User talk:Howcheng/Archive15

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


Gustave Doré[edit]

Careful with the description of these images: Doré's considered one of the master engravers, often listed with Hogarth, Duerer, and the like. He needs mentioned.

Also, the Dante images - I believe there's a few more in the queue - have a slightly confusing history, long story short, I got a set from a Longfellow edition all uploaded, found a problem, and then got a separate edition which the FPs come from. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 10:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for a date[edit]

How about January 27, 2010 for File:Coles Phillips2 Life.jpg? That would be the 100th anniversary of its appearance on the cover of Life magazine. Durova320 17:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Auld Lang Syne[edit]

Can File:Auld_Lang_Syne.ogg run on New Year's? It's from 1910, so it's 100 years old in 2010. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 209 FCs served 15:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I like to run sounds in association with a picture, since we still don't have a mandate to have Featured Sounds by themselves on the Main Page. Do you know if we have a New Year-related image? howcheng {chat} 15:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
If Shoemaker can find an encyclopedic use for this image, we're in business. Durova320 16:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll see if I can assemble a DYK on the artists. That'd likely be sufficient. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 209 FCs served 17:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


Hello. I think this page concerning your POTD entry is worth being looked at. Thank you. Qweedsa (talk) 09:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

POTD spelling[edit]

Haha, my bad. Sorry about that, I was tired and my spelling escaped me. Jerry teps (talk) 04:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the notice. Just wondering, any reason why this image hasn't made an appearance yet? --Muhammad(talk) 18:26, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I try to space things out so that we don't get too repetitive. Prior to the houseflies mating, there was these insects mating and then these guys, and then your blow-fly. Combined with me trying to have more than one insect a week, it will likely be a bit longer before they go up, as we have a pretty big backlog of insects right now (and flowers, and previously there was a big bird backlog). howcheng {chat} 19:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Oh ok. No p then, take your time --Muhammad(talk) 23:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


I'd like to congratulate you for your precise shot has been featured! —Preceding unsigned comment added by HFret (talkcontribs) 03:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Use of copyrighted images[edit]

Hi. Regarding the image on the Macromiidae article, I think it necessary to examine WP policy on the use of copyrighted works at WP:Copyrights; in particular, note the following passage:

You must also in most cases verify that the material is compatibly licensed or public domain. If the original source of publication contains a copyright disclaimer or other indication that the material is free for use, a link to it on the media description page or the article's talk page may satisfy this requirement. If you obtain special permission to use a copyrighted work from the copyright holder under compatible terms, you must make a note of that fact (along with the relevant names and dates) and verify this through one of several processes. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for the procedure for asking a copyright holder to grant a usable license for their work and for the processes for verifying that license has been granted.

The statement on the Wikimedia Commons for this image is "If no terms are shown, even if the image is marked as copyrighted, then there are no restrictions on its usage." This quote is NOT a copyright disclaimer, as it does not appear to originate from the holder of the copyright; as such, it does NOT constitute verification of copyright status (it appears to be an assumption on the part of the person who placed the image in the Wikimedia Commons, and using this image therefore represents a risk that editors should take care to avoid).

Accordingly, before you restore this image, please consider two alternatives: (1) find an alternative image suitable for this article which does NOT have questionable copyright status, or (2) remove the copyright statement from the image as it appears in this article - you will note that no other images in mainspace WP articles indicate the copyright status when copyright status is already indicated in the Wikimedia Commons. In other words, having the copyright notice in the mainspace is not only counter to WP convention, but it draws attention to its possibly non-free status.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your attention to detail. Please note that I am an administrator on Commons and an OTRS volunteer who works on copyright issues, as well as the person who uploaded the image originally. I am intimately familiar with our policies, and I assure you that the image is perfectly fine. howcheng {chat} 00:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
To prevent any further confusion, I've copied the exact terms from the source web site. howcheng {chat} 00:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Happy Howcheng's Day![edit]

Featured article star.svg

User:Howcheng has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Howcheng's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Howcheng!

00:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. RlevseTalk 00:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Paul Paddick[edit]

Information.svg Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Paul Paddick. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

[1] is not even close to vandalism. If you have a content dispute, then discuss it with me. Do not go around blindly reverting good-faith edits or you will eventually piss off the wrong person. howcheng {chat} 19:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but thats NOT Paul Paddick so Please remove it --Jena (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

and whoever gave you that Pic is lying or if you took that pic umm how do you know it's him? --Jena (talk) 21:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Howcheng, after looking at some other Flickr images of Paddick, I'm inclined to agree with Jena. I don't think this is a pic of him. For example, this image, taken at a Wiggles concert. The image you downloaded seems to be of some fellow much heavier than the above one, and the eye color is different as well. I follow Sam Moran on Twitter, so I intend to ask him to take a look at it, too. I'd like to know--where did you get it? You say that you took the picture at a Wiggles concert in L.A. Are you sure that's accurate? If not, I think that you should remove it, as Jena as requested. --Christine (talk) 00:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I took this photo myself. This was directly after the Wiggles concert on 2009-07-26 the ampitheatre at Universal Studios in Hollywood, California, which I attended with my two daughters. Afterwards, on Universal Citywalk, Mr Paddick was sitting with his son, in costume (and his son had a pirate costume as well). I am quite familiar with the Wiggles and the Captain, being the owner of a number of Wiggles CDs and DVDs, and unless someone not only imitated his outfit but his voice and accent as well, I can attest that this was indeed Captain Feathersword. The complete photo, from which this is cropped, can be seen in my Facebook profile at [2] (feel free to share this with Sam Moran too, to verify the identity of Mr Paddick's son). I don't see how you can say the eye color is different; in my photo, the eyes are in shade so you can't even really see the color at all. Regards, howcheng {chat} 02:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry dude you got Lyed to.. Paddy DOSE have a son (conner) but that aint him.. I'll give this to Sam but .. Yah thats not Paul Padick it was a Dad in a Captain Feathersword coustume.... --Jena (talk) 02:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

So where is a picture of his son for comparison? howcheng {chat} 03:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
You know, if it's not him, that's fine; all you have to do is tell me, but calling my edit "vandalism" is completely uncalled for. And this is kind of ridiculous for me to point at all, but I still haven't gotten an apology for that, and I don't appreciate having to ask for one. howcheng {chat} 06:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
@Christine: After scrutinizing a bunch of Captain Feathersword photos, I have to agree that it's not Paul Paddick. The Captain in my photo has a mole near his left eye, which Paddick does not. The only logical conclusion is that I have a picture of Paddick's understudy. After all, Australians in Captain Feathersword outfits that look very similar to Paddic don't just walk around at CityWalk for the heck of it (the only in-costume characters you can see there are within the park boundaries of Universal Studios). I've put the previous photo back in the article. howcheng {chat} 07:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

ok Fine I'm sorry... and nope he is not an understudy eather no one in the wigghes cast walks around in costume... --Jena (talk) 11:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, How, for being so reasonable about this situation. And thanks for the revert on yourself! ;) I think that you got a cute image of some dad-fan who was dressing up like The Captain. I don't think it was someone affiliated with The Wiggles, though; as Jena says, it's their policy to wear their costumes only when they're acting in accord with their activities. Plus, the guy you photographed is so obviously not a professional dancer, doncha think? ;) You also helped out inadvertently. Even though it's a FA, one of the biggest weaknesses of The Wiggles is its lack of good free images. While researching this issue, I saw some recent Wiggles images folks had downloaded from their US summer tour on Flickr; we'll probably be able to use them for the Guys' bios as well. So thanks; you rock! --Christine (talk) 12:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
This is why I love Wikipedia. It brings people together :) Gareth E Kegg (talk) 22:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Holiday suggestions[edit]

Hi, dropping by with a few suggestions for holiday POTDs.

If there are other major spots on the calendar that need filling, please leave word. Do we have anything yet for Valentine's Day 2010? Durova347 19:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Ha, I just noticed the Little Norway photo this morning, and I only recognized it because I'd originally uploaded it to Commons (now deleted that your restoration is there). Halloween and Christmas 2010 are still open, so the WWI and Raven ones might work (but I'd rather not schedule those so early in case something better comes up). The Wicked Witch of the West one I already put on L. Frank Baum's birthday. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 19:11, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, and understandable. After the rocky path of the 2008 Valentine's POTD, I try to plan these things well in advance. Just wanted to ping to be sure you're aware of the possibilities. And thanks again for this year's Halloween scheduling. :) Best regards, Durova347 19:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


I see that File:Democratic presidential ticket 1864b.jpg and File:Ed Walsh portrait 1911.jpg have future POTD dates. Are these Commons POTD dates or WP dates?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Those are on Commons (note the Commons logo on the template). howcheng {chat} 01:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Is either of them a future WP POTD?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, they will be. I just haven't scheduled them yet. howcheng {chat} 02:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
O.K. Let me know in advance of their days, if you can remember.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Snail mating photo[edit]

Sorry, I don't know how to use Wikipedia very well. I just want to point out the image you added on Helix aspersa of two garden snails mating (File:Garden snail reproduction.JPG) is not what snail mating looks like at all; those snails have been cruelly placed upside down, are secreting defensive foam, and trying to hide, and are stuck together. Really it is an image of two snails being very frightened by a photographer and reacting instinctively, but doesn't illustrate mating at all. You should probably replace that with an image of snails actually mating if you would like to illustrate the point, or remove it since it's cruel. I hope you didn't take that picture. Sincerely, an anonymous user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I did not take the photo, but merely uploaded it for someone else who did. It is now removed from the article and deleted, since it does not show what it purports to. howcheng {chat} 16:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


The photo got re-added, I've reverted and raised the issue on the talk page per WP:BRD. May be worth keeping an eye on. Mjroots (talk) 12:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Location formatting preference[edit]

Tell me, for my curious mind, why you prefer Atlanta, Georgia to Atlanta, Georgia. I see this as being wrong because you don't offer the option of getting straight to Georgia in one click, thereby not fulfilling the obligation of WP:LINK; a couple smaller arguments would be that the city's name doesn't actually include the state's name, it is just that the city happens to reside in the state; and that the comma is not part of the name (i.e. only the actual name of the place should link). I'm just wondering, because unfortunately this isn't written anywhere (that I've found over the past six months). I'll liken it to including the US in the location (since WP is international and not all foreigners know the names of all 50 states): shouldn't it be Bismarck, North Dakota, United States rather than Bismarck, North Dakota, United States (if not just for consistency)? Interested to hear what you think. upstateNYer 01:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:VolcanicLegacyScenicByway CaliforniaSection.gif[edit]

File:VolcanicLegacyScenicByway CaliforniaSection.gif is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:VolcanicLegacyScenicByway CaliforniaSection.gif. 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:VolcanicLegacyScenicByway CaliforniaSection.gif]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 07:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Takbir of prayer.jpg[edit]

Hey, if it passes, would it be possible to have it as POTD for eid al hajj in about 10 days? --Muhammad(talk) 09:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Did you mean Eid al-Adha? howcheng {chat} 00:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, sorry didn't see the msg there. Thanks for allowing it :) --Muhammad(talk) 00:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Rancho Camulos[edit]

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Rancho Camulos/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

File redirects after a file move and re-name[edit]


As my image "go-to" guy, I have a question for you regarding the redirects left after an image move. As an example, this file is a redirect to File:Peppara Reservoir viewed from the Bonacaud Hills.jpg. The properly named file is an orphan (that is how I found it). I have come across a few examples of this same situation, and thought I should ask about it.

I had already tagged one of the poorly named files under the "missing image" speedy criteria here (with the better named file here). After adding the speedy tag, the page when from a redirect, to a copy of the image. I don't want to have messed up anything.

I know when an article is moved, the re-direct is generally kept, but I am not sure about the case with images.

Thanks for any assistance. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 19:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, when I move files, I always kill the redirect and change the file references in the articles. I suppose if the redirect works properly for images, there's no real harm in doing it either way, although having a redirected image in an article would be more confusing, I would think. In other words, you're doing fine. howcheng {chat} 07:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

December 4 POTD[edit]

Hi, could you take that one out of the rotation please? Would like to run it on Neda Agha-Soltan's birthday, which is rumored to be in February. Iranian editors are asking around re: the exact date. If it isn't forthcoming, should make a good choice for Feb. 14th. Very famous love story. Regards, Durova371 21:14, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I thought you recently got a V-Day-themed FP promoted. And who is Neda Agha-Soltan? howcheng {chat} 21:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
We can backburner the other V-Day idea. Neda Agha-Soltan; I've heard her fiancé was imprisoned for political reasons after her death. Durova371 19:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
(snaps fingers) Already up...serves me right for getting distracted. Durova371 19:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Ah, OK I remember that now. Actually, that connection would be far too specious for me. howcheng {chat} 20:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

December 10[edit]

No way to nest the scrolling template within the POTD template? That'd be wonderful if it were possible... :) Durova375 23:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The Main Page one, maybe. Not the regular one. I'll see what I can do there. howcheng {chat} 23:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Tried it out, but because the top portion is just the border and empty space, it looks odd. howcheng {chat} 23:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Okay, that's your call. Durova375 00:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


Why did you blank this it is an archived discussion of an AfD? BigDunc 11:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

There was a complaint by the subject that came through the oversight list. Since the contents of the discussion are still visible in the history, no information has been lost, but now at the very least that page won't come up when people search for him on Google. I hope that makes sense. howcheng {chat} 19:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


Thanks a lot for that. I was a bit flustered on why we had that issue today on that image so I attempted to throw myself in to the thing. Should we add that bit of information to the Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Guidelines page? I'll take that into heart when I do that the next time. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 07:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm thinking of adding File:World Map 1689.JPG to the mix of POTDs. I was going to focus the caption around how map maping has improved over the past 300 years. Any suggestions since I am so new to this? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
While I'm here, I was thinking of adding File:Pale Blue Dot.png to the template on April 22, as it is the 40th anniversary of Earth Day. I wanted to ask you what you would think if I was to move the image that is there to another day, preferrably the 21st or 23rd. Thanks again. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
For the world map, as with any article, you need to avoid original research. It would also be best if much of that discussion was in the article as well. POTD, like other items on the Main Page, must defer to the article when possible. As for Earth Day, that would be fine. The dude who's on there now, April 22 happens to be his birthday, but it's not like he was a really important historical figure or anything. howcheng {chat} 04:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Mission accomplished on the Earth photo. The only issue is that I cannot figure out how to add the POTD template to the photo page without messing it up. If you could do that for me, that would be swell. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

December 28 POTD[edit]

As you may have noticed, the Dec 27 POTD has been used as a temporary Dec 28 POTD, as you forgot to select one for today. -- tariqabjotu 00:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Was just coming here to notify you of this. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#We have no TFP. (Sorry if the post sounds a little snappy, I was rushing and hate the noticeboards.) J Milburn (talk) 00:13, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
How embarrassing. This is the 2nd time in recent weeks that I've been unable to get the POTD done on time. :( howcheng {chat} 00:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with it quickly. Maybe it would be good to get a "deputy featured picture director" or whatever as Raul has with FAs? J Milburn (talk) 00:32, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


So I just realized that "File:B-1B over the pacific ocean.jpg" was chosen as POTD exactly three years to the day after it was used. Should I replace it or add in another? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I do have another one that I will put in place if you would think it would be better to replace it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:03, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I already took care of it. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 00:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
If you need help in the future, you can feel free to grab me, as I have the tools to do the job in a pinch, if you need it. ❄ upstateNYer ❄ 01:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

January 13 POTD[edit]

Just to let you know we don't currently have anything for tomorrow. J Milburn (talk) 17:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm planning to get to it at lunch today. howcheng {chat} 17:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
And the next few days? Thanks again for the work, always appreciated! Mostlyharmless (talk) 02:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

POTD for the 14th[edit]

Hey there. I'm sorry that I put up the wrong picture for the 14th--I was unaware that there was a queue. Hopefully, I'll be able to find it and try my hand again at captioning images for POTD. Thanks! BobAmnertiopsisChatMe! 21:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

POTD request for September 19[edit]


Seems perfect for Talk Like a Pirate Day. ;) Durova401 22:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

"Talk like a Pittsburgh Pirate"? Heh. I think there's another pirate-themed FP lying about, however. howcheng {chat} 23:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

POTD 2010-01-19[edit]

Hi Howard. With this edit, a brand new editor replaced {{POTD/2010-01-19}} with a link to the off-wiki website of his/her company. Sixteen minutes later, I noticed it and reverted it with this edit. Can the POTD templates be semi-protected so that accounts that have not yet been autoconfirmed cannot edit them? In this particular case, if I understand correctly, this would have prevented this new wikieditor’s edit. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 05:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE:  Before taking any actions, you may wish to look at this edit by an Administrator to deal with the matter. If his approach fixes the problem, then the issue may be moot. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 06:24, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
This is a pretty rare act of vandalism, honestly, and IP editors often make constructive edits to the regular versions. I'm going to unprotect the templates. But thanks for the note. howcheng {chat} 07:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

POTD for December 31[edit]

Times Square 1-2.JPG

I would suggest that you use my recent FP of Times Square for POTD on December 31, the day of the ball drop. What do you think? upstateNYer 23:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

That's not bad, but it's not an intuitive connection. Since there's still a long time until New Year's Eve, I'll have to keep this one in the back of my mind (you may have to remind me). howcheng {chat} 17:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture for February 4[edit]

Sorry if I'm bothering the wrong person, or if you already noticed, but I just wanted to note that there's no featured picture for today. -- tariqabjotu 00:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I noticed you had just forgotten to copy the version to the protected page. The formatting is quite unwieldy, so please correct me if I did something incorrect. It looks okay, but I'm worried there might be an issue on the backend. -- tariqabjotu 00:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Template of Astronomical Images[edit]

I have seen your beautiful work with Templates and I wondered if there is any Template that produces random astronomical images. I have no ideal how to make one but I understand from SpikeTorontoa that you are the expert on this subject. SpikeToronto has graciously created a random template for my userpage but I would also love one exclusively of astronnical images such as the kind we see in the Hubble Images. Could you advise me please? Thank you in advance for any help you are willing to give me. Mugginsx (talk) 11:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


Hello Howcheng, User:MBisanz told me that you may be able to help in my request. I need someone to create a PD tag for the Images of the Institute of Puerto Rican Culture, an institution of the Government of Puerto Rico responsible for the establishment of the cultural policies required in order to preserve, promote, enrich, and convey the cultural values of Puerto Rico. Said images are PD and I have the confirmation of the Pueto Rican government to such respect which I can provide. If you can do it or if you can direct me to the person that has the knowledge to create such a tag, I will appreciate it and provide futher information. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Is the Institute of Puerto Rican Culture the owner of said images? And how many files are we looking at here? If it's not that many, I would just go with a {{PD-author}} template and not bother with creating something new. Otherwise, I would simply copy the format of another PD template and reword to fit the circumstances. In either case, you will need to forward your correspondence with the Institute to OTRS for archiving and include the ticket number with the images so that there is always evidence to validate the PD claim. HTH. howcheng {chat} 05:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you for responding. First, a little about myself (I think that by now you know that I'm terrible with the image uploading stuff (smile) ). Even though I am not what they call a "polished" historian, I have been recognized as such by the Puerto Rican Government and have been named the Official Historian of ANSO the Association of Naval Service Officers of the United States Navy. As such I have access to military and political figures both in the United States and the territory Puerto Rico, among which are the Governor and the Secretary of State/Lt. Gov. of the island. The Institute of Puerto Rican Culture, is an institution of the Government of Puerto Rico which is funded by the United States Federal Government and whose image copyright laws fall under the Federal Government of the U.S. We are talking about no more then ten images.

My main concern was the images of the images and the not the written content used or published by The Institute of Puerto Rican Culture. I knew that images as such are Public Domain, however, to be on the safe side I decided to contact and ask about the image PD status the Secretary of State/Lt. Governor of Puerto Rico, the Honorable Kenneth McClintock, who holds a doctorate in international law and as an authority knows about the matter and is also spokesperson for the People of Puerto Rico. Here I will publish the correspondence between us (He is fluent in English as well as Spanish and his e-mail was in English as published here).

"Estimado Honorable Lt. Gov. K. McClintock, I know that you are a very busy person and I wouldn't bother you if for not a question that came up. Since you have a doctorate in law, I figured that no one is more qualified to answer my simple question. Are the images of famous Puerto Ricans used by the Puerto Rican Institute of Culture Public Domain? I am almost certain that the institute would not pay for the usage of images of famous Puerto Ricans that they honor in their publications and so on. Could you please inform me? Gracias. Tony Santiago

He responded:

"Tony, The images the IPC uses in its publications, as well as the portraits of Governors and First Ladies (which hang in La Fortaleza---although the Governors', that will hang at the State Department for 2 weeks beginning next Monday), Senate Presidents and House Speakers (which hang at the Capitol), the Secretaries of State photos, which hang at my Department, and so forth, are clearly in the public domain because: (1) nobody is paid for their continuous use, and, (2) the government does not claim payment from anyone from their reproduction and use. I hope this is of help to you. Kenneth D. McClintock; Secretary of State; San Juan, Puerto Rico.

He also responded the following:

" These images were commissioned and paid for by the Government, for public use, with public funds, so they may be reproduced freely. No one has any rights over such images, having sold the images and rights appurtenant to their work to the people of Puerto Rico. KDM"

I will not publish his e-mail address for security reasons, however I have forwarded his e-mail address to "OTRS" in regard to this image File:01 KDM.jpg and if you have access to OTRS, you will be able to verify the interaction between us.

If you can create a PD tag for the images (not the written content) of The Insititute of Puerto Rican Culture, not only will I appreciate it, but also the People of Puerto Rico. Thank you. Tony the Marine (talk) 14:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, {{PD-US}} will suffice for these. There is no need to create a separate template when it's not necessary. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • The situation is, even though the ICP images are PD some are not prior to January 1, 1923. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
D'oh, my bad! I meant {{PD-USGov}}. howcheng {chat} 22:39, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I sent the correspondence to OTRS, I think that if they provide a ticket number for the images of Institute of Puerto Rican Culture, then I may use a template similar to {{PD-author}} with a brief explanation and the insertion of the OTRS ticket number. Does this make any sense to you? Tony the Marine (talk) 07:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
How 'bout discussing this in one place? Duplicated effort bad. I've moved one discussion from my talk page to WP:PDOMG#Puerto_Rico_Template:PD-PRGov. Let's close this thread and continue discussion there, shall we?--Elvey (talk) 03:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Add a "public interest" clause to Oversight[edit]

A proposal to add a "public interest" clause to Wikipedia:Oversight has started at Wikipedia_talk:Oversight#Proposal_for_new_.27public_interest.27_clause. SilkTork *YES! 10:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


Please check out the example of the PD template which I created for the portraits of the Puerto Ricans Governors, First Ladies, Senate Presidents, House Speakers and Military heroes, which has the permit granted by OTRS to the Puerto Rican Government, Workshop. Tony the Marine (talk) 16:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

  • Hello? Tony the Marine (talk) 02:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
    • Sorry, been busy at work. Let me have a link to your new template, please? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


Thanks a lot for the speedy approval of my request! (talk) 17:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

what happen with DNDN page?[edit]

Oddly enough, there was a bunch of chatter today moving their stock all over. If you don't mind me asking, was the revealed IP potentially a COI revelation? This seems a bit extraordinary, I've sometimes had my cookies trashed and didn't really go to that much effort to change anything. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 23:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

No, it was a fairly innocuous edit, but we routinely suppress edits accidentally made by logged-out users to protect privacy. howcheng {chat} 00:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


Howcheng, we are again without a POTD. Someone has coded it to show yesterday's, but we have the rather ugly "check back later for today's". Could we please have this sorted ASAP? J Milburn (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Several users have knocked one up. It would perhaps be best if they were done in large batches, so we always have the next few days at least planned and sorted. J Milburn (talk) 01:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it's been a busy weekend. Thanks for the help. howcheng {chat} 02:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 :/ I'd be interested in preparing images but I'm not an admin, so I can't do the important half.  fetchcomms 03:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Just to assuage my own concerns, I've put up tomorrow's at Template:POTD/2010-03-09 although I can't actually create the one for main page as it's protected. I didn't know if there was some sort of queue—some of the other ones were already prepared, but I didn't want another last-minute scrambling. If I did something wrong, just tell me or discard it (I at least picked an image that wasn't nominated two days ago). In any case, would it be OK if I filled in a few others for non-occasion dates to avoid these last-second dilemmas, as J Milburn suggested? (From his wording, this seems like it happens often?) Thanks,  fetchcomms 05:01, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
That's what I normally do, but RL has been extremely busy for the last few months, so I've been falling behind occasionally here. howcheng {chat} 19:58, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

← Ah, I see. Are there any other guidelines on preparing them than the ones at WP:POTD/G, or would it be fine if I did one every so often if it was missed?  fetchcomms 22:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

No, those guidelines are pretty much it. Thanks for the help. howcheng {chat} 22:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, then, thanks to you too!  fetchcomms 23:03, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

cn tag[edit]

Hi. You added a cn tag to The Mikado and to our cultural references in G&S article for the proposition that Little Shop of Horrors used a poster spoofing a song title from The Mikado, but the image of the poster clearly shows that this is a fact. No further cite is needed, since the fact is verified by the poster itself. Would you kindly remove the tags? It seems to me you must have been in a hurry and not seen where it says this at the top of the poster. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a source that states the poster is an intentional reference to The Mikado or is that just an assumption? howcheng {chat} 04:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
If I may put in my two-penn'orth, one can see that the wording on the poster, if carefully scrutinised, reads, "The flowers that kill in the spring, tra-la" (my italics). As the lyric in The Mikado reads, "The flowers that bloom in the spring, tra-la", I believe it is inconceivable that the later version could be mistaken for anything other than a deliberate echo of the original. I suppose this is "just an assumption", but so unavoidable an assumption that such a description borders on a reductio ad absurdum. HTH. - Tim riley (talk) 20:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
If you were writing a thesis or other academic paper, I think you could draw that conclusion. Here, that counts as original research, no matter how obvious it may seem on the surface. Sorry. howcheng {chat} 22:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


Can you remove my username from tomorrow's POTD here ? I don't want it to appear and I can't remove it myself. Thanks. --George (talk) 07:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Conflicted licensing on image File:American Progress - Jose Maria Sert, photo by Jaime Ardiles-Arce.jpg[edit]

The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes it can. The creative elements of the photo are free. The statue itself is non-free. See Commons:Derivative works. howcheng {chat} 20:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


The caption for File:Water Babies(Restored, Alternate crop 2).jpg, which is currently on the main page, is completely unsourced. Who is responsible for this? For example, the text on the main page currently says, "such as Americans being chaotic and lazy and Jews being greedy." This content is not sourced in the article from where it originates. Viriditas (talk) 04:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

See User_talk:Uucp#Re:_Today.27s_featured_picture. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 04:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I found a source. It's not an exact fit, but I rewrote the sentence so that it matches better. howcheng {chat} 07:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your good work. Viriditas (talk) 07:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

POTD linking[edit]

Thanks for fixing that. I noticed it right away, but I couldn't figure out what the heck was causing it. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:53, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

St. Nicholas Church[edit]

You wrote about the Korenmarket in Gent - did you see my earlier comment on the talk page? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I had not seen it. I don't have the article on my watchlist. Go ahead and fix that if you want. howcheng {chat} 20:00, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


Regarding this edit, WP:EMDASH says "Em dashes should not be spaced." Art LaPella (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Use of "Ansel Adams and camera" image in the Ansel Adams article[edit]

There has recently been some discussion on using J. Malcolm Greany's image Ansel Adams and camera in Ansel Adams. Although many things suggest that this image is in the public domain, they remain educated guesses. I can't find much guidance in WP for how to handle an image for which the copyright status isn't known. This seems to be within your area of expertise; any suggestions? JeffConrad (talk) 23:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

for letting File:Paper Clip Surface Tension 1.jpg hit the main page and not be protected. βcommand 00:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, you've accidently displayed the wrong image. It should be File:Paper Clip Surface Tension 1 edit.jpg. Pyrrhus16 00:42, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Howcheng. You have new messages at Fetchcomms's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing this code.  fetchcomms 20:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Not intended to offend[edit]

Hi. Don't take that summary as something personal. I just pointed out to the readers (by the way, Wikipedia is intended for them, not for we users, nor for administrators) the reasons behind the deletion of an irreplaceable image. Just my personal opinion, but it is also discussed here, thus it is hardly "pretty obvious to all parties". Don't worry about my "frustration", I am free to upload this and other pictures elsewhere.

And regarding my user name, you're right, you must assume GF as per WP guidelines. See here if not convinced yet. Thank you.--Darius (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The meta page that you link to was actually written by Erik Moeller, deputy director of the Foundation, who has since changed his views. And besides, that's not talking about the inclusion of non-free content -- it's talking about being vigilant against things like copyfraud, so it's a little off the mark in terms of the FFD nomination. Lastly, WP:AGF is more about the assumption of users' motives with regards to the encyclopedia, that we are all working to build something better; it has nothing to do with usernames. :) howcheng {chat} 16:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

AnomieBOT's FFD closer[edit]

Thanks for keeping an eye on AnomieBOT. In case you're curious, the problem was that the bot saw (presumably at 2010-03-31 00:01) that the page was completed, and no earlier pages were uncompleted, so the bot didn't bother looking at any pages earlier than March 12 and thus never saw the revert 11 hours later. I adjusted the bot's database so it would check March 10 again, and adjusted the code so AnomieBOT will keep watching totally-closed pages for 24 hours in case the same thing happens in the future. Or do you think 24 hours isn't long enough? Anomie 01:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


I hope you do not think I removed the image too soon. He made it clear that he does not agree with the viewpoints at hand; any outsider can see that five is more than enough to concede the matter. Due to his lack of cooperation, I went ahead with removing the image. I worry that we will see resistance on his part despite us five, since he has an extensive history of edit warring and being blocked for it, three times alone at the article. Erik (talk) 13:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

No, that's fine. It was probably best that I didn't do it myself. :) howcheng {chat} 16:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
The issue seems closed now. Ugly, but it would have become unnecessarily long-winded. I was wondering, what is your opinion about non-free images used in film articles? There is a writeup at WP:FILMNFI that I try to follow. For example, I think it is still possible at 300 (film) to show one of the Immortals in some kind of costume design section if there is enough contextual significance, like in the references on the talk page. Erik (talk) 19:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Film articles, political articles, military history articles, it doesn't matter -- as long as the text can justify the image in a tangible way with sources, then I'm happy with it. The FILMNFI write-up seems good. I think I'm going to add something to WP:SYN along the lines of "images may not be used to lead the reader to draw conclusions that are not supported by the text" or something. howcheng {chat} 04:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Critique of Ansel Adams article[edit]

Hello! I've done an annotated critique of the Ansel Adams article, which I invite you to review at User:Cullen328/Sandbox Ansel Adams. My wife gave me a copy of the Alinder biography for my birthday, which I've just finished reading. I am now prepared to make a lot of edits to the article, but will start out with various factual "nuggets" rather than a major rewrite. I hope to hear your detailed thoughts on how the article can be improved, so that the process can be a collaboration among all interested editors. Cullen328 (talk) 21:52, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Macrobrachium ohione[edit]

Hi Howard,

I was really impressed with your new article on Macrobrachium ohione, and I've nominated it for the DYK slot. Good work! --Stemonitis (talk) 06:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Huh, I didn't think it was long enough yet. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Macrobrachium ohione[edit]

Updated DYK query On April 22, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Macrobrachium ohione, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Photo credit RFC[edit]

Thanks for weighing in at the photo credit RFC. I actually had a note to poke you in a few days if you hadn't. ;-) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

BUG: Quickimgdel.js[edit]

I've had a concern raised that the PUI portion of your QuickImgdel script doesn't seem to sign the messages it leaves.

Could you modify it so it does? This would be much appreciated :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Gunnar Sønsteby[edit]

I would like to ask you what you think is "tenuous" about the use of the Gunnar Sønsteby image for 8 May, seeing how:

  1. He was one of the leading members of the Norwegian resistance during WWII, and the only major one alive today
  2. The Norwegian resistance was one of the most important one in Europe (see FDR's "look to Norway" speech)
  3. There is a severe dearth of featured portraits on WP, and certainly none on a related subject

This seems to me a blatant abuse of admin power to support a highly subjective and uninformed position. Lampman (talk) 00:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

"Abuse" is a strong word to throw there. I'm the de facto POTD coordinator by virtue of nobody else having done it since May 2006. For anniversaries, I prefer to have a file that is more directly related to the anniversary, especially if you're going to jump the queue like that. V-E Day is slightly related, but not really. If there's a significant date in the Norwegian resistance movement, that would be better. Failing that, he's going on his birthday. Regards, howcheng {chat} 00:27, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, sorry about the strong language, but I really saw no problem with "jumping the queue", since there was no other picture in place. The connection with the date is a strong one, since it was the day when the German forces in Norway handed over power to an interim government made up by the resistance movement. It is still an official flag flying day in Norway. The current picture, which also seems to have jumped the queue, has only a tenuous connection with V-E Day, since it was in fact taken on a different date. Lampman (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
The difference is that Yalta is strongly associated with the war and this shot of the Big Three is fairly iconic. People see this and they know it's WWII we're talking about here without even having to read the text. howcheng {chat} 17:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
There's a certain irony that you may or may not be able to see in complaining about being left alone with the responsibility for the project, only to then go out of your way to alienate anyone who tries to contribute. If you think that your bland and ubiquitous stock photo was a better choice than a compelling and original portrait, then that is of course your choice to make, given your position. Lampman (talk) 00:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Cory Kennedy and Clint Catalyst[edit]

Hi there! As you rather politely reverted an "incorrect grammatical correction" I made on Cory Kennedy's page, and you have contributed a great deal to the subject, I thought it might be appropriate to contact you regarding two errors I discovered in her listing for the Andy Warhol Museum exhibition. In the not-too-distant past, I saw a video clip on YouTube of the exhibition's opening night, so I can attest that both Dirk Mai and Linda Strawberry were included as 'Uberstars'—and had artwork of their own included, as well. However, immediately after adding the information on Miss Kennedy's page to that of Mr. Mai's (with a change of wording, of course!), I noted that his name is not included in the referenced materials. The same goes for Linda Strawberry, and while I intend to find WP:RS to back up their accomplishments, I have a question of more immediate concern for someone who possesses the Wikipedia knowledge I do not: For the header 6) among Clint Catalyst's page contents, is it just me, or does it seem as if the information ("Live Performances, Modeling and Events") should be split into three separate categories? Spoken word performances are of a different caliber than "modeling"; also, I am nonplussed at what the information provided about Catalyst's friendship with Jared Gold has to do with a live performance, modeling, or an event. I openly admit that I'm a Wiki neophyte, which is why I ask: would this not be more appropriate if listed under a heading such as "Personal Life"?

Thanks for your help. Oh, and by the way--in case you haven't noticed, I added a rather lengthy defense in the historical relevance of Cory Kennedy on her talk page. Love her or loathe her, the simple fact remains: there's a tremendous amount of scrutiny placed on individuals who have utilized the internet to achieve various levels of notoriety. Not only are the statements of "There's absolutely no basis in acknowledging [insert name of 21st Century new media success story] because [insert reference of outdated historical precedent]" myopic, but the paradox they present borders on hilarious. After all, where is it these arguments are taking place? According to today's rankings on Alexa and, Wikipedia: the sixth most visited site in the world. What we're experiencing isn't just a major turning point in the so-called 'information superhighway'; on the contrary, it's a means of transit that spat dust on the 'IE' cliché over a decade ago...

Cheers to the future!

Shellacious (talk) 13:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


Can I make this work with the new vector skin? I'm not seeing the buttons in my sidebar. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

You just have to move/copy your monobook.js file to vector.js instead. The links will then appear in the toolbox. howcheng {chat} 16:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


You might want to check out ticket 2010051210040987 - still trying to work out how to copy people in through the system. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 16:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

POTD omission[edit]

If WP:POTDs are chosen in order of WP:FP promotion how is File:Ed Walsh portrait 1911.jpg a POTD today when it was promoted September 2009 and File:Democratic presidential ticket 1864b.jpg, which was promoted in March 2009, has not been a POTD yet.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to put those two on Election Day. howcheng {chat} 01:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
November 2010?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Yep, that's the plan. howcheng {chat} 17:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

RE: POTD notification[edit]

Unfortunately I can't translate your username into French, but thanks for the heads up :) I'll get to it.  f o x  08:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


Hi Howcheng,

Would it be too difficult to postpone the appearance of this picture as POTD to June, 10? It is the national day of Portugal and this monument has a very strong symbolic value for us. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:17, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Done! howcheng {chat} 23:14, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks (I'll be a hero at home?...)!! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Your assistance please[edit]

The record shows you deleted File:HMCS Fennel (K194).jpg. The entry you left in the deletion log said: "listed on WP:PUI more than 14 days".

I strongly suspect that this was a free image. Crown copyright#Canada protects images for their first 50 years. WW2 ended 65 years ago. So if this was a crown copyright image it would be a free image.

I'd like to request userification of the information templates and other information associated with this image, to review for possible clarification of whatever problem got it listed at WP:PUI in the first place.

Could you please userify it to User:Geo Swan/rescue/File-HMCS Fennel (K194).jpg? Geo Swan (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Possibly you didn't respond to my request because you have been busy, and you overlooked it. Alternately, you might think I should request a DRV. I will wait another day or so, and, if you have not responded by then, I will make my request elsewhere. Geo Swan (talk) 12:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I can't userfy files, but if you send me an email from the "email this user" link, I'll get you a copy of the image. howcheng {chat} 16:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2 results[edit]

Hi Howcheng, because you contributed to FPC's recent review, I'm letting you know that the results of the poll have been posted. We appreciate your contributions to the first stage and hope you take part in this next step, here, to move towards implementing several changes to the process. Regards, Maedin\talk 18:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

MPUploadBot issues?[edit]

Hi. I've noticed that MPUploadBot's been overwriting image pages, some of which you've been manually fixing. I'm not sure if it's just me, but other strange things seem to be happening too, including earlier versions not appearing in the upload logs, and my not being able to access the bot's user, talk or contributions page. Since X! doesn't seem to be available, I was wondering if you've looked further into the issue? --Paul_012 (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I saw X! on IRC a few weeks ago and notified him, but I haven't heard anything since then. howcheng {chat} 16:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


I don't suppose the image could be a little bigger? It's kind of awkward at that size. Ah, well! I'm not sure if we should mention the Magna Carta, since that implies that the Magna Carta is important to the play. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Cuerden (talkcontribs)

Good point. I chopped the Magna Carta and Robin Hood out. howcheng {chat} 21:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


Sorry to disturb you. I note you are an administrator and I'm not sure what to do. There appears to be vandalism in the Article Eastside Lutheran College. Denisarona (talk) 11:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I have taken care of it. howcheng {chat} 21:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Joaquin Murrieta[edit]

Hi. I am new to Wikipedia. I wanted to ad some info to the Joaquin Murrieta page and added that info that has been passed down in my family for years.

I see that it was taken off. I think it was taken off because of grammar and spelling and no notable source.

If you were to post it how would you post it? I am new and not very good at this. I just think its time for people to know some of what we know. I don’t want to give locations and names of the family of the ranch or lake that is now part of it. Because of people trying to get to his body and dig it up. But as I have been reading on the page allot of the info about birth place and him coming to CA for gold are in fact wrong. He was born in CA on a Rancho in what is now part to the San Joaquin Valley. Mr. Murrieta was a rancher. And was a close family friend with distant relatives that were also ranchers.

The story goes that he was not in the gun fight people think he was in. And they some years later he did get in to a gun fight and road his horse to my family’s ranch to seek shelter and med. help. But he did not make it and die in the hands of a distant aunt. And was then buried on the ranch.

I don’t know if this stuff can be posted there. But I was just thinking its time for some of to it to be heard. I don’t want to give out the name of the ranch or location and the family names. As you can see my spelling and grammar is off so any help would be great help.

Thank you very much for your time and I hope you have a grate day. Whitedozer 19:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

You can't put in any information from your family history. You need to point to a published source to prove that you're not just making it up. Please read Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Happy editing! howcheng {chat} 19:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Bank of USA promissory note[edit]

I have a promissory note exactly like the one shown in the photo on your "Promissory note" wiki. Can you tell me more? It is worth anything? Why are they the same? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:47, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have such information. You would be better off contacting a currency dealer. howcheng {chat} 16:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Template:POTD protected/2010-06-21[edit]

Hey, how did I manage to bugger that up and how can I do it right next time? I just clicked the "create protected" button with the pre-load and saved it, so what am I supposed to do? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Instructions are right next to that link: "To create the protected version, replace the first line with {{subst:POTD row and save it." :) howcheng {chat} 21:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Couldn't see it for looking! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

POTD request[edit]

I'd like to request File:Guiteau cartoon2.jpg be used for POTD for June 30, as that was the date of Guiteau's execution. Feel free to respond here. Jujutacular T · C 20:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I completely forgot about that. I'll put it on July 2, the anniversary of the execution. howcheng {chat} 02:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
No problem, thanks! Jujutacular T · C 03:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me?[edit]

Don't move pictures that have been placeheld for some time! I put that in the queue a long time ago (as in months ago). Secondly, don't move it to 2011, thirdly, the date wasn't decided by you, and it was decided as July 1st, the day the highway opened. Please move it back or I'll go to WP:ANI with it. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 01:57, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

"Months ago" meaning June 8? You do realize there's a long queue of Featured Pictures waiting their turn, don't you? The one I just put on July 1, was nominated over a year ago. Would you like to explain why this image should get to skip to the head of the line? I'll be happy to move it to July 1, 2011, if you prefer that instead of August 10. howcheng {chat} 02:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
If these were made a year ago, how come they weren't on the placeholder until today? July 1 2011 will have to do I suppose. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 03:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for gape[edit]

RlevseTalk 18:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

ITN for 1RXS J160929.1−210524[edit]

--Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:48, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Glowing gases[edit]

Seven images of gases were just promoted to FP as separate FPs (in a group nomination, because of similar subject, quality, and creator). These are:

I don't want to make for a very difficult scheduling issue, so, if you want, five of these seven - the noble gases excluding Radon (which has a half-life of only a few days, making it impractical to photograph in this way) - are available as a combined image:

Glowing noble gases.jpg

You may find it easier to use that, File:Hydrogenglow.jpg, and File:Nitrogen-glow.jpg as three days of images, instead of trying to balance 7 in the schedule. However, if you want to do seven, feel free. Just wanted to make sure you were aware of your options. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the heads-up. howcheng {chat} 17:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Picture of October 20[edit]

Hi, I'd like to request File:Jean-Baptiste-Jules Bernadotte, Prince de Ponte-Corvo, roi de Suède, Maréchal de France (1763-1844).jpg to be used for October 20, as that was the date of the arrival (the text in the link is a bit weird because it is a google translation from Swedish) of Bernadotte, the future Swedish King, to Sweden 200 years ago. P. S. Burton (talk) 19:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I tried doing it myself following the guidelines (apart from the caption). Sorry if I did it wrong, or jumped the queue. P. S. Burton (talk) 01:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Images that aggravate phobias[edit]

A bit over a year ago, a reader complained on Talk:Focus stacking about being frightened by the image of the wolf spider. Yesterday, another reader expressed a similar concern, and deleted the image. Offhand, this didn't seem justified, so I reverted the edit asking for further discussion, and hopefully, consensus. The image in question is also used in Depth of field, and was a featured picture candidate several years ago.

I have no idea if there is a Wikipedia policy on matters like this, but it seems to me that if images (or any other material) that some readers found scary (or perhaps just extremely offensive) could be summarily removed for those reasons, we'd have a mess. Any thoughts? JeffConrad (talk) 22:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I think having a picture of a spider on Arachnophobia is probably on the insensitive side (I think there was a similar dust-up with the clown phobia article, whatever that one is called), but to remove legitimately useful pictures from articles just because they might causes issues with or offend the sensibilities of someone is too much to ask. We didn't buckle to demands to remove images from Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, so there's no reason to give in to these other requests as well. That being said, both depth of field and focus stacking can be illustrated with non-phobia-inducing images, so replacing with other images that serve the same encyclopedic purpose is an easy public relations win in my book. HTH. howcheng {chat} 23:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I'll put a suggestion on the Talk page for both articles that we find a replacement image of comparable quality—I can't see replacing a good image with a mediocre one. I'll include an additional criterion of having both the composite image and a single image to illustrate the benefit of focus stacking; lacking the single image is much like trying to illustrate the effects of shift or tilt without comparison images—it's not very meaningful. I'll also take your comments to mean we should keep the image until we have a suitable replacement. Of course, the first reader's comment probably constituted such a replacement request, and so far it's been unfulfilled. What do we do if a new, more explicit, request gets a similar response?
Also, is it OK to summarize your response (perhaps without mentioning the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy) on Talk:Focus stacking? JeffConrad (talk) 23:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I put a more delicately-phrased reply there. I'll also query at WT:FPC to see if one of our master photographers is willing to tackle the issue. howcheng {chat} 23:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The spider image also appears in Depth of field, but I don't think anyone's complained about it. Should we replace it as well? JeffConrad (talk) 06:53, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Might as well. Good thinking. howcheng {chat} 07:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I'll indicate the intent on that Talk page, and remove replace the image if there's no valid objection. JeffConrad (talk) 09:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


Hello, could you take a look at Ticket:2010072010000475? It's by a person who, it appears, used to have their previous photo submissions processed by you. Thanks,  Sandstein  06:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

OTRS Check[edit]

You processed the OTRS ticket for File:BarbaraGittings in Phaldelphia 1969.jpg the best I can tell, and it's copyright status has come up recently, see here, here and here. A Google search brought up this page, which seems to indicate Cornell University Library possibly owns the original, but no indication they actually own the copyrights (this would require a specific release of them from the photographer to the library). The OTRS ticket, I understand, doesn't indicate they own the copyright. There is also another OTRS ticket 1178257 that is being used on two more images on the associated page, File:Barbara Gittings 1965.jpg and File:Gittings Kameny Fryer.jpg. This ticket, which I think was handled by Riana (talk · contribs), is far more questionable, a free e-mail service for the public library, plus one is by the same photographer as the first photo (Kay Tobin Lahusen). Could you look into at least the image you handled, I'll also contact Riana to look into the other one too, but more eyes the better. Thanks. — raekyT 02:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

In all three cases, the contents of the ticket are emails forwarded by User:Moni3 without headers, wherein a representative from the respective organizations (Lesbian Herstory Archives and NYPL) claims copyright ownership of the photos. While the lack of headers might be suspicious in and of itself, in my experience Moni3 has been conscientious about copyrights and securing releases. I'm sure she would be willing to supply the email address of the individual in question if it's truly necessary. howcheng {chat} 04:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I and J Milburn feel it's worth further investigation, the two OTRS's from two separate places for pictures from the same photographer seems suspicious that they both have copyright releases from the photographer. Just owning the photo isn't enough. — raekyT 05:37, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Your best bet is to follow up with User:Moni3 then. howcheng {chat} 16:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)



Just something I observed and thought you could help out with - when the image is POTD, the templates such as licensing one and the author template from commons don't work and are not displayed thus the image lacks the author and the license. Any ideas? --Muhammad(talk) 17:43, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

That's a known bug with the MPUploadBot. I'm pretty sure User:X! is aware of the problem as it's been commented on a number of times on WP:ERRORS. howcheng {chat} 23:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Do you know if anything is being done about it? I ask because if the license does not show on the day the image gets the most traffic, then there is a greeater chance of image misuse. What, if anything was wrong with the earlier method of keeping the image at commons? --Muhammad(talk) 04:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
It takes time for X! to get to working on his bot sometimes. There was another bug where the MPUploadBot wouldn't leave the FP and POTD templates on the image page, and it took him several weeks to fix it. It may just be that he's too busy IRL to do handle it (just speculating). Leaving the images on Commons is problematic for two reasons: 1) someone has to manually protect it. Usually that was me, but it's easy to forget if I get busy. 2) Commons prefers it we don't protect it there when the protection is specific to one of the local projects. howcheng {chat} 04:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive2[edit]

You are one of the WP image experts. Would you be willing to do an image review for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

FP for POTD unused list[edit]

Hi. After an earlier failed nomination, this image passed FPC here. As you can see, there has been some discussion whether it should not appear on the Main Page. I'm not sure what the protocol for adding something to Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused is, so I thought I'd ask you. I have no strong feelings either way, so you're free to decide yourself if it's too WP:SELF for POTD. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

When for Main Page?[edit]


These two animations I created… Jack-in-cube, and NURBS 3-D surface, were awarded FP status a long time ago. Were they ever featured on the Main Page? Are they coming up? Greg L (talk) 23:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The queue is extremely long right now, with wait times averaging over a year. To give you a sense of where we are, both of those images are in thumbnail group 24 and today's POTD just came out of group 19 (and I just started that! and there are still a bunch of insect photos that I haven't used yet to keep from flooding the Main Page with bugs!). howcheng {chat} 00:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
It appears the FPC denizens could afford to be pickier if the queue is that long. Greg L (talk) 01:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(TPS) Just to randomly pop in, I don't think it's that, it's that every week we consistently promote more then 7 images, which means we're creating a never-ending backlog of images. Solutions could be, like you said be picky enough so we never promote more then 7 and usually far less then 7 a week (not very desirable), or change POTD to be not a full 24h, but 6 hours like DYK, or just accept that we'll never display all the FP's on the front page. I think as the project grows it's expected we'll be promoting more featured content every week, which is a good thing. — raekyT 02:02, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


— raekyT 23:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The year-long queue to POTD[edit]

Howcheng, please see THIS thread where we are discussing if there is anything that can be done about the year-long queue of FPC candidates waiting in the queue to POTD. For many of us, half (or more) of the fun is in seeing our pictures on the Main Page for one day as a POTD. Waiting over a year for this is a buzz kill. But there are no ideal fixes. Your input is most welcome. Greg L (talk) 04:25, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jean Leon Gerome Ferris[edit]

RlevseTalk 18:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Double FP for single subject[edit]

Hi there. I just wanted to give you the heads-up on these FPC promotions. Two images were promoted of a single subject (although they're at different articles). I know it will be a while before they reach POTD, but I wanted you to know ahead of time so you can either spread them out or put them up together. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


I hope you don't mind, I wrote a caption for the POTD for Aug 21. Feel free to edit/format/rewrite as necessary. I'd love to help out in the future as much as I'm capable. Regards, Jujutacular talk 06:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Your quick image delete script[edit]

Your script doesn't appear to be removing the {{move to commons}} template.[3][4] --Rockfang (talk) 07:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Amelia Van Buren[edit]

FYI, I have a pretty solid collection of Eakins books - I own basically every book ever written about him, with about 5 exceptions that I currently have checked out from the library. I also have contact information for his primary biographers/expertisers - John Wilmdering, Kathy Foster, and William Innes Homer, who happens to be a friend of mine. If you need me to look something up, I'd be happy to. Raul654 (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't expect to work on that article much more, seeing as how there is little else written about her. I think the only real room for expansion is going to be what she thought about the painting, which you can try and tackle since you have the sources. What do you think? howcheng {chat} 18:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I think your best bet for getting that information would be in correspondence between Eakins and Van Buren. However, those letters are not easy to come by. William Innes Homer is in the process of writing such a book - he already published Eakins's 1866-1870 letters - but it probably won't come out for several more years. You want me to ask him for you? Raul654 (talk) 18:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Bill Homer called me a few minutes ago. While I was chatting, I asked him if he had any Amelia Van Buren letters, and he said no. But he also mentioned that the curators at the Phillips Collection had contacted him a few years ago. They were building up an exhibit around the Van Buren painting, and it seems likely that in the process they came into posession of such material (if it exists). You might want to try contact them. Raul654 (talk) 20:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


Tweaked this a bit. You know, I'm tempted to suggest you run it on April Fools' Day, with one additional sentence at the end. "Despite having naked, brawny men bound to a rock at the whim of an evil snake, this scene has not appeared in any Japanese hentai." Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)°

While I'm here, a picture I just nominated may well be a great April Fool's Day picture if promoted, though I suspect the article may well end up the AF TFA. J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused[edit]

Do you mind others updating this? I see you've already added Godwin, which was promoted on the assumption it wouldn't hit the main page, but there are some grisly WWII pictures that reviewers are liking, but not wanting POTD'd currently nommed. J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Andrew Mack[edit]

RlevseTalk 00:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


Won't be able to check these for a little over a week. If you have any that may need my input, please delay them until then =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Another possible FP for Unused[edit]

Just another heads up. A few people at this nomination mentioned that they felt the image shouldn't be used for POTD. Your call, of course, I just wanted to put it out there. Makeemlighter (talk) 17:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Amelia Van Buren[edit]

RlevseTalk 12:02, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

sept 11 potd[edit]

on kindle. please delay danl druce. was about to prepare much better copy. adam cuerden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Unscheduled. I had it on the 11th as the anniversary of its opening. I'll get back to it when it's its normal turn in the queue, then. howcheng {chat} 22:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Image of book cover Esther Bubley: On Assignment[edit]

I have added the full name of the monograph to the last paragraph of the article. The book is now out-of-print, and the cover image belongs to me. (I am Esther Bubley's niece, and I inherited her archive when she passed away.) If you need permission from the graphic designer to use the cover, I will contact her. Her name is Linda Florio Jeanbubley (talk) 02:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)jeanbubley (Jean Bubley

Sorry, but that's not really good enough. The book or the book cover itself has to be the subject of discussion in order for us to use it, unless you are willing to release it under a free license. Wikipedia does not operate under a "with permission" system. Think of it this way: there are over 2,000 photos by your aunt available at the Library of Congress, the vast majority of which are in the public domain and are therefore free for anyone to use. Why should we pick the usage-restricted image when there's so many others available without any restriction? If you can satisfactorily answer that question, then we can keep the book cover. howcheng {chat} 07:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Museum Photo[edit]

FYI - I deleted the photo of the Field Colombian Museum from the Field Museum article and corrected the photo description in Commons. The building pictured is now Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry NOT the Field Museum, which is a different building about five miles away. Alanscottwalker (talk) 03:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

OTRS and use of questionable copyright photo[edit]


The following image on Commons - File:Harry_Shum_Pictorial_For_Step_Up_2009_From_Myspace.jpg - is tagged with various missing permission and copyright information but is currently being used in two english articles. There is a claim that an email has been sent to OTRS. It was uploaded by a brand new user and I question if an OTRS request was sent in the first place and if something was sent, that this high quality professional photo would be granted. There is a free image File:Harry_Shum,_Jr._at_Serramonte_Center_2010-08-14_2.JPG available.

I am wondering your opinion, given the issues noted on the first image, should it be replaced on the articles while awaiting a decision on the copyright? Thanks. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I did a search through OTRS and was unable to find any tickets containing the text "Harry Shum". Among the tickets that have the word "Myspace" in them, there is no mention of this photo. This photo is most likely going to be deleted, so yes, it should be removed unless proven to be acceptable. howcheng {chat} 15:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

advice on possible OTRS role regarding address restricted sites[edit]

Hi Howcheng -- Hope you are well. I wonder if you could possibly chime in with information, response to OTRS-related questions posed in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Proposed Interim Guidelines (or at subheaders above or below). The issue being addressed is how wikipedia editors in WikiProject NRHP should be handling location info and photographs of address restricted (AR) places, such as archeological sites. At opposite extremes, there are cases where the NRHP has sites classified as AR which are completely publicly known, like as if the La Brea Tar Pits were classified that way, and cases where locations are truly secret except for an accidental release, which we can easily broadcast and cause a stampede of looters. We wonder if an OTRS-based process to handle correspondence confidentially about whether specific places are now effectively public or not, could be managed. You seem uniquely qualified to understand the issues and logistics, from what i know of your experience! I hope you might be able to help. Sincerely, --doncram (talk) 04:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thirty-six Views[edit]

Hi. I've left some thoughts at Talk:Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji (Hiroshige), and in the meantime have boldly reverted the removal, and instead copied across your great content from commons. Hopefully that all makes sense, at least as an option to consider. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Fort Ter-Waw vs Fort Ter-Wer[edit]

Dont know why it was deleted before but Fort Ter-Waw is the correct name for the fort on the Klamath River. A state landmark site has the misspelling of Fort Ter-Wer and is in error, probably the reason for the misspelled page name. . I am working on California in the Civil War and Gold Rush Era, so I can find lots of confirmation of this if needed. I am fixing this on all pages linked. Asiaticus (talk) 16:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Understood. You had done a copy-paste move, instead of actually moving the page (the latter preserves the edit history), which is what I did. howcheng {chat} 16:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Henry Sandham[edit]

RlevseTalk 00:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Janie Faith Roberts[edit]

Because of family sensitivity, I have removed contents of page Janie Faith Roberts. Could you please delete this page. Thank you. Schmausschmaus (talk)

Yet another possible FP for POTD unused list[edit]

Hi. I just wanted to point out this recently promoted FP. Several voters suggested that it may be too graphic to appear on the Main Page. As always, it's your call; I'm just informing you. By the way, I think you've done a great job lately putting some more recent promotions as POTD. The discussion about fixing the long POTD queue seemed to die without any solutions, but my decidedly unscientific observations lead me to believe you've solved the problem yourself by bumping some less prolific contributor's images to the top of the queue. Maybe that's just my imagination, though! Either way, keep up the good work. Cheers, Makeemlighter (talk) 07:07, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles Lakers[edit]

Hey Howcheng, I see that you've made a number of contributions to the Lakers' article. We're getting it ready for FA over here at the WP:NBA. There's also a to do list that you can add things to, comment on, or otherwise help with, and a few comments here. Your help or just general comments would be appreciated. Quadzilla99 (talk) 03:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

POTD 11/20/10[edit]

Hi there Howcheng. I wanted to thank you for notifying me of today's POTD of the International Space Station; while all I did was nominate it for FP status, I still feel very proud (of NASA, of the international community, of humanity ... the list goes on) to see this image on the front page. I would likely not have noticed if you hadn't bothered to notify me on my talk page, so again I thank you. Also, thanks for all the great work you do here at Wikipedia. It is very satisfying to see this incredible resource improving every day; when something is already such a "game-changing," knowledge-expanding, absolutely priceless invention, watching it get even smarter, comprehensive, and simply better is all the more gratifying. You deserve no small amount of credit for the continuing evolution here, in my not-so-humble opinion. :) Spiral5800 (talk) 20:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Tabby cat[edit]

Hi Howcheng,

I was finally able to get a decent "formal portrait" of a domestic cat, with a decent background. What do you think of this one to lead the article? (Sorry, I went to Commons first, by mistake). Regards, Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:05, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

( ) (talk) 21:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[edit]

Greetings. Hello. I am the User ( ), blocked, and of whom I had been falsely and wrongly accused, and improperly accused (The proper Sock-Puppetry Template was NOT used for example and for instance.), of being a so-called "Sock Puppet", and blocked, partly due to one's work, my work upon on ( ). Requests for Assistance. Thank you very much. (talk) 21:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't get involved with user disputes. howcheng {chat} 22:16, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

29 november : International hug a gamer day[edit]

Hi Howcheng, I added international hug a gamer day on the november 29 page, but you reverted to the old version, you mentionned that it had a popup issue, which I don't think is what I did. In any case, was it my entry or something else? If need be, I can give u a source (Facebook) and some news articles have been mentionning it on the web. Thanks for your feedback. Dragan22 (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, we don't have an article for this, and I would advise you not to create one based on a Facebook page. If you have a news article about it, you can try your hand at creating the article. Otherwise, it's not notable enough to appear in the encyclopedia. Regards, howcheng {chat} 00:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
after a moment of thought, indeed Facebook is maybe not the best to start a "real" international event. In any case, we'll see if this gets bigger or will it stay a internet meme. Thanks Dragan22 (talk) 15:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

POTD image protection[edit]


I've noticed a lot of POTD images are protected by MPUploadBot lately. This is better than no protection, but it still can leave the image unprotected on the Main Page for a short time. For example, on November 30, File:Royal Avenue Belfast2.jpg was protected over an hour after it went live on the Main Page. It would be great if you could upload the pictures from Commons temporarily (and tag with {{c-uploaded}}) to make sure we don't leave the Main Page vulnerable. Shubinator (talk) 15:51, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, MPUploadBot is usually pretty quick about it. I'm more likely to just protect it at Commons instead. howcheng {chat} 16:33, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
MPUploadBot is dependent on Wikipedia's server lag (among one or two other things). Pretty much the same bug that delays cascading protection will also delay MPUploadBot. Right, I forgot you're an admin at Commons. Thanks! Shubinator (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I think the problem lies in that sometimes the protected version is created too late. Since Main Page/Tomorrow happens to be protected, if the other template can be created early enough, that should give MPUploadBot enough time to protect it properly. Of course, that doesn't help when I forget to write the POTD blurb until the last minute. :) howcheng {chat} 16:41, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
True, though I cringe at the "should" in that sentence. I like things to be deterministic. We're all human :) Shubinator (talk) 16:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

POTD question[edit]

Hello a user that commented on this FP nomination Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ecchi saying that the image isn't appropriate for the main page if it is promoted and we wanted to know if this image was promoted could it be added to Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused? It would be appreciated if you would comment on the nomination about it. Spongie555 (talk) 02:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the issue. FWIW, J Milburn also says that he is "opposed to it appearing on the MP". I'm surprised to hear that you are leaning towards using it, especially given your previous comments on the issue, for example: "When I schedule the POTD, I go by what might be visible on the front page of a major newspaper." I can't imagine any major newspaper that would use that image on its front page. Firstly, I don't think it does anything to help Wikipedia present itself as a serious educational resource. Secondly, Wikipedia already has something of a reputation for being a "boy's club"—see Sue Gardner's recent blog post for example—and this would certainly perpetuate such a perception. Surely there are enough quality educational images on Wikipedia that we don't need to feature what basically amounts to cartoon porn. Kaldari (talk) 00:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I did note J Milburn's opposition in my post. If the definition of pornography is, "I can't explain it, but I know it when I see it," then I would have to disagree that this amounts to "cartoon porn". I do agree that it's very close to the line of what is and what's not acceptable. I just happen to think that it falls on the side opposite of where you think it is. Newspapers will have women in bikinis on the front page, this isn't that much different, and I think that because this is a cartoon, it doesn't strike the same kind of chord in people that a real photo would. At least it doesn't for me. I may also be influenced by having lived in Japan for several years. howcheng {chat} 02:52, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
A girl in completely see-through clothing isn't more provocative than a person in a bikini? I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that. The image is blatantly designed to be sexually gratifying (as the article states). A photograph of someone in a bikini is quite different in my opinion (although I'm sure it would depend on the photograph). Kaldari (talk) 03:14, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Dec. 6 POTD misidentification[edit]

Hi. I've notified the author, but this photo is not a Tetraloniella - it is a female in the genus Anthophora, and belongs in a different tribe (not the tribe Eucerini). It's about the same level of taxonomic error as calling a dove a pigeon, though it does require some level of expertise to distinguish them. Dyanega (talk) 17:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I've taken care of it. howcheng {chat} 19:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Please remove all my images from the Queue[edit]

Thanks to attempting to step in and deal with a racist troll on commons doing nothing but put a target on my back, I regret having ever contributed anything to Wikipedia. Please do not put my images from the main page, indeed, I'll be asking for them to be removed from the FP archive. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:51, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. However, I am going to keep anything that is already scheduled where it is. I also don't know how much success you will have getting the remainder delisted. howcheng {chat} 02:54, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


Ah, I didn't realise images were selected in order of when they were promoted :-/ Feel free to change it. Thanks, wackywace 19:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


Hello, I have a featured picture (File:Junior at Darlington edit.jpg) that I would like to be featured on a certain date, February 20, 2011. Royalbroil suggested it to me earlier today, and I agreed. I would rather it be on this date because it is a special date, the 2011 Daytona 500 will be held. I hope you can schedule it in. I couldn't find a nominations page, unless it was the talk page. Thanks and happy editing. --Nascar1996 11:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I added the first template to the image, but when I wanted to create the Month page, that template didn't show up. --Nascar1996 11:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I hope you can schedule it for that day. Thanks. Nascar1996 02:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
That sounds great. Will do. howcheng {chat} 18:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
What happened? Nascar1996 00:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah, sorry. Completely forgot about it. Should have done it right when you asked. Sorry about that. howcheng {chat} 00:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Its okay. I figured you forgot about it. I believe I asked to early. Nascar1996 00:57, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

100 famous views of Edo[edit]

Hi! What order (i.e. what source) did you use for the prints in commons:One Hundred Famous Views of Edo? I am using the Taschen edition of "One Hundred Famous Views of Edo" which is based on the series of the Ota Memorial Museum to create the table in One Hundred Famous Views of Edo. While most prints have the same numbers as in your table, there are some differences particularly for the summer prints (no. 43 to 72). bamse (talk) 10:36, 19 December 2010 (UTC) One more question concerning your table: the "locations" are the location of the main subject(s), not of the viewpoint, correct? bamse (talk) 10:38, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe I went in order of prints as listed on the table of contents, so that would be the same as [5] (although it's been a few months, so I could be wrong). I remember there were differences in ordering when compared to the Brooklyn Museum exhibit. And yes, the locations are of the subjects, not the viewpoints. That might be a useful thing to add, if you want to take care of it. howcheng {chat} 18:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Hm, the table of contents, honestly I can't read most of it. As far as I understand after reading a bit around, the order of your table is essentially based on this book while my table is the same as that of the Brooklyn Museum which is the original order and the one in the toc. To make sure I asked at the wikiproject Japan for help. Please reply there if you are sure about the reading of the toc. bamse (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah I couldn't read most of it either, but I could make out enough characters here and there to confirm the order was the same as howcheng {chat} 23:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Could the difference in order be due to the fact that there are (roughly) two lines of titles in each toc box? One could read: (i) first line -> second line or (ii) first title of first line -> first title of second line -> second title of first line -> second titleof second line -> ... !? bamse (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

What do you think...[edit]

I saw you put the 1777 Christmas Island thing back on OTD for today. Tomorrow, there's another entry for Christmas Island, except it's a completely different year (1643) and island. How much confusion do you think that's going to cause? If you think that's a little too weird, I'll swap the 1643 guy out (or you can, take your pick). howcheng {chat} 02:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Howcheng, for reminding me about Christmas Island already scheduled for use tomorrow. I just wanted something quickly for MainPage balance. It's now taken off today's SA template, and replaced by the end of the War of 1812 in 1814. Thanks, again. --PFHLai (talk) 04:16, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Actually it was a different Christmas Island. You put on Kiribati, which is an independent country, and I had on Christmas Island, which is a territory of Australia. I was just thinking that people would see "Christmas Island" on twice and get confused. howcheng {chat} 08:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Oh, they are not the same? Thank you for pointing them out to me. I shoud've paid more attention.
I wouldn't worry about people getting confused. As long as the blurb on MainPage is clear which "Christmas Island" we are referring to, it's alright. Maybe we should keep both on. This may get people intrigued enough to click. :-) Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 11:28, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Bot malfunction[edit]

Hi, The MPUploadBot keeps deleting the image page of one of my images citing that it no longer appears on the main page despite the fact that the page has the FP templates. Just thought I would inform you --Muhammad(talk) 17:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Please let User:X! know, since he maintains that bot. I've seen that happen before, though, and usually all you have to do is wait a few days before putting the image description page back. howcheng {chat} 17:49, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Salmonlarvakils.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Salmonlarvakils.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kelly hi! 03:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Turning Ten[edit]

On Saturday January 15, 2011, Wikipedia will turn 10 years and people all over the globe will be celebrating Wikipedia on that day. No event is currently planned for Orange County Wikipedians, so I am leaving a message with some of the currently involved editors listed in "Wikipedians in Orange County, California" & "Wikipedians in Southern California" to see if we might want to meet on that day, lunch, dinner, group photo or other ideas welcomed? I will start a "Turning Ten" discussion thread on my Talk page to see if any interest can be planned for and determined. I am located in Old Towne Orange off the circle.Tinkermen (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Republic Day[edit]

Dear Howcheng, I checked your edit regarding Serbian Republic Day in January 9 stating that Bosnia doesn't celebrate Republic Day anymore. Could you check whether it is true or not, because my only source is Republic Day in which it is stated that Serbia and Bosnia celebrated this day. You probably could edit that page and remove any mistake, and add an information referring to when did the holiday is not celebrated anymore. Sometimes the Serbian and Bosnian celebrations can be a little bit confusing to me. Thanks. --Rochelimit (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I checked Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina (the country), and Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (the state), and Jan 9 is only significant to the first one. I think the confusion you have is that Republika Srpska is not the same as Serbia -- it is a state (along with Federation of B&H) within the country of B&H. So on Republic Day, where it says "Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina", that's like saying, "California, United States". Does that make sense? howcheng {chat} 00:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Galilean moons and January 7[edit]

Hi Howcheng. I noticed Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/January 7 lists the discovery of Io (moon), Europa (moon), and Callisto (moon). Ganymede (moon) isn't listed, presumably because January 7 said it wasn't discovered until the 13th (at least until I changed it). That isn't quite right however, see Talk:January 7. Essentially the three moons Galileo saw were Ganymede, Callisto, and a combination of Io and Europa. He was able to resolve Io and Europa the next day, which is why the discovery date for those two is listed as Jan 8th, while the other two are Jan 7th (see here). I didn't notice this until too late though, wasn't around yesterday. I'm not sure what the best way to fix the OTD entry is. What do you think? Cheers. Winston365 (talk) 03:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this. I borrowed some of your wording for the entry on January 7. Much better than my clumsy attempt. ;) Winston365 (talk) 07:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Space picture coming[edit]

An FP candidate, Tracy Caldwell Dyson in Cupola ISS, is coming your way. I’ve motioned there that we offer the suggestion to you that you consider jumping that picture in the queue so it is featured in the next month or two. My motion got one support and one oppose (2:1 in support) and then the issue got lost. It’s an idea to consider; it’s an amazing, one-of-a-kind picture. Greg L (talk) 03:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Anniversary TFP[edit]

Just wondering did you decide to stick with the Globe Skimmer picture? Jimbo Wales? My proposal? Sparky (RIP)? Nil Einne (talk) 23:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Busy at work. I'll switch to Jimbo, I think. howcheng {chat} 00:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
If Jimbo is on Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused for WP:SELF, wouldn't putting him up today be like WP:SELFx2? File:Mike Godwin June08 B recrop 5 to 7.jpg would be a nod to the 10th anniversary without being too bad as far as SELF is concerned. That said, I don't particularly mind either way. Makeemlighter (talk) 00:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
True, but today seems like a valid day to break WP:SELF. howcheng {chat} 00:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
As fun as MM would have been on the main page (although I doubt I would have put her myself if I was in charge, particularly not after visiting JW's page and coming across User talk:Jimbo Wales#Attracting more female editors) I have to agree JW is probably the best bet. Considering he's the (co)founder and all IMHO far better then say MG considering he wasn't associated with wikipedia 10 years ago and isn't really now. Nil Einne (talk) 00:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, JW would definitely be more appropriate. I just wanted to toss another suggestion out there and serve as devil's advocate. Makeemlighter (talk) 00:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Red-capped Plover FPs[edit]

Hi. We have two recently promoted FPs (non-breeding plumage and breeding plumage). The nominator/creator of both, JJ Harrison, has recommended showing them together when it comes to POTD. I wasn't sure if there was a good place to note this, so I just wanted to leave you a note here. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, if they're right next to each other in the thumbnails page, I'll be able to figure that out. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 03:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
They are now. :) Makeemlighter (talk) 03:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Mantra-Rock Dance poster[edit]

Howcheng, I'm just bringing to your notice that January 29, 2011 is the 44th anniversary of Mantra-Rock Dance, a historically significant event that the recently promoted Mantra-Rock Dance poster is the sole extant illustration for. The picture also serves to illustrate Janis Joplin, Allen Ginsberg and four more related articles on EnWiki. Given this fact (apart from the likelihood that FPs of this category are underrepresented on POTD), I thought that you might decide to give the picture some extra consideration. And yes, this is my first FP. :) Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 07:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I went ahead and created Template:POTD/2011-01-29. I hope it satisfies WP:POTD/G. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 02:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
You know, since it just got promoted, I was thinking of pushing it back one year for the 45th anniversary, but I suppose this year will be fine as well. howcheng {chat} 02:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. May I rely on your expertise for tweaking the blurb, as I've never written one before? Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 03:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng. Thanks again for choosing the image for POTD. I wonder if the {{picture of the day|2011-01-29}} template is meant to be placed on its page for future reference. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 02:17, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Never mind, I did it myself as it stopped being protected. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 08:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Refimprove tag on São Paulo article[edit]

Merry meet! I was just curious about the "Refimprove" tag you placed on São Paulo. The article has 122 references. Is there something I am missing? I removed the tag since the references are voluminous and well-rounded. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 06:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

122 may seem like a lot, but there are whole swaths of text that are uncited. For easier understanding, I've marked two sections that are seriously lacking in references. howcheng {chat} 07:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Train station with train and coal depot by Gustave Le Gray1.jpg[edit]

This picture is featured as POTD for Jan 25, 2011. However it is way too dark to observe much detail. I experimented with lightening it with Photoshop and consequently observed a lot of new interesting detail. In its present condition it is virtually useless. Who can tell what it depicts? I believe that someone with a sophisticated photo editor (that can preserve metadata) should lighten it up. Roesser (talk) 05:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Whistler Selbstporträt.jpg[edit]

Whistler Selbstporträt.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Whistler Selbstporträt.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. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/February 3[edit]

In this edit, you added a disambiguation page to Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/February 3. Please correct it, and add {{OnThisDay}} to that article's talk page using oldid 411828780. Thanks. Anomie 01:05, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was deliberate, because Chinese New Year and Tet have maintenance tags that prevent them from being listed, and it seemed odd to only include Korean New Year. Lunar New Year was the best compromise I could think of. howcheng {chat} 01:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't know whether a dab passes WP:OTD#Criteria for listing items on this set of pages #7, but the main reason I said anything is that the bot that automatically updates {{OnThisDay}} won't tag dabs. Anomie 02:11, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

April Fools POTD[edit]

FYI, A decent choice was promoted: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Ugly Duchess. Jujutacular talk 20:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

USS Yorktown collision[edit]

I noticed that the Yorktown collision photo went up the other day, but I missed it being on the mainpage since I was looking for the day or day before message informing me that the image would go up. I feel bad since I do try and make a point to look at the main page on days when content I had a hand in promoting goes up (I admit its selfish, but I take a quite pride in seeing stuff I worked on the mainpage so I try to make a point to come here and observe it). I just wanted to ask if messages were no longer being sent to users who photographic material was set to be up on the main page in the next few days. TomStar81 (Talk) 10:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that. You know what happened was that someone else wrote the initial caption, so since I was not doing it, I didn't go through my usual checklist of steps to do, and that's how the user notification got skipped. howcheng {chat} 17:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
I see. Thanks for the reply. TomStar81 (Talk) 18:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Main page[edit]

Dear Howcheng,

A while ago we discussed the possibility of having a second featured picture on the main page (say), MTuThFSa, with a Featured sound replacing it on Wednesdays and Sundays. There is now a lot of will for this to happen at WT:Featured sound candidates, and I believe it should be possible to move the proposal forwards.

However, I need to check a few things with you:

1. Do you still support this proposal? 2. Is the number of FPs being created high enough to allow this proposal (it's likely the FS days can increase once it gets more visibility, though) 3. Any other thoughts?

There are currently 155 featured sounds, which, thanks to some being long, symphonic works, equals 235 files. This gives us between one and a half and two years of a buffer at two a week, which should be ample for now. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

That sounds fine to me. The backlog for FPs is still over a year long. howcheng {chat} 17:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Right. I've made the proposal. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

KeepLocal image template[edit]

Hi Howcheng, I'm writing to everyone who commented (for or against) on the last deletion debate regarding the Keeplocal image template. This has been proposed for deletion again, and your input would be welcome. See Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_20#Template:KeepLocal. Many thanks, SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 23:16, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


Hi Howcheng, when restoring an older version of T:ITN for main page balance, please do not remove (or please remember to restore) any newer posts that may have been added, as you appear to have accidentally done today with Libya. Best, StrPby (talk) 02:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

??? How'd I do that?? That's weird. Ohhh, I must have copied the old item from the diff when it got removed and then went straight to edit from there instead of going back to the latest version. D'oh! Sorry about that. Thanks for cleaning up after me. howcheng {chat} 04:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank You![edit]

Treble Clef Barnstar.png The Featured Sound Main Page Proposal Voter Barnstar
I was truly humbled by the overwhelming community support for the recent proposal to place featured sounds on the main page. The proposal closed on Tuesday with 57 people in support and only 2 in opposition.

It should take a few weeks for everything to get coded and tested, and once that is done the community will be presented with a mock up to assess on aesthetic appeal.

Finally, I invite all of you to participate in the featured sounds process itself. Whether you're a performer, an uploader, or just come across a sound file you find top quality, and that meets the featured sound criteria, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Featured sounds is also looking for people to help assess candidates (also at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates.)

Thanks again for such a strong showing of support, and I hope to see you at featured sounds in the future.
Sven Manguard Wha?
Adam Cuerden (talk)
(X! · talk)

The man who couldn't please everyone POTD[edit]

I'm pleased to tell you that, as promised, the Walter Crane illustration is now on display in the article The miller, his son and the donkey. I'm sorry this has taken so long. A colleague created the article in the end. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 08:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


Hi Howcheng. This is probably a stupid question, but do you think that this image could become a featured picture? I really like the image, but I'm not sure exactly what reviewers would think. I read the guidelines, but there was some stuff there I wasn't sure about since I don't know a lot of the technical stuff. Thanks in advance for your time!-RHM22 (talk) 04:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

HAve you read the featured picture criteria yet? Unfortunately, because this image is only 600x900 pixels in size, it fails #2. Sorry. howcheng {chat} 16:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks! I read the criteria, but I wasn't sure exactly how many pixels the image is.-RHM22 (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Resuse Request[edit]

Hello Howard! I would like to get permission from you to reuse this image here; I work for a Chicago based television show, and we are showcasing an Andy Warhol collector and would like to utilize this image in the story piece! If you woould like to grant us permission, please include how you would like to be credited in the Thank-yous! If you have any questions, please contact me at [redacted]

Thank you, and I look forward to hearing from you!

Leah (talk) 20:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)


Thanks for your comments on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 5 re the ZX81 article. I put a lot of work into getting it sorted out for the March 5 anniversary, so it would be great to see it in the selected anniversaries list on that date. :-) Prioryman (talk) 23:09, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Chopin polonaise Op. 53.jpg[edit]

Could you hold this back slightly? I think I can get a FS of it, which'd make for good synergy. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'm not even close to scheduling this one yet. howcheng {chat} 16:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Robert Restaino[edit]

Please consider changing this from a Proposed deletion to an Articles for deletion? I think there needs to be some discussion about it beyond the location of its talk page. Sincerely, Kingturtle = (talk) 21:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


I just noticed that, on Friday, you posted a request for more references in the "History" section of the article about C-SPAN. Not only do I agree, but it so happens that earlier the same day I posted a request on the C-SPAN discussion page asking for someone to review my proposed comprehensive rewrite, which I spent several weeks researching and writing. Not only does it provide reliable sources for the network's history, it also builds out that history into a considerably more complete article. The reason I haven't moved it over directly is because I have an organizational relationship to C-SPAN, and wish to be careful about possible COI issues. Handy links:

If you prefer my version to the one that currently exists, I encourage you to move it over, and if you have any suggestions for continued improvement I am all ears. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 13:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi! Thanks for letting me know about Template:POTD/2011-03-23. I am quite excited! I basically like the text. Just one minor nitpick. Writing "hanging scroll by Kanō Masanobu" sounds to me like "framed painting by Vincent van Gogh". Maybe we could replace "hanging scroll"->"painting mounted as hanging scroll" or something like it? bamse (talk) 21:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Nominate a Picture[edit]

Per this. How difficult would it be to add such a link to POTD? ~~

April 4 OTD switch[edit]

As I'm sure you noticed now (rather than before), the Harrison article is TFA, and there was the very odd duplication of not only him, but his photo on the Main Page. I added the Walpole article instead, but I'm beginning to wonder if the King assassination should be put there instead. The Walpole article seems quite poor, not sure if too poor for OTD standards given it was under "Eligible". -- tariqabjotu 00:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

To clarify, if it wasn't obvious, I meant "poor" in terms of referencing. -- tariqabjotu 00:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, Walpole should be moved out. Thanks for catching that. howcheng {chat} 00:33, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Your use of rollback[edit]

Hi, as a long-time administrator, you should know not to use rollback when you're not dealing with vandalism. I've made specific requests for page numbers, which are legitimate maintenance requests. Instead of doing that, why don't you provide the page numbers instead? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

You're asking for page numbers for web citations. Can't provide page numbers for web citations. Firsfron of Ronchester 16:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Have you even seen the reference? It's a PDF of chapters from a book. It has page numbers. Please don't make me look through all 20 pages of the PDF to try and find the citation. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Howcheng, I have seen the reference. I'm the one who added it, after all. When you randomly tag articles with a note that says "This article cites its sources but does not provide page references." when there are clearly page references, you are not improving the article. Fly-by tagging is not appreciated. Thank goodness you reverted that goofy note. As far as having to "look through 20 pages of text" to try to find the citation for "DuMont's latter-day obscurity has prompted at least one notable TV historian to refer to it as the "Forgotten Network"", you wouldn't have to dig at all: it is, after all, the title of the book! But you will, of course, have your way, and now I must labor to repair the damage you've done to the article with your random tagging spree, requesting "maintenance" for an article which didn't require any. Firsfron of Ronchester 21:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I didn't notice that you stuck your page numbers in the middle of your references at first (most people do them at the end), so that's why I reverted myself, but I consider that I went out of my way to put {{pn}} in the appropriate spots. If you look at my contributions to see what I'm doing, I'm looking for suitable articles to put add to the subpages of Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries. I am literally looking through a good 50-100 articles for each day. I'm sorry you consider that "fly-by" but I really don't have that much time to devote to reading long articles and request specific citations. I was trying to work in the April 15, 1946, date that's shown on April 15 (i.e., I was considering adding it to Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/April 15) and which is in the cited PDF (that I found via Google). Then I noticed that the book citation was already in the article, and that's when I noticed that you didn't cite the page numbers. I would have done it myself had I more time. howcheng {chat} 22:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Help with requesting a photo[edit]

Hi, a user on Tumblr posted a photo of herself with a celebrity. I asked her for permission to using the photo (cropping it so it would only be the celeb) and she said yes. What else do I need to do before the image can be used on Wikipedia? --DrBat (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

The person needs to release it under a free license. It's best you have her read and agree to the terms at WP:CONSENT. Good luck! howcheng {chat} 16:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Does she need to send an e-mail to permissions-commons‐at‐ How do I show that she agreed to it? --DrBat (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that would be the normal procedure. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 23:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)