées, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Kanonkas :  Talk  04:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Jeanne d'Arc Joan of Arc at San Francisco's Palace of the Legion of Honor.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Jeanne d'Arc Joan of Arc at San Francisco's Palace of the Legion of Honor.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Jeanne d'Arc Joan of Arc at San Francisco's Palace of the Legion of Honor.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Lower Fort Mason abd Downtown San Francisco.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 02:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:A fire helicopter with helicopter bucket.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 03:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, may I please ask you, if the text of Wikipedia articles is copyrighted somehow? I mean, if it is OK, if I am to take a small portion of Wikipedia article and put it to my own article to be published in a magazine under my name? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I have never had to do something like this, so I don't know the details of how to go about doing this correctly. There is some info on this page [6]. Also I think the best person that I know who might be able to help you with this question is User:Moonriddengirl, her talk page is here [7]. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I am thinking the easiest way might actually be to rewrite the section completely. Or is it short enough that you can quote it? Anyway, see what Moonriddengirl says. Invertzoo (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Susan! I would also like to ask you, if you're be available to correct my English in a new article I am going to write for Wikipedia today or tomorrow? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I will certainly do what I can. Give me the link as soon as it is up. As you may know by now, I usually need to go through the whole thing once, then go through it again the next day and maybe once again the day after too. Invertzoo (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the hook is probably OK as it is although I tweaked it a tiny bit. By the way, I found some more info about the really big stained glass window, in the Frommer's guide online, where they say "The huge Rosary Window, a stained-glass work of nearly 45 sq. m (484 sq. ft.) that represents the 15 mysteries of the rosary, was created in 1892 by Mayers of Munich. You can read that at:

[8]

You may want to add a bit more of that info. By the way, it is very kind of you to give me the credit for these recent DYKs, but you might want to put your own name on them as well, since you did almost all the work. Very best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 22:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Susan. I did include myself in the nomination, but after you.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, good, I am glad although really you deserve to be first author. Anyway, I did a bit more working on the prose and organization of the article this morning. I would also suggest that since there are many quite nice photos on Commons, you may perhaps want to add two or three more to the article? Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 14:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

It looks like it's been accepted. Invertzoo (talk) 19:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:San francisco in fog with rays.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 13:15, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

On October 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Black Abbey, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Bencherlite^Talk 13:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Bencherlite^Talk 17:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Bowling Balls Beach 2 edit.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 03:12, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Please add the category [[Category:Wikipedia Featured Picture contributors]] to your userpage. The category is for ease of access to a list of serial FP contributors, and will not be used for spam. Thanks,   Nezzadar ☎   17:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:32, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

		Voices Needed at Featured Pictures
		Hey there, this is just to let you know that there are some images that need additional input at the older than seven days section, and/or the older nominations requiring additional input section, and/or at that pesky box up top that says "FPCs needing feedback." Either way, it's time to rouse the troops, so if you haven't been around and have the time, come on by. Thanks.

 Nezzadar [SPEAK]  19:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, sorry to have reverted you earlier on. The wine articles are very specialised and the vineyard one describes the layout of the vines and various growing techniques, hence your image didn't make a very suitable lead. It wasn't just because it was my image you replaced, honest! It shows very mature grapes, so much so I was wondering if they must be raisin grapes; maybe ask at Wikiproject Wine for some pointers. November is certainly much later than I'd expect black grapes to be still on the vine. I'm sure there'll be a good home for the pic but hope you can understand that it's not really appropriate for vineyard. Best wishes, mikaul^talk 05:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

What do you think about that one File:Vineyards in Napa Valley.jpg? I mean Napa Valley is an important vineyards region, and there's no single image from there.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Really nice, a bit contrasty and maybe a touch too much saturation but still a good shot. I've already added it to vineyard#current trends as it's a perfect example of New World growing techniques and fits really well. Removed your original one there, as it wasn't part of the FPC EV and reviews at the nom didn't see it as a good example. Do you have any of the actual wines, or identifiable grapes? They'd be really useful in some other wine articles. mikaul^talk 05:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I am afraid I do not.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Mila, I am sorry that I took your image as example. I got involved in an analysis of the rules about verifiability, nature of the sources, ...etc. It is just that my instruction and profession deals with following very detailed rules in a strict manner. According to what I read in the pages that were given to me that part of the caption fitted as what I classified it. Although your images was a perfect example for what I was discussing in the talk page I should have only talk about it there and not write anything in the nomination. My mistake. I am very very sorry. Please please don't withdraw it.  franklin.vp  04:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Photographing a model.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 13:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Please go see my response on the surfer image. Sorry about the poor wording, I forgot you were ESL. (English as a Second Language.)

I tried all ways but it just wouldn't fit at vineyard without removing your earlier one, which I think is a better vineyard shot. However it looks great at the geography/climate section of Napa Valley AVA. What do you think? mikaul^talk 18:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Fine with me. Thank you!--Mbz1 (talk) 19:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Play fight of polar bears edit 1.avi.OGG is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on November 25, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-11-25. howcheng {chat} 23:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree, like you, I am not too sure about the format, but off-hand I can't think of a better way to display the image. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 18:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Vineyards of Napa Valley panorama.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Caspian blue 05:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Dd-flying-dutchman072.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

All best wishes to you Mila, from Invertzoo (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

And thanks for your card, Mila! Invertzoo (talk) 20:49, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I intended to give you the above card, but well, you're popular. :-) I left my message to your FPC nomination page, so hope you're satisfied with the answer.--Caspian blue 21:58, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Your pictures are gorgeous. I know you've semi-retired but keep it up! King penguins are especially beautiful. :) --HoopoeBaijiKite 04:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I wish I had a digital camera, when I was taking pictures of the penguins.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Mila! I just finished watching Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End and they make reference to the green flash phenomenon. Of course, in the film, the actual green flash is more of a green bomb, but that's Disney! Anyway, I remember ages ago seeing a nomination of your image of the green flash development, and it was the first time I'd ever heard of such a thing, so I read about it. Ergo, understanding what the pirates of the Caribbean were talking about is something I can credit to you and your image. If it hadn't been for seeing your image, I'd have thought it was just a made up thing for the film! (Yes, such is my ignorance.) So, thanks, :-) Maedin\^talk 22:12, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Julie, thank you for your interesting message! I'm glad you learned about green flash from my FP nomination. It is the best award for me :) I first learned about green flash few years ago, and ever since I have been looking for it everywhere I've gone, but never seen one until I drove to see a sunset just 10 minutes from my home. Then I got myself educated on the subject, and found out that coastal California is one of the best places to see a green flash. Ever since I have taken many images of green flashes, and every time I go to see it, I feel like I am going to my very first date. BTW Jules Verne also wrote about green flash:"...it will be ' green,' but a most wonderful green, a green which no artist could ever obtain on his palette, a green which neither the varied tints of vegetation nor the shades of the most limpid sea could ever produce the like ! If there be green in Paradise, it cannot but be of this shade, which most surely is the true green of Hope " Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, beautiful description by Verne, thank you. That was a pleasure to read! Maedin\^talk 23:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I will write here the opinions you asked since I guess is not part of the nomination. Let me start saying that among the 5 images your choice for the nomination (the original) is the best. Alt2 is nice too but the original shows the erosion itself in a more dramatic way and also shows it uncut. In detail:

• In File:Cliff erosion in pacfica 4.jpg we find the fence again sneakily entering the picture. Also the crop is tight being very close to the crane.
• File:Bluff erosion in Pacifica 3.jpg has the idea I was mentioning in the nomination with the relative position of the plastic (black) fence and the erosion. Unfortunately this is only in abstract since in this picture the elements are not very pretty themselves. There is also, what I guess, is a sand bag sneaking into the picture in the same way the fence was doing in the previous one.
• Finally File:Cliff erosion in Pacifica 2009-12-23.jpg. I am happy with this one. But again, original is much more dramatic and nicer in general. Here maybe the crane is tight into the frame.

In general I am trying to encourage people to somehow put into the pictures more care in the way they choose to present the subjects/topics. A lot of the FPs (not all) are mostly boring portraits of their subjects. A frontal view of a mountain, a frontal view of a cricket, a frontal view of a building or town. I think, that even within the scope of an encyclopaedia, pictures (at least the featured ones) can have something else besides display of technical skills. Usually when taking a picture it is possible to make some choices that leave the trace of the active participation of the photographer in the image. Details that show that the photographer was there taking decisions. Usually elements in a photograph can be used to convey meaning and say things. Usually not literal things but little connections or ideas. For example, what I was saying about the fence... If its presence in the picture is deliberate then let it be in a way that is being in a role of fence, somehow interacting with the rest of the important parts of the image. Of course there are pictures and pictures. In pictures of unusual phenomenons there is no time to plan things, or in historical pictures, or in really difficult pictures. But in cases like this you can excel and make a really good product. When that happens, looking at the picture, you feel the presence of the photographer next to you, ready to ask you: Did you like this angle that I found? I would like to add examples of this:

• File:B Neue Wache interior 1b.jpg: wonderful! isn't it? The author could ha chosen not to show the opening on the ceiling, or show it but from the same position as the rest of the visitors... His touch is left there.
• File:Broadway tower edit.jpg: That parson there is not strictly necessary. But is not distracting either! She is doing what we are doing, looking at the tower. The meaning of the elements is involved in the act of composing the picture. You can see that there are other versions of this one, in which there are more people or none. But probably you would agree that this is the one!
• File:CAGrave.jpg: not so spectacular as the previous ones but still you see the hand of the author. The shadow of a cross on a gravestone (that doesn't have any on it). There is no literal meaning for this, or maybe there are many. But somehow some extra ideas have been added.

It is true that sometimes the added thing can be done through unusual colors, tones, exposures, DOF,... and also true that sometimes it is not easy to come out with ideas like these. But is good to have them there, at hand, and be alert to catch them. My goal is really to try to encourage those of you that have good skills dealing with the settings of the cameras to produce pictures that are not only good in technical quality but also in this other dimension, which is nice as you see in the examples and is also important. After all we are talking about featured pictures. I am also trying to do so without causing damage (or causing as little as possible) in the current nominations.  franklin  15:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to say that although I don't know the place of the erosion picture and therefore I can not say anything certain, I believe that it is possible to get the fence into the image and having a role in the image not only being juxtaposed as an attachment in the corner. If not (IMO) it is better not include it since it becomes distraction. (Imagine the picture of the tower, above, but with the woman looking directly to the camera instead of looking to the tower. It happens the same effect. From being an integral part of the image becomes a distraction.)  franklin  15:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughts. I certainly understand what you are talking about. I did try to do something special for my images too. For example, in File:Cliff erosion in Pacifica 2009-12-23.jpg there are bulldozers working in the surf, not to say the crane. BTW about the crane. It is very hard to stitch it. The program gives so many errors in the cables, that sometimes it is all, but impossible to fix them all, but I do believe that a crane in some of my images is something special and extra you're talking about. IMO the conditions of filming should be taken into consideration too. As I said I was trans-passing, which means I was in a hurry to leave before I was caught, I climbed over the fences, I even lost my cell phone in one of those climbs, and it is scary to stand at the cliff edge. Anyway, once again I'd like to thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. I do appreciate them, and will think more about composing my images. Best regards and a Happy New Year.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

• Oh, I forgot also to talk about that. Please don't take risks (or at least not so much) to take a picture. You are more valuable than any of the pictures taken or to be taken ever for Wikipedia (and probably your cellphone too). If the access is limited maybe it is even better. Limitations is the mother of creativity. I don't know if the FP project says it somewhere but if not it should advise people to not to take risks to get pictures for Wikipedia.  franklin  16:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

• It is a good advise of course. Sometimes (most of the time) accidents happen, when one expects them the least. For example, I was taken pictures of tide pools, and the surface there is very slippery, so I tried hard to avoid falling down because of that. Slowly and very carefully I made my way dawn to the nice pool. I felt safe now, I was not walking, I was standing still. So I got my camera out and... the rock I was standing at got broken, and I fell to tide pool face down. It was early morning, nobody was nearby. I did not break anything, except my camera of course, but I had few deep cuts, one of them very close to my vein. It was fun to get back to the shore over all that slippery surface, and to find a ranger, who had a bandage...--Mbz1 (talk) 17:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Ogata Gekko - Ryu sho ten edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on December 31, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-12-31. howcheng {chat} 01:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Howard, but I am not sure why me. You are not going to notify me about appearance of every image I've ever supported, do you :) Happy New Year!--Mbz1 (talk) 02:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Bluff erosion in Pacifica 2.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 12:39, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Ford baker temp.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila,

People at FPC tend to kick up a fuss if you close noms with which you've been involved. I don't really want to be doing closing at all, but am only doing so because it seems no one else will do it. Makeemlighter and Maedin are doing the occasional closures of those I've been involved in when they are around, but otherwise they seem to just be getting left sitting around indefinitely; it's getting to the stage however where I will probably also need to be closing those I've taken part in, which will undoubtedly raise more complaints. Seems you get in trouble for closing on time and also if you leave them open, or for many other reasons when closing... :-) Happy New Year. --jjron (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

• Yeah, a week is the proper amount, but we've all been busy/lazy lately. I've been active only sporadically for the last few months, so I haven't been closing noms very often. You're right about the Pinnacles image being a definite promotion. I'd prefer to see a few comments on the edit before closing it, though, to see which people prefer. Makeemlighter (talk) 07:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I would add (and if Makeem's reading this it's directed at him too) it's not entirely clear whether the original or alt (both?) were being supported, as I believe they were both there from the start? Worth noting that it's the alt that's used in the article image box, if I'm not mistaken, and any complaints seemed to be more directed at the original, yet no supports are really detailed enough to distinguish. --jjron (talk) 11:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Kingswear and the Dart s1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mila,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Steam Phase eruption of Castle geyser with double rainbow.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 16, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-01-16. howcheng {chat} 23:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello. As I wrote in my edit summary, I removed the external link because it is a blog. Please see WP:ELNO, item 11. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you cite a Wikipedia policy or guideline that says a picture has to be a reliable source? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I sure can: "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. " That image is used in the article, and is a part of the article, and it does not fell under description of a reliable source. --Mbz1 (talk) 23:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

(a) Where does WP:RS say anything about images? (b) Is the picture being used as a source? (c) If you seriously think the picture violates WP:RS, take the issue to WP:RS/N. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

(a)I am surprised that an admin with your experience is asking such questions, but let me quote WP:RS one more time please: "The term "published" is most commonly associated with text materials. However, audio, video, and multimedia materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable third-party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable source. Like text sources, media sources must be produced by a reliable third-party and be properly cited. Additionally, an archived copy of the media must exist." (b) Of course this picture is used as a source (A picture is worth a thousand words) (c) Let me please ask you a question. Are you seriously think that this tabloid image that was not reproduced by a single respectful publisher is a reliable source?--Mbz1 (talk) 23:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The presence of an image on the page doesn't mean it's being used as a source. As I wrote, if you think there's a problem with a source, bring it up at WP:RS/N. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I cannot agree with you. Could you please be so kind and help me to understand why the picture (any picture for that matter), is not a source? If for nothing else a picture has a text description.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The picture isn't a source because there are no facts in the article that cite the picture as their source. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

• The caption of the picture?  franklin  00:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
• @Malik, may I please ask you to read out loud what you just wrote? I mean that statement of yours "The picture isn't a source because there are no facts in the article that cite the picture as their source" . The picture and its caption are claimed to be the facts themselves. Of course they are the source, and this source is unreliable.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

And I still would like to continue this discussion epically now, when you blocked me, and I cannot edit anything else.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Please self-revert on Israeli_West_Bank_barrier you are in violation of the three-revert rule. Respectfully, RomaC (talk) 03:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I acted according to wp:NPOV, which "is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors.". Regards, --Mbz1 (talk) 03:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I wasn't clear, sorry. I am aware of NPOV. Are you aware of and do you understand the three-revert rule? (WP:3R)? If not, maybe you could have a look and see why you should either self-revert or face a block if an editor reports you. I'm not attacking you I am telling you that you are breaking a very clear policy. Respectfully, RomaC (talk) 04:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

RomaC, I do understand WP:3R. Please do not worry about this. Could you please provide the diff, in which I said you're attacking me? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I never said you said I was attacking you, rather I informed you that you were in violation of WP:3R and I was not going to report you (not attack you), rather I suggested you self-revert so that we could discuss the issue on talk. Now I am confused -- you say you understand WP:3R, yet you apparently choose, nonetheless, to violate it. Please explain. RomaC (talk) 05:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

You are well past 3 reverts on that page, please do not continue edit-warring or you may be blocked from editing. nableezy - 04:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Have you read the message above? I only could repeat what I said in the response on that message ::I acted according to wp:NPOV, which "is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors.". Regards, --Mbz1 (talk) 04:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Darn it! You blocked at the very same time I was about to stop edit warring and to start making constructive contributions :) Dear Malik, while on the one hand I believe you posting block on me is unjustified, if for nothing else, at least because we were involved today on a different issue, on the other hand I believe the block is justified because I was involved in edit warring. While on one hand I believe the block is unjustified because edit warring should involve at least two editors (and nobody else was blocked), but on the other hand I believe it is justified because RomaC made only two reverts, and Nableezy reverted himself. So, I will not bother to ask to unblock me. Thanks for protecting the right version of the article for three days! I do hope you will use the time of my block to learn more what is included in WP:RS :) Warm regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

BTW according to blocking policy "Blocks are intended to reduce the likelihood of future problems, by either removing, or encouraging change in, a source of disruption. They are not intended for use in retaliation, as punishment, or where there is no current conduct issue which is of concern." You protected the only page I was edit warring at for three days. Why to block me for 24 hours then? Few minutes block to make a point and for the record would have been enough IMO. Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've unblocked you because the article in question has been protected to prevent further edit-warring. In the future, please try to avoid edit-warring and be aware that there are only a small number of exceptions to WP:3RR, and WP:NPOV isn't one of them. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Malik. I still cannot edit anything else, but my talk page. Could you please see where is the problem? Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The autoblock needs to be cleared (#1750839). nableezy - 06:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I hope some admin will do it for me. BTW Nableezy, I would like to thank you for this! It is really kind and generous of you, and I am impressed. I wish I could post my thank you to your talk page, but as you know I cannot do it right now :( Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 06:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Look at Template:Autoblock, that has directions on what to do to get the autoblock cleared. As for the message, right is right and all that. nableezy - 06:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Even if I am blocked for 24 hours it is OK. I was involved in edit warring, and I knew I should not have done it. I know the block was justified, and I know I am the only, who deserved to be blocked from all the editors involved , but please do not tell Malik I told you this :) Besides I need a break after today anyway :) Nableezy, as I said what you've done was very kind and generous especially after all our communications today. I an glad I was blocked because it helped me to get to know you better! Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 06:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I just undid the autoblock. Please try to edit another page and let me know if you're still having trouble. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 06:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Malik! I do believe that the block was justified. You've done nothing wrong. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 06:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

1) Are you able to edit other pages?

2) No, the block was unnecessary because I had already protected the page. The purpose of a block is to prevent further disruption, and I had already done that by protecting the page. So I shouldn't have blocked you, and I apologize for that. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 06:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

1) Yes, I just was able to thank Nableezy for his/her message on your talk page

2) Really no apology is required. Even, if you protected the page,you had no way of knowing I would not start edit warring in other place. You know how it is with I/P conflict articles. So, you have done absolutely the right thing, when you blocked me, and me alone. I did needed an in-forced break. Please accept my apology I got you involved in that, and for some of my posts above. I know sometimes I could be a real pain in a neck :) Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)