User talk:Godot13/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup![edit]

Hello Godot13, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition will begin at midnight tonight (UTC). There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

POTD notification[edit]

Hi Godot,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:US-$1000-GC-1882-Fr.1218g.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 11, 2014. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2014-01-11. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:43, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism?[edit]

I explained why I made my edits; calling them vandalism is completely unfair. 1000 in this case obviously doesn't mean 1 + 999 people; it means 1,000, plus or minus a few dozen, and you can't add 81 to that and get 1081, because 1081 does not mean 1081 plus or minus a few dozen. Again, read Significant figures.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Yup. Read it. Think you're missing the picture, but I'm not going to get baited into an edit war on New Year's Eve. Your calculations are "visually" incorrect and misleading given the general context of the list. I could go in an add an "~" next to the numbers, but then the table sort functions wouldn't work.-Godot13 (talk) 02:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) Did you try {{sort | 1 = 1000 | 2 = ~1000 }}? That should keep the sorting in good shape. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492-Thanks, unfortunately the way the table is set up it doesn't work (I tried)... @Prosfilaes-I can see from your talk page that your editing style has resulted in a number of edit disputes, warnings, and the occasional block. Dropping in on an article out of nowhere and using an unconventional form of logic to support your re-working of a table in a featured list (without bringing it up on the talk page first) is a fairly aggressive move. Per your user page - is this necessary drama? --Godot13 (talk) 07:23, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Gave a test (in preview mode). The issue is that it's reading 1000 as text and not numbers (so the automatic filter it has doesn't work). That's why the format is going screwy. To make this work, you would have to include a sort template for all entries... so no worries if you choose not to. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
    • LOL! It's not that the task is overwhelming (well perhaps slightly), more so that I spent significant time cutting code out to reduce the size of the list... BTW- Happy New Year.-Godot13 (talk) 07:52, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
      • Happy new year to you too. If it absolutely must be noted, my suggestion would be a footnote... that's the only thing I can think of. But yeah, agree 100% about the code. That is one huge list. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:59, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
        • Funny about the footnote, that what I was doing while you were responding...-Godot13 (talk) 08:03, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
WP:BOLD tells me that I can and should feel free to correct any article I want, no matter who owns it. Significant figures is high school level math, not unconventional. Perhaps if you read people's edit summaries and didn't call them vandals in violation of WP:AGF, it would be easier to have this discussion.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • No one said you shouldn't try, but once you've been reverted you might want to try discussing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Prosfilaes - WP:BOLD doesn't necessarily act as free reign to avoid going through a talk page discussion in order to reach consensus (after three reverted attempts to make your point). Your initial edit carried the comment the sum of around 1600 and 92 is 1700, a bit cryptic to me at least. I did AGF in my first reversion as can be seen in the comment (Reverting good faith edits due to math errors...). The second edit included a reference to an article and numbers written in scientific notation. Combined with your editing history from your talk page, this seemed like you were trying to push a specific POV regarding the significance of numbers. Perhaps vandalism was not the right word. I have tried to address your concern by even adding footnotes taking your argument into consideration.
      If you have specific accurate information to add please do so. If you want to quantitatively change the way we as readers view significant numbers, I don't think this is the forum, but I may be wrong. Please open a new section on the list's talk page and gather consensus for your approach to calculating the sum total of numbers before making these changes again. I think that is fair, no? While I don't claim ownership of this list, I was the significant author, I did take it though FLC and I keep an eye on it to make sure contributions are constructive. I am reverting your edit for the last time. Other than by gaining a consensus from those editors who have already worked on this list (and/or others), if you replace your numbers again I will understand that to mean that either a Third Opinion, Dispute Resolution, or admin involvement will be necessary to resolve this matter.-Godot13 (talk) 19:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
      • Perhaps accusing an other editor who you admit you didn't believe to be trying to damage the encyclopedia of being a vandal was wrong? Perhaps? WP:VANDAL is very clear on this point: "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. ... Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful."
      • You yourself have not posted on the talk page; asking that of you is fair, no? It's not changing the way we as readers view significant figures; it's about using them by the correct, standard way instead of a sloppy careless way.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps vandalism was the wrong choice of words. I couldn't find the right word to describe the intentional alteration of a simple addition equation to produce an incorrect and/or confusing answer. Had you started with attempting to use the "~" or "c." we would have been on common ground.-Godot13 (talk) 15:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 January 2014[edit]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dome of the Chain/2[edit]

Israel-2013(2)-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Dome of the Chain (south exposure).jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Israel-2013(2)-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Dome of the Chain (south exposure).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! Armbrust The Homunculus 09:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aerial view of the Temple Mount[edit]

Israel-2013(2)-Aerial-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Temple Mount (south exposure).jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Israel-2013(2)-Aerial-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Temple Mount (south exposure).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! Armbrust The Homunculus 09:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Treasury, or Coin, Notes Article[edit]

Hola, Godot13, can we also have an image of the proof for the ornate back $50? Cheers and Happy New Year! --LondonYoung (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh, and one minor thing - would it be better for sake of consistency if you used all Large Brown Seal examples for the 1890's? Up to you. --LondonYoung (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi LondonYoung- Happy New Year to you. The $50 was never issued in 1890. I'm fairly certain that there was never even an approved design/proof for the series, same as the $500 which was not issued in either 1890 or 1891 (at least there is a proof for 1891). Regarding the large brown seal- I agree, the consistency would have looked nice but the $5 and $10 1890 large brown seal notes are missing from the Smithsonian collection, and the $20 1890 large brown seal has significantly less visual appeal... I'm going to be adding a lot of images this year!-Godot13 (talk) 20:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi and Happy New Year! The "Comprehensive Catalog" does illustrate the design for the reverse of the $50 - though it may not have made it to essay form. Here I am using "essay = possible design for currency that was not issues" and "proof = test print of an issued design" --LondonYoung (talk) 00:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Ahh... If you are referring to Hessler's book, he did manage to find some concept designs or initial stage proofs at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing archives which sadly were not transferred to the Smithsonian. FYI (in case you didn't see the addition in the article), an 1890 Grand Watermelon just set a new world record price for a banknote sold in auction... --Godot13 (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
The Bureau of Engraving & Printing customarily busts out old printing plates, inks them up, and stamps official currency designs on souvenir cards for distribution at national numismatic events. Notice that for the ANA show, August 2001, in Atlanta, one of the souvenir cards featured the ornate back $50 design. I would strongly suggest purchasing one of these souvenir cards, and submitting a hi-res scan, because the source of the card material is the BEP and its authentic printing plates. On another point unrelated to Treasury Notes, there are some other "proofs" of designs on these BEP cards that are not available in the Smithsonian, which may be worth looking into. For instance, the complete face design of the 1882 $10,000 Gold Certificate is featured on the ANA 1988 Little Rock souvenir card. 99.7.246.126 (talk) 10:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Photographer's Barnstar[edit]

Barnstar-camera.png The Photographer's Barnstar
Regardless of WLM, I sincerely thank you for providing the public with many many high-quality images of Israel. Please come back and take some more pictures in the future :) —Ynhockey (Talk) 10:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks Ynhockey! - Godot13 (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 January 2014[edit]

ITN nomination[edit]

--331dot (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/U.S. Treasury (Coin) Notes - complete type set[edit]

US-$1-TN-1890-Fr-347.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-TN-1890-Fr-347.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$2-TN-1890-Fr-353.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$2-TN-1890-Fr-353.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-TN-1890-Fr.361.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-TN-1890-Fr.361.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-TN-1890-Fr-367.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-TN-1890-Fr-367.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$20-TN-1890-Fr-374.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$20-TN-1890-Fr-374.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$100-TN-1890-Fr-377.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$100-TN-1890-Fr-377.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$1000-TN-1890-Fr-379a.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1000-TN-1890-Fr-379a.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-TN-1891-Fr-351.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-TN-1891-Fr-351.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$2-TN-1891-Fr-357.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$2-TN-1891-Fr-357.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-TN-1891-Fr.365.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-TN-1891-Fr.365.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-TN-1891-Fr-371.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-TN-1891-Fr-371.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$20-TN-1891-Fr-375a.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$20-TN-1891-Fr-375a.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$50-TN-1891-Fr-376.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$50-TN-1891-Fr-376.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$100-TN-1891-Fr-378.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$100-TN-1891-Fr-378.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$500-TN-1891-PROOF.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$500-TN-1891-PROOF.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
US-$1000-TN-1891-Fr-379c.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1000-TN-1891-Fr-379c.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Coin Note[edit]

Hi Godot,

Thank you for contacting me on this issue rather than simply reverting my move. The former title did not conform to Wikipedia's naming conventions, but "Coin Note" is not our only option. The guidelines for choosing article titles when the most common title is ambiguous can be found here. I chose Option #1, "natural disambiguation", which is often the most preferable option, but Option #2 could also work in this case if you are concerned that Option #1 is misleading. Using Option #2, we would create an article title with the format "Treasury Note (disambiguator)" where the word "disambiguator" is replaced by a word or phrase that distinguishes the relevant definition of "Tresury Note" from the other definitions of "Treasury Note" discussed on other articles. What do you think of Treasury Note (Sherman Silver Purchase Act)?

Neelix (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast! While "Treasury Note (Sherman Silver Purchase Act)" is probably the most technically accurate, it is quite a mouthful (and wouldn't really fit with the names of the other articles about types of U.S. Banknotes. Would it be odd to call it "Treasury Note (1890/1891)" or "Treasury Note (Series 1890/1891)" ? This is very close to how they are referred colloquially within numismatics, and there is absolutely no mistaking it for any other version of a Treasury Note? Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 04:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Oh yeah, what's the point of reverting without finding out why you did it (said a little sarcastically since I know that's how edit wars begin). I believe in asking before shooting... Godot13 (talk) 04:46, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
It's good to hear that you're not the shoot-first type. :) Having a slash in a parenthetical disambiguator looks strange to me; I've never seen one in use before. Normally, television shows that ran for multiple years are disambiguated solely with the inaugural year and then the class of thing (ex. Spider-Man (1994 TV series)). How about Treasury Note (1890 currency)? Neelix (talk) 04:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Problem there is that the Treasury Notes were issued in Series of 1890 and 1891. The front is the same design (barring the varieties in signature and seal) but the reverse is complete different. Could we get away with Treasury Note (1890-91)? or possible other variations of the disambiguator: (Series 1890-91), (Series 1890 & 1891)... I'm concerned that beyond adding the date (with or without Series), this could open the door for renaming all U.S. Currency articles. This may or may not be bad, but it could create issues.-Godot13 (talk) 05:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
My preferance would be one of the first two options I mentioned (Coin Note or Treasury Note (Sherman Silver Purchase Act), but if you would prefer Treasury Note (1890-91) and there isn't any other opposition, I won't oppose it. Either way, I'm going to bed, so if you'd like to discuss this further, I won't be able to respond again at least until tomorrow. It was good to virtually meet you! Neelix (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Good to "meet" you too. If you don't have an objection, my preference would be Treasury Note (1890-91). Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 05:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
    • I would "vote" for a disambiguator based on year. That is the most natural way to do it to me. (I was also fine with the original title, perhaps as Treasury "Coin" Note instead of Treasury (Coin) Note.) I am indifferent between Treasury Note (1890–91) and Treasury Note (1890/1891). --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:37, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
      • Of those three options, I would certainly prefer Treasury Note (1890–91); several move discussions for other articles have made it clear that the community is against including synonyms in article titles. Neelix (talk) 22:09, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
        • Great. Basically the original title with the disambiguator date at the end. I would be happy to make the changes in the article (Coin back to Treasury "Coin" Note Treasury Note (1890-91) in the article text) if you wouldn't mind doing the page moving. - Godot13 (talk) 22:14, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Note: I copied to above discussion to the article talk page to create a more easily findable record of the discussion... I think we are in agreement on "Treasury Note (1890–91)" (the dash is an endash, incidentally) for article title. If so, the text of the article generally should read "Treasury Note", the note's proper name. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks ThaddeusB. I'll make any additional comments there.-Godot13 (talk) 05:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 January 2014[edit]

Wikicup[edit]

Before I start, let me just say I do not for a moment want to question the good you're doing on Featured pictures with images of notes. I'm solely bringing this up because I worked with FPs in last year's Wikicup, and know there's some somewhat arbitrary cutoffs for which FPs "count" for Wikicup purposes.

Do you take the photographs of the banknotes yourself? Because the Wikicup requires some substantial personal work to get Featured Picture credit in the Wikicup; I had an image rejected from getting credit because the necessary edit I made - removing a repeated line in the image - was too small.

If you're photographing them, though, all is well, and feel free to ignore this image, and I look forwards to a very strenuous competition for the FP credit this year. I'm currently working my way through a book of William Russell Flint watercolours. Half-toned, which is sad, but it's the first edition and the originals are apparently scattered and unavailable to the public.

Cheers,

Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Adam- Fair question as I'm sure others may be curious too. In order to access the actual banknotes I joined the Smithsonian Institution (SI) as a consulting volunteer which required a U.S. Federal background check. I have personally handled every banknote in the images I post during ongoing week-long digitizing trips to the National Numismatic Collection.

I use an Epson 10000 scanner at 800dpi to scan one note at a time in the SI numismatic vault. I wish I could load the bed and scan multiple notes at the same time, but this is not allowed per archiving policy. I do image alignment, color correction, and background/border cleaning but do not make virtual repairs or cleaning as the image would not be an exact representation of the actual note. In addition to the banknote scanning, I also maintain extensive database spreadsheets for the Smithsonian documenting the condition and relevant historical factors for each note.

I feel confident that this qualifies as substantial personal work on my end, as well as providing access to images of some banknotes rarely (if ever) seen. I too look forward to some healthy competition in the FP category. Regardless of the outcome, Wikipedia is the ultimate beneficiary. Many thanks-Godot13 (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I would say that definitely counts. That's amazing work! Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:38, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Much appreciated Adam. --Godot13 (talk) 03:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
I must say that is pretty cool, even more so knowing you held a note worth $3M in your hand... Not my usual "line of work", but improving the Treasury Note article was fun - let me know if you come across others you'd like writing assistance with. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks ThaddeusB, over the course of the next year I'm sure there will be some...-Godot13 (talk) 03:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

UTC[edit]

Hey! Well, since the UTC says at least three there is no need to add them all. Though, I have amended your entry to include "7 others" :) Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 16:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Hahc21-Godot13 (talk) 03:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 January 2014[edit]

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter[edit]

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dome of the Rock-Temple Mount[edit]

Israel-2013(2)-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Dome of the Rock (SE exposure).jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Israel-2013(2)-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Dome of the Rock (SE exposure).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! Armbrust The Homunculus 03:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 12 February 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 19 February 2014[edit]

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Silver certificate (United States) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • together from 1922 to 1927). Therefore, a Series 1899 note could have been issued as late as 1927). | group="nb"}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 February 2014[edit]

WikiCup 2014 February newsletter[edit]

And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:

  1. Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
  2. Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions), a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
  3. United States WikiRedactor (submissions), another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/United States Silver Certificates (complete set)[edit]

US-$10-SC-1878-Fr.285a.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1878-Fr.285a.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$20-SC-1878-Fr.307.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$20-SC-1878-Fr.307.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$50-SC-1878-Fr.324-PROOF.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$50-SC-1878-Fr.324-PROOF.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$100-SC-1878-Fr.337b.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$100-SC-1878-Fr.337b.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$500-SC-1878-Fr-345a.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$500-SC-1878-Fr-345a.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1880-Fr-287.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1880-Fr-287.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$20-SC-1880-Fr.311.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$20-SC-1880-Fr.311.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$50-SC-1880-Fr-327.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$50-SC-1880-Fr-327.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$100-SC-1880-Fr-340.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$100-SC-1880-Fr-340.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$500-SC-1880-Fr-345c.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$500-SC-1880-Fr-345c.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1000-SC-1880-Fr-346d.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1000-SC-1880-Fr-346d.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1886-Fr-217.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1886-Fr-217.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$2-SC-1886-Fr.242.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$2-SC-1886-Fr.242.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-SC-1886-Fr.264.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-SC-1886-Fr.264.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1886-Fr-291.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1886-Fr-291.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$20-SC-1886-Fr-316.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$20-SC-1886-Fr-316.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$2-SC-1891-Fr.246.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$2-SC-1891-Fr.246.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-SC-1891-Fr-267.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-SC-1891-Fr-267.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1891-FR-298.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1891-FR-298.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$20-SC-1891-Fr-317.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$20-SC-1891-Fr-317.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$50-SC-1891-Fr.331.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$50-SC-1891-Fr.331.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$100-SC-1891-Fr.344.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$100-SC-1891-Fr.344.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1000-SC-1891-Fr-346e.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1000-SC-1891-Fr-346e.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1896-Fr-224-(3923429).jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1896-Fr-224-(3923429).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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-SC-1896-Fr.270.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-SC-1896-Fr.270.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1899-Fr-226.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1899-Fr-226.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$2-SC-1899-Fr-249.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$2-SC-1899-Fr-249.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1908-Fr-302.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1908-Fr-302.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1923-Fr-239.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1923-Fr-239.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-SC-1923-Fr-282-(A3347311B).jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-SC-1923-Fr-282-(A3347311B).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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1928-Fr.1600.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1928-Fr.1600.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1934-Fr.1606.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1934-Fr.1606.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1935-Fr-1607.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1935-Fr-1607.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$1-SC-1957-Fr.1619.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$1-SC-1957-Fr.1619.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-SC-1934-Fr.1650.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-SC-1934-Fr.1650.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$5-SC-1953-Fr.1655.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$5-SC-1953-Fr.1655.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1933-Fr.1700.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1933-Fr.1700.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1934-Fr.1701.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1934-Fr.1701.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
US-$10-SC-1953-Fr.1706.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-SC-1953-Fr.1706.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Aircraft incidents list[edit]

Hi Godot,

It looks like you are doing some great work with respect to articles on banknotes and aviation. List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities is particularly impressive. I have some concerns about that article's title and scope, and I thought that, as the one who pushed the article through to featured list status, you would be the best person to talk to. I would greatly appreciate your consideration of my points below:

  1. "Accidents and incidents" seems redundant to me; while not all incidents are accidents, all accidents are incidents, so we would be saying just as much to simply say "incidents".
  2. Lists of things that are the most _ (fill in the blank) have to include a cutoff point, but this cutoff point is not normally included in the article title (ex. List of highest-grossing films, List of the most populous counties in the United States, List of tallest buildings in Hong Kong) unless that cutoff point is itself significant (ex. One million sales of a single is a threshold that is widely celebrated outside of Wikipedia, hence List of million-selling singles in the United Kingdom). In the present case, it would be simpler and more consistent to switch "resulting in at least 50 fatalities" to "resulting in the most fatalities".
  3. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for a list article are normally encoded in the article title; other than this one, I don't know of any featured list articles for which such is not the case. At present, however, this article's title makes no indication that "acts of aggression on military aircraft by an enemy combatant within their theater of warfare" would be excluded from the list. What is the reasoning behind not including this particular type of aircraft incident? Because this is such an unintuitive exclusion, I can think of no way of renaming the article so as to make this exclusion explicit. If I understand correctly, both peacetime and wartime civilian aircraft incidents are included, peacetime military aircraft incidents are included, and wartime military aircraft incidents that were accidental are included, but wartime military aircraft incidents that were not accidental are not included. If the list is to exclude some military aircraft incidents, it would make much more sense to me to simply exclude them all and have separate lists for civilian aircraft incidents and military aircraft incidents, with the military aircraft incidents list including acts of aggression by an enemy combatant.

What are your thoughts on my three concerns outlined above? If the article's title were to be altered according to my recommendations above, it would read thus: List of aircraft incidents resulting in the most fatalities. If my scope recommendation were to be followed, the incidents involving military aircraft would be split off from this article onto a new list, the current list being called List of civilian aircraft incidents resulting in the most fatalities and the new list being called List of military aircraft incidents resulting in the most fatalities. I hope we are able to come to mutually satisfactory decisions on these matters as we did with respect to the Treasury Note (1890–91) article title.

Neelix (talk) 04:01, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi Neelix- Your proposal is something of a Pandora's box. I think point #1 above is addressed by footnote numbers 2 and 3 in the list, #2 is discussed on the list's talk page, and #3 was discussed on the talk page and during the FLC nomination. I am slowly working on a 30-50 and a 10-30 list which makes the cut off in the title necessary. You can probably see on the talk page and FLC review, there was very lively discussion about this list. While I certainly appreciate you approaching me with this, there would need to be at least a few more people involved... - Godot13 (talk) 04:40, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) - A ten to thirty? That would be thousands, or hundreds of thousands of entries. I think the scope is just too big. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for responding to my message so promptly. You are correct in asserting that my point #1 is addressed by footnotes 2 and 3. I remain concerned about the inclusion of a numerical cutoff point in the article title. On the talk page, I do not see a discussion about moving the article to a title that replaces this cutoff with the word "most". I also find the sectioning off of a 30-50 list and a 10-30 list problematic; these cutoff points are not significant in themselves, and, as such, the lists you propose would be non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations. For an aircraft accident or incident to fall within 10-30 fatalities is not a "culturally significant phenomenon"; there is nothing significant about that range specifically. I would be glad to see more lists about aviation accidents and incidents, but they should be divided by culturally significant phenomena, such as the civilian/military distinction, or by country, or by airline, etc. Would you oppose a move to List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in the most fatalities? Neelix (talk) 16:20, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the use of a numeral in the title, please see the last four paragraphs of this section of the talk page. I agree that 10-30 may be a bit excessive and not quite as relevant as the current list. Using the word "most" in the title is not very descriptive without having to then operationalize the word later in the list. Your idea of most may be different than someone else. With the numbers in the title, everyone is on the same page. thanks-Godot13 (talk) 19:09, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • FWIW Jane's Air Facts and Feats has a list of Aviation's Worst Disasters and used the loss of more than fifty persons' lives as an inclusion criteria. MilborneOne (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Steeplechase Award[edit]

The Lads of the Village cropped.JPG
The Steeplestarter Award
Awarded to Godot13
For having submitted pieces of content from two different types of featured content during the Steeplechase.

ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 16:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014[edit]

FLC[edit]

Just notifying you I've left a question on your FLC. Aureez (Talk) 21:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Aureez, I have made the correction based on your observation.-Godot13 (talk) 22:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2014[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
Another FL with Silver Certs, YOU THE MAN!! HOPEFULLY, you can get to Gold certs next, I have a stunning circulated specimen for a pic if required LOL Coal town guy (talk) 12:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) - Somehow I think Godot can get access to type specimens a bit more easily than circulated specimens. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
    • @Coal town guy-Many thanks for your support and the barnstar. I'm working on a few lists simultaneously, gold will get there ;-)
    • @Crisco 1492-You're probably right on that one, but I go to enough currency conventions to find almost any note in any condition.-Godot13 (talk) 17:45, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Shudder... any condition is right. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:55, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
EGAD, mine is in MUCH better condition........BUT its a cool thing to see prime specimens, the only exceptionis exonumia for me, some of them MUST show wear EXAMPLE before I collectCoal town guy (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
@Coal town guy-Agreed. With National Bank Notes some are so scarce I'll take them any way I find them...-Godot13 (talk) 15:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I knew the collector who owned one (National Bank Note) for Thurmond, West Virginia...he wanted galactic freak money for it and it sold, I was stunned due to its condition, which I would have placed at FAIR...MAYBE........BUT, I also noted how rare that is and of course there are regional specific collectors...Coal town guy (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Thurmond, WV (National Bank of) charter 8998 - only bank in town, 9 notes known (5 large size and 4 small size)... Eventually I'll get to uploading some Nationals, I've got a few from VA/WVA...-Godot13 (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
THAT is rather cool, as in VERY cool.....I have some rather uncommon coal scrip......I posted one piece at the Saxman, West Virginia page. I still have some older stuff which I may share here, AFTER I build up the coal scrip article..Coal town guy (talk) 16:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Taft[edit]

The check Taft wrote is interesting, but it would be better with an explanation... --Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 16:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what I could say. It comes from the Smithsonian (and prior to that the Chase Money Museum, donated in 1978). It was likely a courtesy autograph given the amount is all of one cent. I thought it was an "ordinary" presidential signed check until I noticed the date. It certainly isn't a shoe-in for the article, more of a neat coincidence. If you think it can work let me know I'd be happy to add something addition to the caption. If not, please feel free to remove it. Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 16:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy response. My first thought was to remove it then drop you the note, but it is interesting. I hadn't thought of the autograph angle. I'd say leave it. BTW, is the Waldo C. Moore on the check the man who was president of the American Numismatic Association (1919–1921)? The dates are curious. --Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 17:23, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 26 March 2014[edit]

WikiCup 2014 March newsletter[edit]

A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. Rhodesia Cliftonian (submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.

With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup error[edit]

Hi there- this is just a quick note to apologise for a small but important mistake in the last WikiCup newsletter; it is not 64 users who will progress to the next round, but 32. J Milburn (talk) 18:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Maastricht[edit]

Has anyone (attention talk page stalkers) been to Maastricht? I will be there next week and have 1-2 days for photography. I would welcome any suggestions. Thanks--Godot13 (talk) 17:51, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

har hazeitim[edit]

You can't change a photo with a description. I deletes your change in hebrew wikipedia "הר הזיתים". Uziel302 (talk) 02:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Uziel302-You are correct, my mistake. If you feel the image is/was an improvement, I would appreciate your help making an appropriate description for it. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 03:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 09 April 2014[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Hello Godot13, I would like to say thanks for posting the currency collection from the Smithsonian. Are there any images for the 1870-1902 "NATIONAL CURRENCY" series including "NATIONAL GOLD BANK NOTES" ? Thanks Hpman2 (talk) 19:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the barnstar Hpman2. The Smithsonian collection of National Bank Notes (NBN) is not extensive but there are some good notes. I have one or two other sources I will go to for some of the best NBN out there, it will take some time to process the images. Thanks!--Godot13 (talk) 20:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2014[edit]

April 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Early American currency may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • (VA-69)-Virginia-4 Mar 1773 REV.jpg |150px|alt=Virginia colonial currency, 3 pounds sterling, 1773 (reverse]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Codrington Library Image[edit]

Hi Godot13,

Thanks for suggesting a new main photo for the article. It's a lovely picture, so I have no problem with you making the edit if you wish (provided you own the copyright &c. &c.). All I would say is that it would still be nice to have an interior shot somewhere within the article (especially since the library isn't usually open to the general public). Perhaps we could retain the current image as a thumbnail somewhere?

Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farradane (talkcontribs) 18:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Farradane- I'll be happy to work on it (also keeping the interior image) and if you are not pleased, feel free to revert the changes. The photo was taken by me. I'm working on an image gallery from a marathon Oxford photo day last week- 22 colleges in 7 hours. It's a work in progress... - Godot13 (talk) 18:34, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I think it turned out rather well, let me know what you think. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Looks great! Thanks very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farradane (talkcontribs) 06:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2014[edit]

WikiCup 2014 April newsletter[edit]

Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's United States ChrisGualtieri (submissions) who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included Rhodesia Cliftonian (submissions), who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and Washington, D.C. Caponer (submissions), who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from Canada Reid,iain james (submissions), tiger from Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and The Lion King from Minas Gerais Igordebraga (submissions). We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to Nepal Czar (submissions) and Indiana Red Phoenix (submissions) for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.

192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talkemail), The ed17 (talkemail) and Miyagawa (talkemail) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2014[edit]

National Gold bank Note[edit]

I originally had the banks listed in another column on the table and feel they would make more sense somehow incorporated into the table. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Knowledgekid87 Oh, I agree with you. Getting them into the same table might be difficult (because each line is based on a denomination) and I was just trying to avoid a second table. Although... If we went with a second table, we could add date of charter, and # notes reported on the bank (optional would also be the date of conversion to a non-gold national bank)... Just a thought.-Godot13 (talk) 01:56, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Knowledgekid87- I've been looking at some of the different data available and a second table (actually it might be the first table of two) could make sense. If each line represented one of the 10 NGBs, the info that could be presented might include: Bank name, charter number, date of charter, and denominations issued. Both Treasury and bank serial number ranges are available, but that might be overkill. I'm not very familiar with the style (syntax) of the table you set up. If you are on board with the idea of a bank table would you mind setting up the framework?
In the existing table I'm going to change the Series values to either Original or 1875. The dates currently there aren't the series but rather the plate date reflecting when the actual plate was authorized for BEP engraving. I need to check the criteria, but I wonder if we could get this up to a Good Article...--Godot13 (talk) 23:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Sure I can make the second table, as for the one I created I actually borrowed one of the tabless used in the Federal Reserve Note article and tweaked and played around with it so it worked. I can create another one for the banks and link you to a preview. As for GA status, I get the feeling that it will be a challenge, not a-lot of information is out there in reliable sources regarding these notes. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I have not been active on the page, I just returned from NYC yesterday and had been busy before too to dedicate time for the article. The article looks great I think what you did greatly improved things. =) I feel the history section should be worked on next, do you have any book sources to work from? I have found before some sources with what National Gold Bank notes were used for but did not want to paraphrase the sources too closely. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Currency from the original 13 Colonies (set)[edit]

US-Colonial (CT-178)-Connecticut -2 Jan 1775 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (CT-178)-Connecticut -2 Jan 1775 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (DE-76)-Delaware-1 Jan 1776 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (DE-76)-Delaware-1 Jan 1776 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (GA-124)-Georgia-4 May 1778 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (GA-124)-Georgia-4 May 1778 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (MD-55)-Maryland-1 Mar 1770 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (MD-55)-Maryland-1 Mar 1770 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (MA-87.15)-Massachusetts-1 May 1741 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (MA-87.15)-Massachusetts-1 May 1741 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (NH-179)-New Hampshire-29 Apr 1780 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (NH-179)-New Hampshire-29 Apr 1780 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (NJ-179)-New Jersey-25 Mar 1776 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (NJ-179)-New Jersey-25 Mar 1776 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (NY-173)-New York-2 Aug 1775 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (NY-173)-New York-2 Aug 1775 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (NC-33)-North Carolina-27 Nov 1729 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (NC-33)-North Carolina-27 Nov 1729 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (PA-149)-Pennsylvania-20 Mar 1771 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (PA-149)-Pennsylvania-20 Mar 1771 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (RI-282)-Rhode Island-2 Jul 1780 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (RI-282)-Rhode Island-2 Jul 1780 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (SC-155)-South Carolina-8 Feb 1779 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (SC-155)-South Carolina-8 Feb 1779 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
US-Colonial (VA-69)-Virginia-4 Mar 1773 OBV.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-Colonial (VA-69)-Virginia-4 Mar 1773 OBV.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup[edit]

If you want to withdraw, I'll withdraw too. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:21, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I certainly appreciate the solidarity, but I have to think about that. It has nothing to do with winning an award (the images will get where they need to be with or without the Wikicup). The rules may very well change for next year, but under these rules I want to see everyone work their ass off to be on top. One of my "agendas" with digitizing the Smithsonian banknotes was to get them out into the public, to get the history and art of currency to a broader audience. I will admit, the Wikicup has kept my level of motivation at an unusually high level. I've thought about what would be required to be competitive in the final round, but this sort of drains your energy for a big move. Let's see what the upcoming days bring. Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 02:48, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry there's been an issue about this. Your work is appreciated by me, though I do not write about banknotes personally, I've been able to borrow your excellent images when coins and banknotes have crossed paths. Anything that could be done to get the Smithsonian to put the coin portion of the National Numismatic Association online with suitable licenses would be appreciated as well--we have some articles reliant on pre-1923 images of patterns uniquely in the NNC and we're desperately short on images for some mid-19th and earlier issues. I've had to defer writing some articles until suitable images can be gotten.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Wehwalt- Thanks for the comment, much appreciated. While imaging coins and notes are two very different stories, I would be happy to inquire as to what images the NNC has (high res digital) for their coins that they might be willing to share (or make). I will be back there in June or July for a week and again in August. Perhaps you could give me (email?) a "short list" (20-30 coins). Indicate which images would be the centerpiece of an article (i.e., priority). I can not make any guarantees, but can try.--Godot13 (talk) 04:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
I will work something up. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:39, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I can't wait. 3000px images of mint-quality coins coins. Speaking of which, I need to get some new presses. These are really dirty at full resolution. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2014[edit]

Curious about one of your photos[edit]

Hi Godot13. I am curious about these block-like shapes in this photo. What are they? Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

They are gravestones. It is a biblical-era cemetery.--Godot13 (talk) 22:46, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Godot13. At first I thought they were, but when I compared the size to the cars in the streets, I began doubting my first impression. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Netherlands American Cemetery (memorial tower)[edit]

NET-Margraten-American Cemetery 01.jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:NET-Margraten-American Cemetery 01.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! Armbrust The Homunculus 21:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

About your camera[edit]

I noticed that your recent photos have been taken with a medium format camera with Leaf back. Obviously the resolution is fairly incredible with these cameras, but I always have the niggling feeling that you'd get better images with a good DSLR and stitching (as I do). After all, I can often downsample my stitched images to your camera's native resolution, gaining additional sharpness as well as great resolution. I'm a bit biased though as that's been my technique for getting great panoramic/architectural detail in my photography for about 10 years now. I do also appreciate that there are additional and significantly time-intensive post-processing requirements for this method (and occasionally stitching errors if you're not careful), although it could be argued that the technical attention to detail required of medium format photography (slower shutter speeds for equivalent depth of field etc) makes it just as complex. Anyway, I was just wondering how you came to the decision to go medium format though, as it's quite a big investment. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 10:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Diliff- I've never tried stitching because I have no idea how to do it. I'm willing to learn if you have any good intro sources you can turn me on to. I'm generally amazed by your work and certainly see the upside of spending the extra time putting the images all together. Shooting medium format is slower and sometimes not as versatile as a good DSLR. There's something rewarding about going though a day's shoot and finding one or two images where you just nailed the shot. I don't actually own the camera (I have a Nikon D4 and tons of 35mm and medium format film gear), I rent from a pro place when I travel and have taken the Leaf back on a few trips now. I started medium format digital in 2003 and have seen the resolution get better and better, so I've sort of been waiting for technology to slow down before investing (but I also hope it doesn't). If there is a site or literature you recommend on stitching, please let me know. Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 11:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • You'd have to hunt down the software first. Diliff and I use PTGui, which is fairly automated (in a way which is sufficient for most needs, though once you can manually edit the panoramas it becomes much more powerful). You can read up on it here, and their documentation is pretty good. There's also an open-source alternative, Hugin (software), but I've had trouble with that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
(Talk Page Stalker) I had an oppportunity to try the stitching software, in a brief nutshell, IT SUCKS. ESPECIALLY when you have an entire suites of photo editing software out there designed to paste differing images. I have found greater control, BUT thats me....PROVISO...I used to use a Kodak Brownie camera until the fine folks stopped making film for it. I now own a LOW end SLR, and would LOVE to try out the DSLR out there but as fate has it, I do not have 3 grand to drop on a camera. Then I had a thought. most of my pics are of abandoned appalachian buildings, damaging good equipment in the middle of nowhere isnt my bag. So, UNLESS there is an urgent need, IMO AVOID the stitching, and just edit.......Coal town guy (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Were you shooting from a single point, or were you trying to, say, shoot everything face on? If the latter, that'll explain if you had major issues (my first attempts, before I read into this, were like that). You have to shoot a certain way, but PTGui and Smartblend handles my handheld panoramas quite well (in most cases). Taman Sari (Yogyakarta) has three images I plan on nominating at FPC next week, all of which were stitched. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:34, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
ALL of the above and a good observation. Some of the places I shoot do not give me a chance to have a certain approach.....the errant rattle snake, or hornets nest tends to put a damper on traditional approaches, BUT, I would not trade it for the world. HOWEVER, your images are remarkable in quality good showCoal town guy (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
As they say, a poor workman blames his tools. ;-) Stitching software doesn't suck, it serves its purpose and it does an excellent job if used correctly. But if you don't know what you're doing and the photo doesn't come out right, it isn't the software, it's you. The same can be said of any camera. "I spent 3 grand on camera and it doesn't take good photos". Anyway, just wanted to get that out there to counter your stitching software slander. ;-) Of course stitching software isn't going to be useful for an image of a rattle snake or similar. It's designed for situations where the subject is relatively static and you have time to compose it. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:11, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
A "static" subject is swell..as long as said subject is not in nature. You now, the outside world, far from places that allow you to get that shot...HOWEVER, IF I spend 10 hours to get to a place and I rely on software that does not do the job , it sucks, in fact, I can honestly say if I do not get the utility that is stated, it sucks..... As to knowing what I am doing.......yeah, thats kinda funny, in its own way, I guess. The point of my comment was ,before you got weepy about using software, I cant afford the camera I want, which I am certain NOBODY ELSE EVER SAYS  ;-)......HOWEVER, I will state IMO, and in my career, film offered better quality and I did not have to rely on a software vendor telling me how to take a pic in my darkroom or in places they normally never go anyway. Its kind of like a sales pitch gone wrong. Oh yes, Mrs Linclon, besides that, how was the play? I dont take pics of snakes, I avoid them to get the pics I want. As to my current camera doing the job, nope, it never ever will, in fact no camera I owned ever did everything I wanted. Thats just me, I do however have a wish list. I will again state, the pics here are excellentCoal town guy (talk) 16:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Sometimes it can be the equipment. The Canon PowerShot A*** which I used to take this image of a destroyed house doesn't seem to have had enough range, so I got blown highlights. However, human error is still possible; in the session that produced this and others like it, I lost Jimbo knows how many pictures to blur because I chose settings which weren't allowing me to get enough shutter speed, and chose a position where my field of view was blocked by some decorations. I think 60 out of 200 made it to Facebook, and 20 made it to Commons. Just today I junked 20 RAW files because I had missed the focus in places while trying to prepare a focus stack. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:28, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
As for site, it's worth checking out Hugin or PTGui (try the demo version of PTGui and let me know if you like it). Crisco already mentioned PTGui's website as a good place to start, and the tutorials are particularly helpful (especially the first one on how to shoot panoramas which is applicable regardless of what software you use to stitch. Hugin works fairly similarly to PTGui, but I'm most familiar with PTGui so I'd recommend that. And I know what you mean about going through a day's shooting and finding a couple of images that you really nailed. It's actually the same, possibly even more so with stitching. Some of my panoramas are composed of 50 or more images, because in addition to taking, for example, a 2 row by 5 column panorama, I often also take 5 exposures for each of those frames. So 2 * 5 * 5 = 50. It's not uncommon for me to have taken 500 images and only have 3-4 final panoramas of any worth. Sometimes I will have accidentally left autofocus on, or left it in aperture priority, or bumped the focus ring or the tripod in the middle of the sequence, or in some other way screwed up one or more of the exposures and rendered the entire panorama useless. So there is definitely a technical aspect to good panoramic photography that can't be underestimated. But once you get your technique right, it's pretty unparalleled in creating great quality images. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I hate when I accidentally leave something in aperture priority; I had to reshoot this entirely (PTGui can do a bit to mitigate it, including the colour balance, but the sky ... it was a nightmare). I didn't catch it until I was already home. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I know your pain... Are we whispering?--Godot13 (talk) 17:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • While we're on the subject of pain... Crisco, once PTGui has outputted the final image and you've done whatever retouching might be needed in Photoshop or whatever, resave it with a little more JPG compression. 70mb for one image is pain. :-) It's needlessly large! I resaved it as a test and reduced it from 70mb to 15mb and there was no noticeable loss of quality. Oh, and also, you don't seem to be using colour noise reduction in your RAW processing (the shadows have significant colour noise, particularly on the lower left wall) That said, it's a nice photo and a pretty good real world example of how a relatively pedestrian camera can create a great, high resolution stitched image (twice as much resolution as the Leaf digital back). Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:37, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
  • <microscopic>You guys crack me up! Okay, as soon as the Wikicup is over I'll start my stitching apprenticeship. Hmmm, I guess you can't get any smaller than this...--Godot13 (talk) 17:54, 21 May 2014 (UTC)</microscopic>
  • Are you sure Godot? The luminescence denoising is at 15 right now. Still not that much, but I was kinda worried that that would cause too much loss of detail. Then again, I'm downsampling from 15k pixels wide to 12.5k, so it's not going to have that big of an effect. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I pulled a muscle in my eye...--Godot13 (talk) 00:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Look mum, I'm downsampling my reply! Seriously though, Crisco, I'm not talking about luminance (brightness) noise, I'm talking about chrominance (colour) noise. There should be sliders to adjust both types of noise separately. Colour noise can be removed more aggressively without affecting the detail. In Lightroom, colour noise reduction is enabled by default and you don't generally need to adjust it further as it removes most colour noise but from memory, you use Camera RAW which has the same options available but perhaps different default settings. Have another look. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 09:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Ah. I'm using Lightroom now, and it was at 50. My latest version (Poco considered the lighting in the one you looked at too harsh at COM:QI) seems to be a bit cleaner. The image is also 15 mb now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
  • BTW, Godot, if you do get some stitching software, you may enjoy the masking features. It allows you to remove a few people who accidentally get in your way without fancy Photoshop maneuvers. I will probably rely on this heavily once I try and get an FP-able image of the Tugu of Yogyakarta (which is in the middle of a busy intersection). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:19, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
    • Okay Crisco, now you have my full attention. That detail in and of itself is very valuable...-Godot13 (talk) 03:27, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
      • Then I probably should have started with that. File:Eastern face of Eastern Gate, Taman Sari, Yogyakarta, 2014-05-07.jpg, for instance, is of the main entrance of a fairly busy tourist attraction (there had to be three tour groups while I was there, and that's also where the guides wait for tourists), but with the masking feature (and patience while photographing) I was able to get a reasonably empty entrance. So long as one or two of the overlapping images you shoot has nothing blocking it, the masking feature should be able to give a satisfactory output. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:02, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
        • I get it, and it explains an exchange I had... When I was taking photos at the Temple Mount I spoke with a man taking the same picture (with a tripod), over and over. I asked why he was doing this and he replied: to get rid of the people...--Godot13 (talk) 04:49, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/U.S. Refunding Certificate (1879)[edit]

US-$10-RC-1879-Fr-214.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US-$10-RC-1879-Fr-214.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. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:25, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2014[edit]

You might be interested in the Featured Content this week. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:07, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
  • A bit south of the fold though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:15, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, but a very nice full set in the Signpost...-Godot13 (talk) 03:25, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
  • It takes up a lot more space than our normal headers and footers, so I figured it'd overbalance at the top. 17:31, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Alaskan parchment scrip[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Talk:King Alfred's Tower/GA1[edit]

I think I've now addressed all the issues at Talk:King Alfred's Tower/GA1. Could you take a look and see what else needs doing?— Rod talk 08:03, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Brosius image[edit]

I hate these kind of battles. They have a tendency to screw up nominations, which is why I'm so reluctant to provide any but the most obviously-improved alts... Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Rep. Marriott H. Brosius[edit]

BROSIUS, Marriott (BEP engraved portrait) (name cropped out).jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:BROSIUS, Marriott (BEP engraved portrait) (name cropped out).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! Armbrust The Homunculus 20:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm a bit sensitive about this sort of things because of the number of times I've seen images uploaded without the captions, or have had some idiot on Commons come along and crop my images due to the idea that borders/text should always be removed. I really, really do not ever want to see a precedent emerge that this is acceptable at FPC. It's not so bad when the original exists, but... I hadn't realised voting had closed. I think the wrong decision was made, because the alt was judged in such haste, and may ask for a D&R later. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough...--Godot13 (talk) 00:49, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

WonderSwan[edit]

In case you're thinking "I already answered this", Chris accidentally removed your comment by the looks of it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:56, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

LOL! I thought I was having a premature senior moment... --Godot13 (talk) 15:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
  • You're not the only one. I was thinking "Wait, he already said the new image was okay". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hawksmoor Towers, All Souls College, Oxford[edit]

UK-2014-Oxford-All Souls College 03.jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:UK-2014-Oxford-All Souls College 03.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! Armbrust The Homunculus 20:30, 28 May 2014 (UTC)