User talk:Ipoellet

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Ipoellet!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). 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. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 03:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Good eye! I'm afraid that I've come across my photos in a variety of places out on the web without attribution. C'est la vie. Perhaps I should care more about it, but I really don't. Nonetheless, I might contact them to let them know that I know they're using my photo without attribution just to see if anything happens. Thanks for looking out for me. --Sanfranman59 (talk) 01:18, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 20:07, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Catrinas 2.jpg

Hi, File:Catrinas 2.jpg was the picture of the day of 2008-10-16. I think it shouldn't be selected as picture of the day of 2013-11-01. Please check. --Mywood (talk) 15:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The new picture is OK. Since i have been working on translating of picture of the day to Chinese for 6 years, I knew almost all featured pictures. -)Small hint: If you choose one picture as picture of day, please add template "picture of day" to the description of the picture. It will be easier to check later. --Mywood (talk) 08:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States

Dear Ipoellet,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States. The images you uploaded will help illustrate Wikipedia articles on historic sites in the United States. We are delighted to share the winning images and our top 10 finalists with you.

Click here to read our press release and view the winning submissions »

We invite you to continue uploading images to Wikimedia Commons and we hope you will return for Wiki Loves Monuments again in September 2014. For more information about Wikimedia Commons, please visit our welcome page. For more information about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, please click here. Once again, thank you for sharing your images and participating in our contest.

—

User:Mono

Organizing Team

Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States

---

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey. Dear Ipoellet, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place. You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help. To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

---

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey! Dear Ipoellet, Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests! In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days. And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy! Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

NRHP Oregon map

Morning, Just saw the message about the NRHP Oregon map typo. Have fixed it and uploaded new version. Thanks for the heads up! 25or6to4 (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

OpenStreetMap map

Is there a how-to or tool for transferring OpenStreetMap maps or screenshots to Commons? I am interested in having maps for Portland's neighborhoods and parks, etc. -Another Believer (talk) 08:19, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Not really, unfortunately. I had been doing it a very clunky way:

• Within OSM, spiff up the area I wanted to put on the Commons map. (Add buildings, straighten roads, etc.)
• In OSM, zoom in to max or close thereto (because I wanted high detail for the HDs, though for neighborhoods you might not want to go in that close), click the "Share" button on the right, check the "Set custom dimensions" box, drag the box over the area you want, and click "Download". The download often fails (server load at OSM, I think), so you might have to go through these steps several times.
• Then I would open the PNG locally in a graphics editing app (I just used Windows Paint - there's obvious space for improvement there) and add in all my special border lines, shading, labels, etc.

However, I recently took a GIS class, which got me thinking about better ways to do the cartography using ArcGIS and publicly available datasets. I'm probably going to tackle NW PDX / Alphabet HD that way sometime soon.

Some time back, you invited me to do map some neighborhoods, and I never really responded. I apologize for that - it was discourteous of me. Fact is, limited time doesn't allow me to do much or any more than I already am. But thank you for the implied compliment. Hope this helps. — Ipoellet (talk) f.k.a. Werewombat 17:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. This sounds a little convoluted, but I might give it a shot some time. No need to apologize--I totally understand. And yes, please interpret my comments as compliments. You do great work! Thanks again, -Another Believer (talk) 18:29, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Named-after category

Hello, I'm wondering if you know of a particular policy or consensus regarding categorization based on naming, as with the example of Category:Oswald West State Park and Category:Oswald West. Most, but not all, of the categories in Category:Parks named after people are in the form of "Category:Parks named after NAME". I am not mainly asking this to contest your edit, but to know if this is a rule I should keep an eye out for and start de-categorizing things named after people which don't have any other connection to them. djr13 (talk) 01:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

No, I don't actually know of a specific rule addressing this situation. The named-after situation doesn't specifically fit under any of the relations described in Commons:Categories#Types of reflected relations, but I don't think that section is intended to be exhaustive. Beyond that I was just going on my personally feeling that a place named in honor of someone is not a substantive relationship, unless there's some more specific association between the two (e.g. if West had had a hand in establishing the park, if he had a home there, etc.). On the other hand, it makes gut sense to me that if a person had several places named after him/her, then they could be gathered into a category, and that category would be attached to the person's own category. However I'm not able to argue why this idea should apply to instances of several places but not instances of one place, so if you feel it makes sense to categorize the state park under Category:Oswald West, then go ahead and re-do it. One question to consider, however, is if the categorization should go the other way around: i.e. categorize Category:Oswald West under Category:Oswald West State Park. Anyhow, I wouldn't suggest going on a de-categorizing campaign based just on my gut. — Ipoellet (talk) 19:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Category:Boundary maps of United States historic districts

Hi, Ipoellet. The reason I took the NRHP categories off of this category is that this category name does not specify NRHP. Because it doesn't specify that, it could contain boundary maps of any US historic district. Even if it doesn't have any now, it could in the future. If you want a category that's only for NRHP districts, you could either change the name of this one to specify NRHP, or make a new category that specifies that. I am re-doing the change I made. Please don't undo it again unless you change the category name. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The problem with your action is that you have completely removed the category from the NRHP category paths, even though the overwhelming majority of the contents belong in those paths - i.e. you've diminished the information available in the category structure. If it's important to you to make the distinction between NRHP and non-NRHP historic districts, then what you've done is only half the job. The second half is to create a sub-category for NRHP-listed districts that is in the NRHP category paths, then move all the NRHP-related contents down to the new category. Either you need to finish the job, or a revert is appropriate. — Ipoellet (talk) 06:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I see your point. I will look at all the entries and make sure this is addressed. For subcategories (or even the main category) where all the entries are on the NRHP, I might rename the category rather than create NRHP subcategories. Thanks for pointing this out. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe I have addressed this issue. I found one file that was for a historic district that did not appear to be on the NRHP. That was File:Madison Square North Historic District map.jpg. Let me know if you see any issues with the way I recategorized things. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I've got to salute you for the amount of work you've done. Good job. I don't see anything you've done that seems wrong to me. But to increase your scope a little, can you remove the word "boundary" from the beginning of the Iowa, Ohio, Oregon, and Pennsylvania categories to harmonize them with New York? Thanks! — Ipoellet (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem: I like that kind of detailed project. We could change the category names only if we also change the name of Category:Boundary maps of United States historic districts. If we're saying the subcategories aren't necessarily boundary maps, then they shouldn't be underneath a boundary map category. Just as a point of interest, though, is there any reason you don't want to take care of that yourself? --Auntof6 (talk) 04:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I can. I just assumed you were doing something that involved administrative rights, which I don't have. — Ipoellet (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

No, I'm not an admin here. I can use the move function, though: I don't remember if that's something everyone can do, or if you have to be given the right to do it. I see you've done some of them; if you can't do moves, let me know and I can do whatever might be left (and move the contents with HotCat). --Auntof6 (talk) 16:19, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Ontario State Bank Block nom1 - Ontario California.jpg

File:Ontario State Bank Block nom1 - Ontario California.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

Nyttend (talk) 04:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Rivoli Theater (Pendleton, Oregon)

Hi, Ipoellet. I noticed that you reverted my change to this category. I removed Category:Theatres on the National Register of Historic Places in Oregon because this theater does not appear to be individually listed on the NRHP. It is in Category:South Main Street Commercial Historic District (Pendleton, Oregon), which is the category for the NRHP-listed historic district that it is in, but the theater itself doesn't seem to be listed. This kind of property, a non-listed building/place that is in a listed historic district can go in one of two places. If there is a category for the listed historic district, it can go in that category, otherwise it can go in the general category of NRHP listings for its location, to represent the historic district. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Ipoellet,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:42, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

New HDs in Nebraska

I've left a note at your Wikipedia talk page re. three new downtown HDs in Nebraska. Could you please reply to that, either at my Wikipedia talk page or your own? Thanks. — Ammodramus (talk) 17:21, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States - Thank You!

Hi there! Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States. We're excited to see people uploading thousands of photos from all over the country! You and others have collectively uploaded 4,929 photos so far, all of which are viewable at Category:Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States (sorted by state).

We encourage you to continue contributing through the rest of the month. Uploading your photos of monuments isn't the only way to contribute, however. If you're interested, we have compiled a list of auxiliary ways to contribute - which include improving Wikipedia's coverage of historic and cultural sites, as well as finding existing free photos that can be shared on the Commons. While these contributions don't count towards the contest, we are still keeping track of them and they are great ways to contribute to the spirit of the project.

If you are interesting in contributing to Wikipedia, WikiProject National Register of Historic Places is also great place to start. The WikiProject showcases the work that has been done so far in covering NRHP sites, and can also help you find articles that need improving.

If you're on Twitter, give us a follow @WLMUnitedStates for updates, news, and more.

If you have any questions between now or the end of the month, feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Thank you! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 09:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States – Results!

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2016}} to your userpage!

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States during the month of October! The United States contest saw over 1,700 people contribute over 11,000 great photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the United States and its territories. In addition to National Register of Historic Places sites, we welcomed uploads of sites designated by state- and local-level historical institutions and societies. Hundreds of these photos are already being used to illustrate Wikipedia articles!

We're excited to announce that our national judging process has concluded, and that we have selected the winners of Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States! We were amazed by all of the uploads, and regret having to narrow it down to just 10. That being said – congratulations to our national winners and their amazing shots! Our 10 winners will be sent to the international Wiki Loves Monuments jury, who will then select the winners of the international contest. If you're interested in seeing the winners of the other various national contests as they are announced, you may do so at Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 winners.

Finally, we have also created a feedback form for all participants in the United States to fill out. The survey is optional and anonymous, and only takes a minute or two – we hope to use the feedback to organize better events in the future!

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, and we hope to see you again for future Commons photography events! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 06:28, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Portland winter storm

Thanks for categorizing a few of my photographs that I overlooked. BTW, if you are interested, I am collecting images of the winter storm here if you want to add any more. -Another Believer (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Reminder: Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2016 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2016 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Ipoellet,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2016 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eleventh edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2016) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 20 April 2017, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
--Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 08:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States – Back for 2017!

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2017}} to your userpage!

Hi there! My name is Kevin, one of the organizers of Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Last year, you contributed to our 2016 event. It was a great success thanks to you and many others, with over 1,700 people contributing over 11,000 great photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the United States. Over 1,000 of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, making our open knowledge about United States history and heritage all the better.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information, including updated tips, lists, and prizes. Like last year, you'll be able to upload your new photos of any registered historical site in the United States through the end of September (even if the photos were taken before this month).

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, and we hope to see you in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 08:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Barnes General Hospital

Are you sure of this? http://www.historylink.org/File/10111 describes Barnes General Hospital as "on the north side of Vancouver Barracks", which it seems to me would put it well within the area of the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. - Jmabel ! talk 18:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Yes I am. Fort Vancouver and Vancouver Barracks are not the same thing, although they are closely associated. While a portion of VB is preserved within FV National Historic Site, most of VB's historic footprint is outside the NHS. On this map the NHS is in orange, while the Barnes hospital was where the hospital icon is to the north, near the intersection of Fourth Plain Boulevard and Saint Johns Boulevard and well outside the NHS. Thanks to you making me look again, I've put Category:Barnes General Hospital into Category:Vancouver Barracks (the latter category had previously passed my notice). In the future, I want to figure out a graceful way to categorize those items that are in the overlap between the Barracks and the NHS. — Ipoellet (talk) 19:42, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

(Here's the relevant history, in case you want it. (Mostly I'm just writing this to organize my own understanding.) Fort Vancouver was a Hudson's Bay Company trading and administration post established in the 1820s - HBC's most important location west of the Rockies. In 1849, as the US established control over its portion of the Oregon Country, the US Army set up its headquarters post adjacent to Fort Vancouver and called it Vancouver Barracks. Fort Vancouver remained as a private commercial concern until the 1860s, and the fort stockade burned down in 1866. The Army never occupied the HBC buildings. However, over time the Army base footprint expanded to take in the old HBC stockade site and quite a bit more. Activity at Vancouver Barracks peaked during WW1, and was gradually drawn down through the 20th century until the final Army elements were withdrawn in 2011. The Army established Barnes General Hospital at the Vancouver Barracks in 1941 and closed it again in 1946, but it was promptly re-opened by the VA; the hospital campus remains a VA facility today, although the WW2-era buildings were replaced in the 1980s. The national park unit was established in 1948 in the immediate vicinity of the HBC stockade but excluding features directly associated with the Vancouver Barracks; the stockade was reconstructed in the 1960s. In 1996, the national historic site was expanded to take in the Vancouver Barracks parade ground, a small number of Army buildings adjacent to the parade ground, a portion of the Army's Pearson airfield, and some riverfront areas not directly associated with the Army. Most of what had been the Vancouver Barracks, including the site of the Barnes General Hospital, remained outside the national park. — Ipoellet (talk) 19:42, 15 July 2018 (UTC) )

That's complicated, but makes sense, especially now that you've added Category:Vancouver Barracks to the image. - Jmabel ! talk 21:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Quality image candidates

Hello! I just recently nominated a couple images for Quality image status here at Commons, and found the process to be quite easy. I am curious, have you attempted to promote any of your images, or do you have any favorites you think might qualify? I'd be happy to nominate them on your behalf, if you're not interested in jumping through the hoops yourself. -Another Believer (talk) 22:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

@Another Believer: I have never attempted to promote any of my pics - I have always just assumed that they don't measure up to the criteria technically, even though I do like some of them compositionally. I am flattered that you think some of them might be that good - thank you! If you want to try nominating some of my pics, here are a few of my favorites:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

— Ipoellet (talk) 06:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I might wait to see what happens with the 3 images by User:Jmabel I've already nominated. Some images I think are pretty good have been declined, so my untrained eye may not be the best at identifying QIs. But, I will say, the nomination process is super easy, and nominations get feedback quickly, so if there are any you think qualify, no harm in testing to see if they get promoted! I'll keep these in mind for future nominations, unless you beat me to the punch. -Another Believer (talk) 16:08, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Category:1532_in_Puerto_Rico

1532 in Puerto Rico has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC)