You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.
Hi Dger; I see that you are relatively new and have been contributing photographs of animals. One of our bird experts corrected the identification of your image of a house finch that was uploaded as a purple finch. The two species are very similar and difficult for non-experts to distinguish. It has been renamed File:Carpodacus_mexicanus_Ottawa.jpg. Thank you for your contributions. Walter Siegmund(talk)04:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I recently came across your beautiful File:Side-striped Jackal, Sarengeti.jpg. What concerns me is that the specimen shown looks to me like a golden jackal than a side striped jackal. I am not an expert, but please check the golden jackal page. To me, the animals in that article bear much more resemblance to your image than does the one in the SSJ infobox picture.
Regards
Mariomassone (talk) 21:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know you added incomplete {{Delete}} templates to the above two images. Your reason appears to be that you uploaded correctly named duplicate images. If this is the case instead of {{Delete}} you want to add the {{bad name|correctly named image}} template. You should change the {{Delete}} templates on these two images to {{bad name|correctly named image}} templates providing the correctly names images. Then the incorrectly named images can be speedy deleted. Let me know if you have any questions. --Captain-tucker (talk) 01:31, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dger. I noticed this image you uploaded on the Coppermine River article on Wikipedia and I was wondering if you know the rock in this image is volcanic. The Coppermine River lies in an area where extensive flood basalt volcanism occurred about 1,267 million years ago, but I am also not sure if this part of the river the image was taken lies in the volcanic zone. So it would be nice to know if the rock in this image is volcanic or not. Thanks. Black Tusk (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I am looking for some pics for an article I am expanding on Wikipedia called the Mackenzie Large Igneous Province, but currently I only have maps to add in the article. Something like basalt pics would be nice to add. Black Tusk (talk) 20:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just a brief note to let you know that I've corrected the identification of this. Remaining species from the genus similar, but C. crassum is the only one found in the E. Pacific (remaining are Indo-Pacific or Atlantic). I presume Manuel Antonio Park = Manuel Antonio National Park. Regards, 62.107.237.7219:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do have another image of the insect and no I am not certain that it is an en:Asian Longhorned Beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis). I uploaded here: Can you identify it? Dger 27 jan 2010 04:19 (CET)
Hi Dger, I took the liberty of moving your answer here as the page you found for posting it was a "redirect" (I'll correct the links on my talk page here if those were the cause). Also, it keeps the discussion centralized. I don't have an ID just now, other than that I'm sure it's not A. glabripennis, I'll have a seceond look later today, without promises however as those are truly not my field. Thanks for the second though, cheers :o) Pudding4brains (talk) 10:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's a much better option :o) I had a quick look, but other than recognizing this was not A.glab. I'd better keep quiet on those "overseas" beasties :o| If you're not 100% certain it may be a good idea to get confirmation from people who know the regional Longhorns better. I for one would not be able to exclude say, Neacanthocinus obsoletus and maybe some others with any certainty. But cheers for picking up the ball! (Pudding4brains [User talk:Pudding4brains|talk]]) 17:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for detecting this problem. I had lost track of this particular image after I discovered its correct species name. I have requested a change in the filename. It usually takes a few days for the change to take effect. Dger (talk) 22:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. While it is great that you have taken and uploaded a better image of this monument, you should never upload over an existing image unless it is the exact same image (often with some modifications). An image taken (in this case) two months later, even if it is the same subject, should be uploaded separately. I reverted your changes to the Feb 2010 image, and uploaded your improved April 2010 image separately. You will need to update the en-wiki article separately if you want it to use the more recent photograph. Hope that helps. Regards, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I don't agree. These are pictures of a statue. It doesn't change from month to month. I took both pictures and I have elected to remove a poor image and replace it with a better image. I don't see a significant problem here. Cheers. Dger (talk) 22:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're not supposed to upload one image over a different image. It doesn't matter if they are of the same subject. And the April 2010 image has already been uploaded separately. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 02:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
In the badname template is states in the first two lines:
This template has an incorrect name.
Error: Please specify the correctly named image.
I have intrepreted this to mean the file should be renamed. I did specify the new name. I have done this before and incorrectly named files were renamed (at least by other editors). I have now tried the rename template. I hope that works. Dger (talk) 03:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you said "Please specify the correctly named image."
It doesn't read "Please specify the correct name."
There's no micrometer tolerance of interpretation left. Especially when taking the third line into consideration. The {{Rename}}-tag does exactly what you want. Little hint: This template should go first in the file description otherwise one might overlook it ... Regards axpdeHello!15:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 01:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Dger - thought you might like to know, your photo here shows a Grey-breasted Spurfowl, not a Red-necked Spurfowl as you'd labelled it; note the black (not red) legs and rufous (not brown) mantle. Quite a lot rarer - Serengeti is one of few places it occurs. I've renamed the file with the new identity. - MPF (talk) 17:46, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dger, I went ahead and uploaded another file to commons based on your (excellent) map. All I did was slightly crop northern Canada: it made the image fit a little nicer in the article. Thank you so much!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:36, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've borrowed your image of the Crimson Rosella to be a logo for a new open-source software project I am developing called "Rosella". The webpage is HERE. I've put some attribution at the bottom of the page including your name and a link to the image on commons where I found it. Please let me know if this is okay for you, and if you would like to see your work attributed in any other way.
I just wanted to let you know that I used a photo of yours on a petition to save freshwater turtles. I tried to link you to it, but my comment got filtered and rejected, but if you google "Lynn Hamilton" and "Save Georgia's freshwater turtles!" you can probably find it.
I add pictures such as yours to one of the following major sections of my site:
1. World section - contains information and over 10,000 images of every world country and territory. Link at:
http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/index.htm
3. English section - "Mel and Wes" lessons in conversation format. Stories are located in various USA states and world countries such as China, England, Germany, Japan, Mexico and Thailand. Each lesson has many slang terms and idioms, which I link to my Slang Dictionary. This eventually will have over 5,000 terms. Currently, it has about 3,000 slang and idioms. I regularly add new lessons and slang terms. Link at:
http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/lessons/index.htm
Slang Dictionary link at:
http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/slang/Eslang_a.htm
Prior to retirement, I taught English at several private and public universities in the United States.
Please share this free site with your friends. I hope all will enjoy the pictures and find the English information useful. Sincerely,
Duane Hurst in Utah, USA
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Thanks for uploading File:Dave Winter, head shot.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.
Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).
The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Dave Winter, head shot.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.
The Wikimedia Commons (this website) only hosts media files with a realistic educational purpose and that can be used for any purpose, including:
use in any work, regardless of content
creation of derivative works
commercial use
free distribution
See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons, and Commons:Image casebook for some specific examples. Some other Wikimedia projects have different licensing policies. For example, the English Wikipedia allows fair use of sounds and photographs. This is not the case on Wikimedia Commons; "fair use" materials are not acceptable here.
Please make sure that you only upload educational content you have created yourself, those which are out of copyright, or those for which you have the required permission for the work to be used in all the ways described above. Please note that derivative works of copyrighted material are also considered copyrighted. Again, please read through Commons:Licensing, which is quite crucial, to understanding how Wikimedia Commons works. Thanks for your contribution, and please do leave me a message if you have further questions.
Hi. I see that you recently changed the ID of a photo you had posted, from Chlorion aerarium, to Sphex pensylvanicus. it is neither of these. It is Chalybion californicum, the "blue mud wasp", a widespread predator on widow spiders. It can be easily told from Sphex by the lack of the tarsal "rake" which Sphex species use to dig in the soil. You might want to rename the file yet again, I'm afraid. Dyanega (talk) 00:26, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Museum would like to obtain your permission to reproduce the work(s) mentioned above for the following purposes; in an interactive timeline on computer station(s) in the exhibition and on its Website.
If there is any cost associated with acquiring the high resolution digital file(s) (8 x 10 @ 300dpi) and/or any cost to use the work(s) in the context of the project, please provide us the total fees and, if possible, the detail rate per use.
Best regards,
M. / Mr. Dominique Dufour
Agent aux actifs numériques, Salle de l’histoire canadienne
Musée canadien de l’histoire
Digital Assets Officer, Canadian History Hall
Canadian Museum of History
100, rue Laurier Street, Gatineau QC K1A 0M8
Yes you are free to use the image. All that I request is the my name be attributed somewhere. Please use D. Gordon E. Robertson. There is no fee required. Dger (talk) 16:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
Thanks for your comment but I don't believe you are correct. This specimen looks to be a little lighter than a pristine specimen but the markings do not resemble any Dixeia I have examined. If you have Steve Woodhall's book, check page 150 4B. The reference is on the article's page. Cheers. Dger (talk) 04:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dger, I don't have this book, but your butterfly clearly has the wing shape and patterns of a Pieridae, I don't understand how you can see a Lachnocnema here. You can also compare the head and the legs.
I have been requested by reviewers to include a picture of hemlock looper in a paper I have written on the risk of the pest to Ireland. I would like to use your image, please. Is there any particular way you would like to be cited as the image owner (e.g. would you like an affiliation included)? I will make sure copies of the paper are open access. M G Tuffen (talk) 10:37, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dger, I just want to inform you that this butterfly, which you labelled as Celastrina serotina, cannot actually be a Celastrina (for instance the black margin doesn't match). Have you seen the underside? A good candidate would be Glaucopsyche lygdamus. --LamBoet (talk) 05:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dger. The Vindula butterfly picture you took is very beautiful. Thank you for posting it. I find it quite remarkable. Best wishes!
Tavilis (talk) 12:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I just wanted to let you know that the photo you uploaded and identified as Platycerium bifurcatum is actually the very similar species Platycerium hillii. The main differences are:
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
First steps tutorial
Getting help
Goodies, tips, and tricks
Made a mistake?
2.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
→ Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 03:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
