User talk:Solipsist

Fluorite

Hi! I've moved your Fluorite Talk Page gallery to the article itself. It's not normal practice to put a gallery on the Talk page where the reader will probably never see it. Hope you don't mind - Adrian Pingstone 20:53, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't mind, but it is actually recommended practice. Somewhere in the FAQs or Howtos, it recommends that instead of just removing an image from the main article page, you should instead move it to the talk page so that it is available for use once the article grows. I don't think it suggests using a <gallery> to hold them, but galleries are more recent. -- Solipsist 23:22, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Understood, but it's got to be better to let the reader see the picture instead of hiding it. Remember this is the only pic to show the rock in its polished state so it certainly should be in the article (IMHO). Also, more fluorite pics will surely arrive and then they can be very easily added to the gallery - Adrian Pingstone 07:58, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

No problem, I was really just being lazy in not taking the time to sort out the picture layout on that page. The real problem is the infobox which hogs 90% of the right hand side, so it wouldn't be easy to find a good picture layout. And sorry, I hadn't noticed that the fluorite pig was one of yours. I don't suppose you could get it under an ultra-violet lamp — a side-by-side shot with it fluorescing could look really good.

Having grown up in Buxton I'm also thinking the page needs an example of Blue-John, but that's another story. -- Solipsist 08:19, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Brookie here - thanks for the note. Kind regards Brookie: A collector of little brown things 06:51, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

FPC promoted

I sure hope I'm doing all of this right, but at least I'm being bold. By the way, great picture. I'm not sure what to do now to get this version on the commons... hopefully I did what I was supposed to =).

Template:PromotedFPC

Yeah, I figured that was why you hadn't promoted any recently. I think that's a good guideline to abide by when the vote is 8-3 or 9-5, but at 14-0, I think you were pretty safe =). Now I'm off, and I'll let you do the other pictures =).

All right, here's a couple more...

Template:PromotedFPC

Template:PromotedFPC

Now, no more for awhile... this featuring picture business is tiring. --Spangineer ∞ 02:13, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I think we are up-to-date now. It looks like you've got the hang of FPC promotions, so feel free to chip in whenever you see a backlog. As they say at the Chinese manual electric generator plant - many hands make light work. -- Solipsist 10:23, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Re: Flaming POI FPC

Hi Solipsist, thanks for the heads-up about the vote — I had actually forgotten about it. It's no big deal that it wasn't pushed, though I'm confused about the comments. I thought I had a pretty good monitor, but don't see any artifacts or checkerboard pattern in the image that peeople were talking about. Anyway, I'll set myself up at a better computer at a later date and try to eliminate any artifacts, though of course anyone that wishes to improve their photoshopping skills is more than welcome to use my image...

Thanks, — Asbestos | Talk 17:28, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

User talk:207.239.12.200

Please note this user has yet again vandalized Earth after your {{test4}} warning. As somebody who keeps Earth (among others) on his watchlist to catch vandalism, I must request you follow through with your warning of May 13. Since the IP in question is one for a school and there is abysmally low "positive editcount", I don't see any harm in blocking them from further edits. Anyone who wishes to contribute to the wikipedia may continue to do so from their home. Lastly, while the wikipedia is almost sickeningly inclusionist and pro-newbie etc, many of the vandalizing attacks from this user are simply disgusting, and in my opinion merit special attention. Avriette 23:48, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Sock Puppets on FPC

Hi Solipsist, Just asking for some advice. I believe that there is at least one sockpuppet skewing the voting on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Stag on hill. I'd like to draw your attention to the similarity b/w User:Killerchicken's (found on User:Electricmoose's discussion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Electricmoose#watch_out_for_killerchicken)] user page and User:McGnasher alias InTheFullnessOfTime. In addition there is a distinct resemblance b/w User:Brookie's userpage and User:Electricmoose's user page. As for User:Cyberlettuce, he is the biggest joke. I mean a 10 yr old voting on FPC is pretty unlikely, and the only history on his user page was done by User:Tobymarshman

I maybe just paranoid and making something out of nothing, but they all seem to be new users with weird connections. Thanks, --Fir0002 11:54, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Someone is definitely taking the piss out of Wikipedia. Let's ignore the bogus votes and simply delete the pic. — Chameleon 13:00, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I know what you mean. They may be sock puppets, but it is more likely they are group of school/college friends larking about. See for example this edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_Hore-Ruthven%2C_1st_Earl_of_Gowrie&diff=0) where User:McGnasher tries to clean up after an inappropriate comment by User:Killerchicken in a testy discussion that User:Brookie is having. You can also see that User:McGnasher has been suspected on being a sock puppet before [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:McGnasher&diff=12973921&oldid=12973797).

I'm not sure what the game is, but I was rather hoping one of them would own up after their scam on the stag picture was rumbled so quickly. -- Solipsist 13:07, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The somewhat trickier issue is that the pattern of voting on this nomination also draws into question the votes on Brookie's earlier FP at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/CAGrave which wouldn't have been promoted without the support votes from many of the same characters. -- Solipsist 13:28, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes that was why I was kind of uncertain of User:Brookie, as he seemed to have done a little legit editing/uploading photos. I think you've hit the nail on the head I think with your hypothesis of them being a bunch of friends, as this would explain their minor but ongoing edits. It would also explain the way they have a go at each other - in fun probably.

I second Chameleon's opinion that we just delete the image. I mean how can an encyclopedia have such a photo?? The sun in front of the clouds! --Fir0002 22:23, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

16 ships

This link lists the 16 designated ships : http://www.mod.uk/consultations/maritime_graves/controlled_sites.htm User:Mark.murphy 22:17, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

FPC

Template:PromotedFPC

Template:PromotedFPC congrats...and maybe one more (it's in overtime). This link is Broken 01:52, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Stag Problems

Sorry about any inconviniences and problems caused by my picture, it was not meant as a hoax of any sort, if there are any copyrightvios on the picture I apologise for that, please also see Missing image
Stagonhill.jpg


Stagonhill.jpg, it is an uncropped version of staghill.jpg and I believe it also must be a copyrightvio due to fir0002's sky used in the image. I don't know what is being suggested about sockpuppeting, but I can assure you I have been involved in no such actions. And one last point, I believe any links between me and User:Brookie should not be a subject of discusion about voting for the same thing, as there is no wikipedia rules or any such thing on the matter. Sorry again about any problems caused by my picture. Electricmoose- Electrifying 11:30, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Well you sound pretty genuine, so don't have anything against you for that photo. But one thing bothers me, on your uncropped version Image:Stagonhill.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stagonhill.jpg) you say that it is an "original picture by Electricmoose". Why?

However, I'm still in favor of deleting the image as it is unencyclopedic (sun in front of clouds an impossiblity). --Fir0002 12:41, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Thats fine on the deletion issue- I understand why. I put original picture on the tag because the whole picture is original, it is only one part of it that is copyed, so techniquely it is original because it is not the same as Fir0002's picture, but I can see why it probably is a vio. I created the image and then put it on Wiki because it is striking.

Electricmoose- Electrifying 16:21, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Well surely that's a contradiction. If one part of the image isn't original, how can the whole of the image be an "original"? Its like cropping off 3 pixels off a photo and calling it an original, or adding a caption to a photo. --Fir0002 22:26, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, it is fine to make derivative images of work that is released under GFDL, so long as the result is also released under GFDL. However GFDL also requires attribution, so the derivative image would also have to credit the original author to avoid being a copyvio. Adding a phrase like 'original picture' is less relevant, but I guess it doesn't help.

Of course, breaking the laws of physics is far more serious... -- Solipsist 16:30, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for improving the Arts

Hi Sparkit,

Thanks for the work you are doing on arts articles. I'm noticing you popping up all over my watchlist — fixing cats, tidying up wiki-links and expanding text. Keep up the good work. -- Solipsist 19:05, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's my pleasure! Now I shall go paint. --sparkit (talk) 21:16, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

FPC

Congrats! It doesn't look like Blue Crab is going to make it though, but I didn't want to remove it right after voting... --Spangineer (háblame) 01:40, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

I know what you mean, but I doubt its a problem. Concensus is tricky on this one, as although the voting is fairly clear, many of the associated comments are somewhat equivocal - it looks like people are having trouble making up their minds. However, its got sufficient votes for concensus (>4) and it has consistently run at ~50:50 support/oppose, which is good, but not enough to promote. Even without your vote, I would have closed it as a 'not promoted'. On the other hand, BrokenSegue was looking at closing it the other day, so it might be best to leave it for him. -- Solipsist 02:20, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Do you have a set percentage in mind when you look for consensus? 60%? 67%? 75%? Right now Ivan ISS is at 9 / 6, and that's 60% for, 40% against, and I wasn't sure what to do there. Let it sit a few more days to see if anyone else votes? What if it's 10/6 or 11/6? And do you just throw out neutral votes, or include them in the percentage somehow? --Spangineer (háblame) 11:39, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Concensus is a slippery thing - and voting on Wikipedia is left deliberately vague; partly because absolute rules encourage people to game the system, but also because although most votes in a particuar area might be straight forward unusual situations will crop up from time to time. It is something you tend to pick up over time by watching the results of other votes.

The basic guideline is that concensus should reflect the collective view of a typical group of Wikipedian's. On FPC the rule of thumb is a 2/3rd majority to promote. That is, if there are twice as many supports as opposes then the image gets promoted. But it gets more complicated when a nomination only attracts a few votes. You are also free to discount bad-faith votes, or take into account the quality of comments being. If it is a borderline case, but many of the support votes show reservations or qualifications in their comments I would probably not promote it, but if the opposite were true I would give it the benefit of the doubt.

It can be useful to look back at the FPC archives to get a flavour for previous borderline votes. Ultimately as long as you think you are doing the right thing when closing a nomination and it is not likely to attract a flood of complaints on Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates then you are probably making the right decision. -- Solipsist 14:42, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

spam block

Hi, as you can see from that users contributions [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=62.195.252.195), their only activity on Wikipedia over the past year has been to try to add that link to the Amsterdam page; by my count twenty times. Each time it gets reverted by another editor. There was also some discussion about this issue on the Talk page in which he/she took part, but evidently in vain. HTH, -- Viajero | Talk 20:00, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User page vandalism

Hi Solipsist —

thanks for reverting whatever it was that happened to my user page. I had seen it, but as it was a junble of code with everything mixed up, I figured it to be a server problem, not an act of vandalism, so decided to leave it. I guess I should have thought to check the page history. What did the guy do — copy the contents of the page source into the wiki?

Anyway, thanks, — Asbestos | Talk 11:03, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcoming message, Solipsist! I'm surprised I didn't get one for so long. I'm using your POV Declaration idea, because I'm inherently way POV-ish and have to bite my tongue a lot. Luckily did not have to do so on my Ice Ih article however ;) dikaiopolis 16:41, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

Also, the Persian Astrolabe is one of my favorite images on wikipedia, I remember it from long ago! Thanks a lot!

Spam

Hello Solipsist,

Thank you for your feedback. One quick question. I am wondering how my link, to what is a comprehensive quotation resource, is considered 'spam' when numerous less worthy links are not. Quote-fox is a valuable resource for which should be available to your users.

Regards,

Speermeister

Thank you Solipsist for your fair, reasonable and prompt response.

POTD

Hi Solipsist, I fixed a small typo on the text but apart from that I reckon it's spot on. I have sent an email to the artist to find out when she painted it. Actually she is my mother which is kinda how she was convinced so let an image of her's on the web... Thankfully it has worked out well and she will appreciate that others have enjoyed the painting being there as she was wary of copyright violations. I've tried to get her to write a bit on some of her peers which I could add to wiki, but so far no joy.... Anyways, all the best! SeanMack 12:45, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No joy on the date. There were many related paintings over a few years here, no definite date for this one...

FPC nominations

Kurando-san looks for the first date on the page, not the contributions. Sign a new date at the top, and you should be fine. -- AllyUnion (talk) 03:45, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank You

Merci for the wiki-thanks, it feels good for the wiki-soul. I'd like to request a barnstar of some sort for Cburnett for his hard work and excellent layout of Star Trek lists. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 06:08, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fruit basket

Well, bless your heart. And from Fortnum's, too! I am touched and grateful, particularly since I just came back from an irate pounding of the keys over at VfD, and was having a passing Wikinoia fit. My first thought was - oh no, I've gone and deleted a fruit basket in Breakfast or something and I'm in trouble. Obviously I need a break. I think I will look at the lovely Fortnum's fruits in large scale for a while. It does perk one up to be noticed. Noticed in a good way, I mean, of course. Thank you very much. --Mothperson 22:05, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bumblebee edit

Thank you kindly for your honor of a barnstar! Pollinator 01:14, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Antarctic krill

Hallo Solipsist! thank you for the note on icefish - I feel honored again and am proud to contribute to a great international project - can you please take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Antarctic_krill maybe help with some editing / formatting / language / vote - best greetings across the ocean to GB (i am from Germany originally, homesick for Europa Uwe Kils 14:12, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

compound eye

hallo again - maybe you can nominate this image - one of the most amazing artforms of nature, the eye of Antarctic krill as raster electronic microscope image, showing thousands of ommatidia arranged in a nearly perfect sphere http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Krilleyekils.jpg - or the blowup here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Krillommatkils.jpg - take care Uwe Kils 18:13, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

thank you for the fast reply. I know of the other pictures, I think of this more of the art component, of the beauty - I do not want to nominate own stuff, just tried that with my Antarctic krill page and got only 4 supports. It would be great if you could do it. I will not do it - Uwe Kils 18:36, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

ok, very good. what do you think of this critter, I could donate it in high resolution http://www.ecoscope.com//hyperia/hyperia1.htm Uwe Kils 20:02, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

you are right with the octopus eye. I have this image http://www.ecoscope.com//squid/index6.htm Uwe Kils 20:06, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

or this from the mystic glass eels http://www.fishbase.org/larvalbase/Photos/PicturesSummary.cfm?ID=300&what=larvae Uwe Kils 20:16, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

how do I substitute an image with a new version? Uwe Kils 21:03, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC

thank you, I will try that, I will give some images in high resolution now (I retired) - should you not soon hit the bed? Uwe Kils 21:29, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day - predation

That great, thanks for your work. --Fir0002 23:42, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Andes flight disaster

I added to that discussion with the suggestion of renaming the Andes flight disaster Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571, which would conform to the majority of other aviation disaster-related articles. If I get some agreement, I'll request that the article's title be changed. Avalyn 06:55, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

krill eye

I put the gfdl tag - I also uploaded high resolution images to amphipod and copepod and icefish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Icefishuk.jpg but when you click in the image or the high res link the old small images come up - any sugggestions? Uwe Kils 18:11, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

if I click in the icefish image or the high res link it jumps to the 500 pixel image, same with the amphipod and copepod - I cleared all cache Uwe Kils 18:51, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

LoPbN

Apologies! I meant LoPbN! --Jerzy·t 08:44, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

External links

Heya, nice to run across a kindred soul in the fight to keep external links sections clean. Thanks! --W(t) 14:04, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

Its an uphill struggle. I think User:Newsjunkie is well intentioned, but the effect is similar to spam linking. -- Solipsist 14:08, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am not connected to Yahoo in any way! The only reason I added the links was that I thought they were informative and interesting for to anyone doing further research to the subject. I had thought the earlier comment had bene mainly about the fact that it was discussion-oriented forum, while these links were informational. I was not trying give Yahoo more traffic or anything, I have no motivation to do that, I just thought these links were lacking. What is the point of an "External Links" section with no links? Shouldn't we either have one or not have one? I would think spam linking is when you add a million links to something unrelated or because you own the site, and this was not the case. How is it different from the fact that all movie articles link back to IMDb?--newsjunkie 14:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

External links are useful for many things, including;

• pointing to the 'official page' for a given article - the article on Amazon.com points to www.amazon.com even though it is commercial, because that is what the article is about.

  But we explicitly don't connect to Amazon.com for every article on a book, instead there's some wiki magic with ISBN numbers which connect to a range of booksellers and libraries that have information on the book

• pointing to images which can't be added directly because of copyright reason
• connecting to tools that can't be supported on Wikipedia, for example a website that calculates tide tables
• connecting to some of the most relevant websites on a subject (this is where it can get contentious, as it means we are starting to act as a web directory and not an encyclopedia, and Wikipedia is not a web directory)
• on older articles, pointing to sites that provided information that was used in the article - it is now prefered that these be put in a references section

It is certainly not the case that every page needs an external links section.

Personally, I'm not sure it is such a good idea to link to the IMDB entry for every movie and actor. It is a habbit that is common practice that may get changed in the future, although in practice they are probably all reference links. I doubt many articles on movies get written without checking facts via IMDB. -- Solipsist 14:45, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Hi the copyriht status of the image you have been discussing at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates nominations has been changed to GNU Free Documentation License. The gfdl would only apply to the digitization and use at wikipedia.org. Cheers. Gabrichidze 12:51, 17 June 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the Day

No problem. I've been blocking each new ip as well. Been doing it to a couple of other templates. Evil Monkey∴Hello 10:43, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Breakfast cereals

I love Shredded Wheat (no frosting, nuked with cow's milk or soy milk), and Cheerios, cold, with one of the milks. I abhor Cap'n Crunch and Count Chocula and their disgusting relatives. This is slightly odd, given my other sugar proclivities, but in breakfast cereals I just know it's wrong.

Okay. I'll bite. Whole wheat and hellfire are irresistible. What did you have in mind? --Mothperson 22:59, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) (and yes, I've always been fond of that Niagara Falls/shredded wheat connection)

• 19th-century America seems to have been full of food fanatics regarding whole grains. The Shakers (Quakers), Sylvester Graham, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Kelloggs, Henry Perky, Dr. Ralston, Horace Fletcher, and C.W. Post all sound promising. I'm not familiar with the other name you mentioned but I'm sure I will be soon. I'll go look at those articles you mentioned, and do some research. Have you heard of "Fletcherism?" Something to do with chewing and health. William James tried it for three months and said it nearly killed him. --Mothperson 23:08, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I got distracted by unnecessary interference on another subject, and I have done little about the cereals. But there's a book I intend to get hold of, by hook or by crook ("Cerealizing America"), and in the meantime, I will add bits as I can. Or subtract, where warranted. The Quaker of Quaker Oats is, alas, just good p.r. They never would have called the product Shaker Oats, you can bet. --Mothperson 21:07, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WP:FPC

Hi, Solipsist. Someone has already deemed the Black Butte Blackberry image Not promoted here. I was wondering if this was appropriate if people are still allowed to vote at this time. Thanks, Sango123 00:05, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Sango123 13:50, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Solipsist. Thanks for your note. I guess I agree with you. There really isn't much more to say on this matter. The policy makers have made their views plain, as have I. I am sure that both sides of the debate have given the matter careful thought - I know I have, and I'm sure that the same applies to others involved. I've expressed my views at considerable length in a variety of places, and don't really have anything to add to what I've already said, so I think it is sensible to move on to other matters at this point. Best — Tannin 04:57, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Visible and thumbs?

Hi Solipsist, I wanted to run an idea by you that I had. Do we really need all those lists of FP? Wouldn't it be easier to just have, say, one list of thumbs and one of text and that be it, instead of having the huge visible FP page? I'm not sure if it's that much more useful than the thumbs page, especially if the thumbs page were categorized. I'm trying to think of ways to reduce the load of work required by the maintainers of FPC, and I thought of that as a possibility. --Spangineer (háblame) 22:14, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Spangineer,

It is certainly an idea to discuss it. Others on Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates have suggested that it is the thumbs we don't need.

For context, the FP list and FP visible list have been around for a while. The thumbs list was introduced by User:Ed g2s at the tail end of last year, changed into a gallery format more recently and I split it into sections when I started to have loading problems whilst editing it a couple of months ago.

For my money, I think it is a good idea to have a place to where you can browse the current featured pictures and the standard galary size on thumbs is too small to really appreciate the images (except as a visual memory jog for something you've already seen). In fact it could be a useful instruction for nominations to say 'if you have found a picture that is better than, as good as, or somehow different from the other featured pictures here, then nominate it on FPC'. However FP visible is also getting rather heavy, and I have been thinking about approaches for breaking it up into separate pages.

On the other hand, I personally find thumbs quite useful when selecting a future Pic of the Day. Thumbs maintains a chronological order of promotions - it would be possible to figure it out from the monthly FPC archives, but less convenient.

The main problem with having multiple formats for accessing Featured Pictures is that it adds to the headache when promoting pictures, especially if the pages are too heavy to load and frequently fail on saves. In principle, this part of the problem could become moot with the assistance of a promotions bot. -- Solipsist 22:38, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

missing image error on eel page

hallo, can you take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_eel - the images show up as missing in the box, but they are there - Uwe Kils 22:38, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

thank you for the quick fix - how stupid of me! sometimes you are blind - Uwe Kils Missing image
Uwekilsmini.jpg
Image:Uwekilsmini.jpg

23:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Voting at Fir0002 FPC's

Hi Solipsist, Hope you can spare the time to vote again at Pincushion Hakea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fir0002/FPCandidates#Pincushion_Hakea)] Thanks, --Fir0002 11:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

response from London

Uwe wants to share this with you (from his talk page):

Hello Kils

Just would like to state that i have very much enjoyed being involved in a project of this nature. To see the speed of co-operation between various people was (Uwe, Lupo and Salleman and all others) fantastic. It was a complete buzz to go off researching about a scientific subject and coming to some understanding and appreciation of a creature that i would have no knowledge or interest in otherwise. I would like to say that it takes a damn good teacher to get others interested in what they teach and i for one, if only in a rudimentary and general way have found the subject of Krill and sorrounding issues of ecology and environment fascinating. I think that says a lot about your willingness to let others participate in something which you obviously have great knowledge in and could easily have been a lot less humble with. At some point i will put up some informtion on my home page so at least people know a little more about me. Am going to try to extend the article on Ice-algae so any info you may have would be good. I hope the article on Antartic Krill gets featured as i think it is now very good.

Wikiversity sounds like a good idea but will need more time to go through the proposal (not too sure what help i could be).

Once again thanks Uwe! Yakuzai 22:50, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

that feels good

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Antarctic_krill

take care Uwe Kils Missing image
Heringmini.jpg
Image:heringmini.jpg

23:58, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Forgotten FPC?

Image:Bang Pa-In floating pavilion edit.jpg seems to have been promoted as a featured picture, but isn't listed anywhere on Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Since you are the person who does most of the promoting, I thought I should tell you, rather than try to add it myself, since I don't know the complete process. Thanks! User:Rdsmith4/Sig 15:26, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Mont-Saint-Michel nomination on FPC

Yes, a little bit discouraging, I just like the image, without noticing its color. Anyway, thanks for what you have write. You do have a lot of beautiful images. Roscoe x 15:44, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Solstice

How could I have almost forgotten? Happy Solstice to Solipsist. I know - no connection. But never mind - in the vampire view of Wikipedia, you're my sire, having greeted and encouraged me, so now you're stuck with me on the hols. Watch out for UFOs on the 23rd and 24th. I'd attach a lovely picture of a crop circle if I knew how. --Mothperson 21:17, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mind Benders

Hello! I've noticed your interest in creating logos, barnstars, or your past artistic ability! Thus, I just wanted to let you know that the pre-round, an artistic competition, is now open at Wikipedia:Mind Benders (Shortcut: WP:MIND)! The competition is open to everyone and is seeking a logo/trophy, similar to Barnstars, to be placed on every winner's page. We urge you to help us out and submit an entry! Afterwards, the normal rounds, each consisting of ten or more fun, logical, brain-stimulating questions will open. Why don't you give it a try when it opens! Look forward to seeing your contribution. Thanks, Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 21:48, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chestnuts on Fir0002 FPC

Hi Solipsist Hope you can have a look at My Chestnut Photos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fir0002/FPCandidates#Chestnuts) Thanks, --Fir0002 11:24, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Wallpaper

Hey, what do you think of Category:Featured desktop backgrounds? — Chameleon 17:14, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dab Persia