User talk:Jstuby

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Jstuby!

Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文（台灣）‎ | 中文（简体）‎ | 中文（繁體）‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−

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) 20:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm just curious as to why you removed "Category:Photos of the Moon by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter" from a number of images today, when they are clearly images created by LRO's LOLA and WAC instruments. Thanks! — Huntster (t @ c) 20:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I removed that tag because those images are not technically photographs. They are rendered maps generated with JMARS software. But you are correct that nearly all the data came from LRO. Jstuby (talk) 20:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I thought that might be the case. I'm unable to get JMARS to work for some reason, but it seems that there are some photographic elements through the WAC instrument, so wouldn't the category still be relevant? — Huntster (t @ c) 01:23, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the shaded relief on those images is calculated rather than being based on the WAC, but I am not sure (I created them a while back, and at the time I didn't really give a shit about categories). Still the images are projections (cylindrical I think) rather than photographs, whether they have WAC components or not. But if you feel strongly that they should be categorized as photos I won't revert them. I think I categorized them as lunar maps or something like that when I removed the photo tag. Jstuby (talk) 12:22, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't feel the need to contest this. You are more in tune with this material than I am. I just made an assumption that if it was a WAC product then it must be photographic in nature, but this seems to be a mistaken assumption. Thanks for your time! — Huntster (t @ c) 18:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I saw you created several subcategories for A16 surface photographs, but the traverse category names are a little puzzling. "Apollo 16 Traverse Station 11-13‎" for example, suggests this was an actual location on the surface, but I'm guessing these are photographs made en route from Station 11 to Station 13? If so, I would suggest giving the categories clearer names, like "Apollo 16 traverse from Station 11 to 13". Would "Apollo 16 Traverse Station LM-4‎", therefore, mean "Apollo 16 traverse to Station LM-4"? I ask because I wasn't able to find these stations (ALSEP-1, LM-4, LM-11) mentioned anywhere. There is also the question of how to sub-categorize these cats...simply place them in "Apollo 16 moon photography", or something more custom? Cheers! — Huntster (t @ c) 21:29, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Apollo 16 Traverse Station LM-4‎" means traverse from LM to station 4. I get it that it is not completely clear but once you get the convention it makes sense. Is it easy to rename a category? Do you just "Move" it? I also did a bunch of Apollo 17 categories similar to the Apollo 16 ones. For 16, they traverse photos are actually listed like "LM-4" or whatever in the mission Photo Index (at Apollo Lunar Surface Journal). Jstuby (talk) 21:36, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's reasonably easy to rename categories, especially when using an on-site tool like Cat-a-lot to help move the images around. I can take care of them, I just wanted to confirm that was the intent. Don't be afraid to use longer category names when appropriate, since we cater to everyone, and not just specialists in the know. So names like "Apollo 16 traverse from Station 11 to 13" and "Apollo 16 traverse from LM to Station 4" are appropriate descriptors? (also, sorry for delay, been busy at work.) — Huntster (t @ c) 02:28, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind if you rename the categories to better/wordier ones. I'll move on to Apollo 14 or something, although there are probably some dangling Apollo 15 ones without a category. I'm also trying to check 16 and 17 for missing photos - what a pain in the ass. I wish the uploader would have paid more attention. Jstuby (talk) 02:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I know. Some folks have a habit of just mass-uploading photos and letting everyone else sort them out. But you're doing good work, and I for one appreciate it. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stuby - corrected the dates on the files Category:Apollo 9 Earth photography from Project Apollo Archive and NARA in accordance with the index you sent me. I hope you find it helpful. I will correct the other Apollo flights soon as well, and thanks for the collaboration. Do not hesitate to contact me again, if you have any other ideas. Askeuhd (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great news, thanks! A related concept I'm working on is the Araguainha crater|Araguainha crater. A Brazilian geologist named Geraldo C. F. Valadares took some students there in 2012 and uploaded all of their photos to panaoramio. They were then transferred to wikimedia commons. I put them in a category called "Valadares expedition 2012". I was thinking of contacting Valadares to get him to try to categorize these photos to include things like "impact breccia" or at least "breccia" or "Orodovician" or whatever time period the rocks are, and so on. Jstuby (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds interesting! Do you want me to make a list of all these files (I'm thinking Excel format is the easiest) so you could send it to Mr. Valaderes for annotation? We could batch implement the information afterwards, either using one of Commons tools or one of my scripts. Askeuhd (talk) 10:53, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's probably the right approach, if I can figure out how to contact him. A problem with the set of files is that the numbering is messed up, but it may not be a big enough problem to be worth fixing. They all have the same name followed by a number in (). The problem is the way they are shown in the category is (1), (10), (100), (1000), (1001), etc, then after (1099) are (11), (110), (1100), etc. So many files are out of sequence. The change would be to add zeros so that (1) becomes (0001), (100) becomes (0100), etc. I have no way to fix that except moving each one, one at a time. If you could do it with a script, I think it would be worthwhile. I think the timestamps on the photos are intact if you can dig into the metadata and renumber that way, if that is not even more difficult. Jstuby (talk) 16:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assume we are talking about the images in Category:Valadares_expedition_2012? I don't think we need to move the files, we can just add sort keys. Is the number in the parenthesis chronologically correct? If so, I can solve it pretty easily, but if the current numbering is incorrect (even if properly sorted), we will have to take the timestamps into account. I will e-mail you the list of files. Askeuhd (talk) 18:35, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that category. I don't think the numbering is 100% chronological, but it is not random either. I am not familiar with sort keys. Jstuby (talk) 18:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When adding a category, f.x. [[Category:Valadares expedition 2012]] you can add a sortkey like this [[Category:Valadares expedition 2012|0000]] this would sort this particular file as 0000 instead of the file name in the parent category. That is why I was asking if the filename was correct, because if it is was it would been easy to add a sortkey based on the filename. However it should be easy to determine the chronological order based on the metadata - I will look into it. Askeuhd (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kuan Han-Chʽing (crater) 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! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

D3rT!m (talk) 13:38, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]