First archived talk at User talk:Arpingstone/ArchiveMar3-2003
Second archived talk at User talk:Arpingstone/ArchiveJul10-2003

Hi!
I'm on holiday from 10th July 2003 to 17th July 2003 in Brixham in the county of Devon in southern England. So I won't see anything put here until the 16th July. Cheers!
Adrian Pingstone 08:50 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hi Adrian. Just looking at your photos for Tattoo, could you crop the image

down a little further? With the tiny images we work with it seems we really need to fill the image almost completely with the subject or the detail gets completely lost. --Robert Merkel 06:23 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

No problem, Adrian. I couldn't be bothered figuring out how to do it either, so I just re-uploaded the same picture from my hard drive. (I took a moment to sharpen it a fraction first, though sharpening only seems to work well when you have resized. That was taken with my old camera and was not resized, just cropped.) My duck is a female Blue-billed Duck, and I think she is the prettiest thing I've met since ... oh, since I was 17 and full of hormones, I guess. Here is all of her. The other picture, of course, just shows her tail feathers. I haven't written the 'pedia entry yet, but if you read Musk Duck you'll get a pretty reasonablle idea: female Blue-Bill Ducks look very like female Musk Ducks, and are equally fond of diving to the bottom to look for tasty morsels. She's just on her way down.

I've spent two full days a week taking bird pictures these last five or six weeks (bad weather or no bad weather), but that shot (at full size, not cramped down to small resolution) is the one I like best of all. But one day, I'll get one of her on the way up, just breaking the water. A very difficult shot to take, as they stay down for anything between 10 seconds and a minute, and if they want to they can come up anywhere at all within 20 meteres or more. So you have to guess where you think she will come up, and then guess when you think she will come up, and squeeze the shutter release a half-second before you see anything. But if I keep at it long enough, sooner or later, my lucky number wil come up. Cross some fingers for me! Cheers -- Tony

Hi Adrian, I hadn't realised that you had identified the Paignton zoo picture. We will make a birder of you yet. jimfbleak

Thanks Adrian - I'll have to write a few species articles soon, since I put on a few pics myself. Jim

The reason I used a fairly small image size was because the images in question were taken on a low-resolution (0.7 megapixel) digital camera, and so the images wont look very good if their blown up too much, but your right they are a bit too small. If you look at the train article, I have however enlarged the big versions to 550 pixels, which is about as far as the images can be blown up without looking terrible, what do you think of it now?.

BTW seem as your good at finding images, I was wondering if you could find a pic to go in the Mallard (locomotive) article G-Man 22:39 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Adrian, I've written Andean Flamingo now. Do you know what the species is in your pic on Flamingo? It's hard to tell with their heads down. jimfbleak

Super Andean Flamingo - I don't think I've ever seen a photo of the species before. By all means replace the Flamingo pic, it makes more sense to have an image where we know what it is. I'll write Lesser Flamingo soon, but not sure quite when.

It's an eclipse male Common Eider. Most male ducks go into a much drabber "eclipse" plumage in the summer after breeding and while they moult. The eider in particular has a baffling range of juvenile/eclipse/firstyear plumages, but the head shape and feathering pattern around the bill are unmistakable. The only problem with photographic guides, even the best ones, is that they can't show every plumage.

I like trying to identify mystery birds, so don't worry about that. I've got Wildfowl of the World so any duck should be identifiable. Jim

I'm sorry. I didn't notice who had put Paris (France), it was not intended to be insulting to an indivudual contributor. Apologies. Mintguy 11:21, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Game Boy

I compiled all the versions into 1 long image.

I couldn't find a box image for the 1995 Play-It-Loud color/clear series, or a good box image for the 2003 A-SP series. If someone can find these images then feel free to modify the pic using a photo editor.

Tonius (UTC) 15:17

PS1: The 1995 version is distinct from the 1996/1998 color versions by the placement of the Start/Select buttons.

PS2:

• 2003 GB ASP
• 2001 GB A
• 1999 GB L
• 1998 GB C
• 1996 GB P
• 1995 GB PIL
• 1989 GB

Game Boy

798 x 115 - JPG - 27.3 KB

Sorry, I forgot about 56K - I have a 100 Mbps connection. Originally I was using JPG, but JeLuf requested that the pics be in PNG format which augments the file size by 2025 percent.

I made the panaramic myself using a photo editor; I'm working on the sources of the individual pics.

Tonius 17:44

PS: Game Boy 750 x 108 & thanks for the image recommendations. What do you think of my Videogame Timeline page? Tonius 18:29

PS2: Thanks again for the more information. The Videogame Timeline is also a compilation of countless internet sources. So far (that I know of) there is no other website that offers a more complete timeline of video games than this one. Tonius 19:34

PS3: Please see the Timeline of video games User talk:Tonius 03:28

I uploaded a slightly cleaner version of Image:Klm.b737.300pix.jpg, since the original was kind of pixelly-looking (compare new with old). I'm not certain, but it looks like Image:Piper.gdltr.300pix.jpg and other aircraft photos may have a similar pixellated appearance. What software are you using to shrink them? It seems like it's not doing the greatest anti-aliasing :-) -- Wapcaplet 13:13, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Photoplus, but Photoshop has always seemed to do well with resizing. One thing which I know can cause aliasing is resizing when the image is in indexed-color format; if it's RGB format during resizing, it ought to work. Also, I seem to recall some older software I used which made a distinction between "resize" and "resample"; the former simply hacked out enough pixels to shrink the image (and looked pretty bad), while the latter would interpolate and average out the pixels, resulting in a smoother appearance. I don't know if either of these things is the culprit, though. Best of luck finding a solution! -- Wapcaplet 14:52, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your ideas, I'll return to Photoshop and see if I can make improvements.

Adrian Pingstone 14:56, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Regarding the 6k size for the KLM image: that is output from the default quality setting of a UNIX utility called "convert", which is part of the free ImageMagick suite of image manipulation tools. Looks to be available for many platforms; my (Linux) version is command-line, but there may be a GUI interface for it as well. I know there are a number of specialized JPEG compression tools which let you tweak the compression settings and preview the results, and are useful for finding a good compromise between file size and image quality, but it seems like most of those are commercial software, and free tools like ImageMagick seem to do pretty well with just default settings.

Also, if you are working on PNGs, there's one called pngcrush which I believe is only available for UNIX variants or MSDOS; if you have one of those platforms at your disposal, you may want to check it out. -- Wapcaplet 17:24, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I liked your changes to Cemetery. Kat 21:38, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the Emperor Goose pic Adrian. My guess is that it's a one year old bird. It's basically in adult plumage, but the brown tinge and the paler bill are juvenile features, according to my Wildfowl of the World book. There doesn't seem to be much seasonal variation although the book doesn't go overboard on detail for this virtually unmistakable species. Jim

Thank you for removing the Grasshopper image. Kpjas

Adrian! I too am a former British Aerospace employee. I worked at Brough for 10 years until 2000. I live in Las Vegas, USA now. Be seeing ya! -- sugarfish 21:04, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi Adrian! On the subject of image titles... I actually agree with you but I had my wrist slapped a couple of times (by whom I don't remember) for using the <small> tags. I'm happy to use the tags because you're right regarding the overly large fonts. Like they said in WWII... "I was just following...", etc. -- sugarfish 08:43, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi Adrian. Until recently, the Caribbean Flamingo and the European Flamingo ( and sometimes Chilean Flamingo ) were classed as races of the same species, Phoenicopterus ruber ruber and P. ruber roseus respectively. Last year, the British Ornithological Union split them as separate species, so Caribbean becomes P. ruber and Greater (European) becomes P. roseus. Because this is such a recent change, it's inevitable that there will be a considerable time lag before it becomes common. jimfbleak

I thought "both ends in South Glos" sounded a little odd, so I checked on an OS map that showed the Avon-Gloucs border as it was in the 1970s. Here are some Multimap URLs that show the borders around the bridge... [1] [2]. Thanks for that PDF link, it's a useful reference. --rbrwr

Thanks for sorting out Salzburg's population. now if we can only figure out what to do with SR-71 Blackbird. Rmhermen 16:18, Sep 17, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Adrian,

the reason I removed your Plumed Basilisk picture was that I created an entrance for Basiliscus plumifrons and put the picture there (http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basiliscus_plumifrons). I just thought it would fit in there better. I didn't want to be rude so I apologise I didn't make clear that I put the picture somewhere else.

Jurriaan

Hi Adrian,
I didn't know how to sign with the four tildes. Thank you for the suggestion!
Cheers!
Jurriaan 10:08, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hello Adrian -

Thanks for letting me know you removed the Egyptair statistics. I reverted them and am starting a project to add such numbers to all airlines that have Wiki listings. I agree with you - if one has it they all should - and I feel it's important data. NuclearWinner 23:21, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Whops, sorry about removing the pic! I guess I just saw you mention reversion and I went ahead and did so. Should have paid more attention NuclearWinner 22:16, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Nice Woodpigeon Adrian Jim

Heya,

I just wanted to say thanks for all the images you've contributed to Wikipedia. Without you, the place would be a lot poorer!—Eloquence 21:17, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi, among the hastily-taken pics I snagged at the Moscow airport, one is of an aircraft that seems to from a "Yakutia" airline which may or may not also be called Sakha, after a region of Siberia - Google finds almost nothing, although there is at least one other spotters' photo online that I found by searching on the tail number(!). Is there some sort of definitive official reference of known airlines, with basic facts about them, in print perhaps, or not otherwise visible to Google? Thanks for any info! Stan 17:00, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Why do you think that the picture on Ford Model A is a replica and not just a restored car? I have heard of replicas being made of '32 coupes and some of the rare old cars. Rmhermen 20:04, Oct 11, 2003 (UTC)

I don't have any knowledge of classic cars so all I could do was quote directly from the typed list the organiser gave me, which called it a replica. In any case, I doubt the reader cares much. Restored, rebuilt or original, the photo will surely look much the same.

Adrian Pingstone 21:57, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the 40s Cadillac picture on the Cadillac automobile page -- nice car. --Morven 17:58, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)

They are indeed gorgeous vehicles. The decline of the American automobile has been a slow but continuous one, unfortunately. While Europe still produces a vehicle or two to stir the blood, even if the true golden ages are rather past - America by and large does not, except for the Corvette (still a rather intensely fast and sophisticated machine).

Most fans of the American automobile consider the clock stopped in 1973-75 (about when the double threat of the oil crisis and pollution regulations dealt the American automobile industry a blow it's never really regained its full faculties after).

However, at the very top end things had been trending towards the ordinary for some time -- the American automobile had been 'flattening' in market, the expensive cars becoming more ordinary even as the ordinary became better. The 1950s were probably the end of true opulence at the top end, but one must look earlier for the most beautiful cars.

What's considered the Classic period was around 1925-1947, during which time the most luxurious and expensive American cars were the equal of anyone's. That Cadillac would definitely fit in that category. See the article I mostly wrote at Classic Car Club of America that details the cars (American and otherwise) of that period, and take a look at their web page, http://www.classiccarclub.org/ for more. Duesenbergs and Cadillacs and Packards and Lincolns etc. of that era are quite amazing things. --Morven 07:26, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Austin Princess

• There was a 1940s/50s limousine
• On the evidence of your picture there was a 60s Austin Princess
• There was a 70s wedge- shaped Princess made by Leyland and badged as an Austin

Three completely different cars. The Leyland princess is just the last one. We need another article for the others. Andy G 21:31, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)

That article has now been created & I put the picture of the '60s car in it. --Morven 08:23, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Dear Arp: Hi! How are you? Im having trouble. Go to the Prinair page and see what happned when I tried to place a photo of a Prinair plane that I have been allowed to place by its owner. I need help. Maybe you, the God of airplane photographers if there is such a thing at Wiki, can help me..lol

Thanks, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Rockero Martin

Dear Arp: Thanks for the update on Prinair! From now on, I officially name you Lord of the wikipedia aviation photographers!

BTW, I read your update on the Kalitta page, and had to laugh at myself for thinking Connie Kalitta was a woman..LOL!!

Thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio T-Bird Martin

Quick search for the logo led me here doule the size and resoluction for a printout on a transfer on ink jet for a holloween costume. Even my friends and NASA's site did not have the quality you had. Bravo.

- Aaron B. GSI Commerce Inc. Babcok St. Melbourne, FL.

Thanks for the thanks but from your message (above) I can't tell which picture you used. Just let me know which article it was on, please. How does NASA relate to Halloween?

Best Wishes, Adrian Pingstone 09:05, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Kia Ora Arp. Would you have a suitable pic to upload to the De Havilland Vampire page. Cheers. Moriori 22:29, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

You know about the odd-colored sattelite picture of Paris that I put in, right? That was originally from the Dutch wikipedia. Also, I downloaded and then uploaded the pictures of Houston, Texas from the Landsat. WhisperToMe 02:07, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hello again Adrian. I have a pic I'd like to put on the Pania page. I'm not confident about uploading it (and terrified I'd upstuff the whole page) so can I e-mail it to you for you to kindly take care of? Moriori 22:53, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Kia Ora. Thanks for your suggestion about the New Zealand locator map - you're certainly right in saying that it was distorted. As you guessed, I took it from a map of the world (the same one I used for most other countries), and it was significantly curved at the edges. I've replaced it with another one I made - does that look any better? Thanks. - Vardion 10:27, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Any simple image processing tool can obtain the size of an image. As wikipedia allows for anyone to reupload images, someone that chooses to resize one of yours will also have to change the name of the image in the wiki. These are two reasons that you should stop this process. If you need coaxing, i can give you a tool i have been using that allows me to upload images automatically from the command line. user_talk:hfastedge

RE: you dont understand: im addressing the fact that you leave pixel data in the actual picture name. Given this, reread the previous paragraph.

Now I understand what you are saying. It seems odd that I have 650 small pics and 650 large pics on Wkipedia and no one else has been concerned since I began image uploading in January 2003. Just change the name, I don't mind! I find putting the pixel count in the image name helps me to keep track of what I'm doing. I'll think about just using "large" and "small" but I'll probably need a lot more complaints than one before I change. In any case, someone resizing one of my pics is so rare that I don't think changing my image naming style is at all necessary

Adrian Pingstone 09:29, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

If I may chime in, I'd like to say that having tried it both ways, it's better to have the size in the pic name. First, getting image size requires an explicit download of the image and running the tool - a complete nuisance when you're copyediting and fixing bad formatting (this could be addressed by an enhancement to the image description page). Second, if someone wants to resize an image, they should upload a new one; we have the disk space, and there may very well be a good use for the pre-resize image. Third, people have comically variable ideas of what "large" and "small" means, actual size is a more precise way of describing. Stan 14:43, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi Adrian. I just changed the link on image:Safrica.arp.400pix.jpg to the specific page it is on. Linking to the index page doesn't really work, as the pictures change position in those indexes. (Because a new picture is added every day). --snoyes 20:18, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Thanks Adrian. I trust you have been good while I've been gone. :)

I don't think I'll contribute much for a while, as I have a lot of organising to do - I haven't even turned the hot water system back on yet, as it's a horrible little job - but I've come back with many thousands of photographs, and some of them good ones. A hell of a lot of driving, but some wonderful places, great birds, and a fantastic trip. I'll start posting some of the pictures to appropriate places when I get a bit more organised - many of the species are not represented here yet, or at least were not when I last logged on two months ago.

Back to work on Monday.

Sigh Tannin 10:00, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Nice job taking Image:Concorde.lastflight.arp.300pix.jpg! :) --mav 08:26, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I just came here to say the same thing! I expect it was pandemonium round Filton yesterday?... certainly was on the M25 on the last day of commercial flights. Pete 13:14, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Thankyou Adrian. It was a wonderful bird. :) Although called a "flycatcher" for some reason, it is really an Australian robin, both in the genetic and the behavioral senses. Like most robins, although it tends to like dark shady places that force me to push my ASA-equivalent as high as I dare and use shutter speeds that, tripod notwithstanding, are too long for such a big lens, they keep delightfully still for the camera while they are scanning the ground for a tasty morsel and are ideal subjects. And very cute. She (or he - the sexes are identical) made my day. --T

This "undercarriage" nonsense has to stop - it is destroying the page history. Please add your voice to a straw poll I set up at Talk:Concorde. --mav 22:19, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

History of computing has moved to History of computing hardware, so you may want to update the link on your user page accordingly. Cheers, Cyan 22:02, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

No problem. :-) -- Cyan 09:39, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Dear Arpingstone, please do interfere! I changed it to 300 pixels but i dont notice any difference. I have a 19 inch screen - i like to pamper myself :) - and sometimes dont think about space problems. Can i do anything with the original pic in order to make it more practical? (btw, my tent was about two meters from that track, so imagine the adreneline in the morning!) Muriel Victoria 14:58, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hey Arp: Whats up, man? Is there anyway that you could upload the picture I linked to the Prinair airticle into the actual article? Also, I put a few requests of airline photos on the picture request, you might want to take a look at the list.

Thanks, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Hell on Earth Martin

Dear Arp: Hi! How are you? You know I was thinking, I wish we had more people like you at wikipedia. Every news outlet, book, etc etc, needs photoreporters! And youre the only one out there pushing it to have photos of everything in this site. Good job, and I wish we could have more people doing what you do!

About the Prinair photo, Mr. William Sierra gave me permission to use it at the Prinair page, but about a year ago. I dont know if this breaks any stature laws about copyrights because he gave me permission so long ago. But anyhow I should still ask him, as you say. About the other airline photos I have requested, go here Wikipedia:Requested pictures and check under transportation.

Thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio El Loco Crazyloco! Martin

Hi Arp,

Many thanks for the advice. In my defence, I would point out that the two pictures you mention on my talk page weren't actually uploaded by me! I think (hope) that the 300px wide ones you're referring to were the ones I uploaded... Cheers. -- MykReeve 11:44, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I think Kpflude uploaded the inside of 1 Poultry. Secretlondon 11:46, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)

And Kaihsu uploaded the larger image of the Houses of Parliament at Parliament of the United Kingdom. - MykReeve 12:16, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi, do you have permission for File:Optical.greysquares.arp.350pix.jpg? I've seen a few times on the Internet in the last couple of years and I don't know its original source. It's a very commonly copied picture. silsor 23:30, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)

I realize that the image page says "copyright status unknown". We can't do this with text and I don't think we should be able to do it with pictures either. silsor 17:55, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC)

This could be the source of the image. His email address is here, perhaps you could email him to determine if he created the image and if we can use it. --punishinglemur 17:58, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hey there. I think that your picture of a BA aircraft on the Boeing 767 article is actually a picture of a 757. Compare it with what you see in Boeing 757. - Sekicho 12 Jan

hi Adrian. I'm just about to do Swan Goose on the basis that you have a picture to put in it, so watch the link, thanks, Jim

thanks Adrian, I believe you also have an unused Cape Barren Goose, Jim

Adrian, no need for an apology, you certainly have improved it... I'd realised it looked dark (for some reason the apparent quality dropped when I cropped off a lot of sky) but I didn't have time to play with it. btw there are some more Kitt Peak pictures at http://www.lea.eclipse.co.uk/arizona2003-04/ (30th December), if you think any of them are worth adding or better than that one. seglea 18:14, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC) (Exeter resident currently working in Berkeley CA)

Adrian, please help yourself to anything on that website (you'll find leads to some more pictures by moving up one level), and use it any way you like, unless the accompanying text indicates there are identifiable people in it. I am spending a sabbatical year here, and as I go around to new places I try to get photos that might come in useful for Wikipedia or other such purposes, so if you've got the time to do it, I am more than happy for any of these images to be used. Please flag anything you use as taken by me and placed in the public domain for "this reduced image" (or words to that effect) - if I wanted to be fussy, which I don't anyway, I have 1600 x 1200 pixel originals to which I thereby retain the copyright. If you leave me a message when you use anything, I'll add the date and location where it was taken to the descriptor page if need be.

Sorry to hear our business people wouldn't let your son in... we do keep telling departments that they have got to encourage more regional students, but that lot always were snotty. seglea 20:44, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Dear Adrian: Hi! Good news! The owner of the Prinair photo that I linked to the Prinair article, has said that we can upload it into the article itself, as long as we leave the copyright part and the thanks to William Sierra note. I'd do it myself but my computer never works at these tasks.

Thans, and God bless you!

Antonio Copyrighted Material Martin

Dear Adrian: I would be an ingrate if I left this day pass by without thanking you for putting the picture on the Prinair page. Thank you and God bless you! Not to overload you, every once in a while, like in say, 3 months or 4 months, Ill ask you to upload another photo into another airline article. We definitely need people like you,. We are the only informative media I know with only one photoreporter!!! LOL (and a good one at that by the way!).

Oh, check the Alps ski-lift air disaster, see if you like it, I think its missing some information, also check Florinda Meza and French Connection. I made those yesterday.

Once again, thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio half green half pink Martin

I saw your Coot query, Adrian. You're right that the shield should extend onto the head, but I think it's just the angle, so that some of the white is hidden by black head feathers. It's definitely Eurasian Coot, and an adult at that (sub-adults still have a similar shield, but the bill is grey-tipped. Jim

Ha! Jim is too quick for me again. Yup: definatly a Coot. Maybe ours are a little different. I'll look into it after the more important task -- some sleep! (I just got home after a 3-day trip. It's 2:20AM and I'm bushed.) Cheers -- Tannin

If this is still the same coot pic (as at 3 Feb), yes it is a Eurasian Coot; the absence of the 'white piece extending up over the head' indicates that it is an immature; the white shield only reaches full size when it is about a year old. - MPF 15:09, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Seems our thumbnails have gone the way of the dodo. I have a mild workload ahead of me, but I sure don't envy yours.  :) - Hephaestos 14:59, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi Adrian, A quick word of thanks for all the effort you've put in adding the many car photographs to articles over the last few months. One small point though - I wonder why nearly all of them are a rear three-quarter view? Do you favour this view for some particular reason or is it accidental? Most illustrative photos of cars tend to go for front 3/4 views. I'm only curious - no criticism intended. Keep up the good work! Graham 05:42, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hey Adrian: Thanks for the support , buddy! I have begun uploading photos of boxers to their pages. Preferably, when they are hitting an important opponent cause I think those photos are awesome. Of course, after asking for permission first. But I enlisted Maio for that because I dont want to over load you with work! I have permission for a Mexicana de Aviacion jetliner but permit was given two years ago almost. I also will ask for permission of a Delta Airlines jet. My love affair with Delta dates back to 1980 when I first flew and it was on Delta, to Orlando from SJU. Thank God dad didnt choose the alternative, Eastern Airlines, cause then my favorite airline would be gone now! LOL!

But Im gonna re ask for the Mexicana permit and ask for the Delta permit in March, so not to overload you with work! BTW I love Mexicana too although I never flew them: Theirs was one of the first planes I could recognize at SJU when I was about nine..LOL

I even knew at what time Mexicana was arriving , I ususally made grandpa wait until seven PM so we coud see the Mexicana DC-10 or 727's arrival! LOL same with Viasa and Iberia.

Well, thanks for the support with this reddice guy. He seems to me to be one who doesnt get jokes. Oh well, we must deal with everyone...LOL

Thnaks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio stuck in the 80s Music Martin (ps: Im listening to a 80s music cd right now hence the nick..lol)

Hi Adrian - These two really belong on the Tadorninae page, not the Goose page - OK if I move them? - MPF 23:37, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks; done. I've also moved the (broken) links for a Falcated Duck pic from Dabbling duck to Talk:Dabbling duck (and similarly for Coscoroba Swan on the Anatidae page); if the links can be repaired I'll put them back. MPF 20:41, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Do I have your permission to delete our discussion at Talk:Giant sequoia? I'm just trying to 1) follow Wikipedia:Wikiquette and 2) not leave a mess for search engines. -- hike395 07:06, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Dear Arp: Hi1 My friend from Puerto Rico is having trouble finding the images I want him to download. I need to ask you another favor: Can I please direct you to the exact page with the photo Ive been given permission to portray both of Wilfred and Clara Benitez and then have you download them?

And I need to ask, exactly what system to I need in my memory to be able to transport photo files from my files to wikipedia and how do I get that system and is it expensive?

Thank you and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Angel on my left shoulder, demon on my right one Martin

Dear Arp; Hey, thanks for the help1Im gonna call the Benitez family tomorrow, they will surely like the way it looks,as much as I do.

I need tutorial on how to upload photo files from your computer to wikipedia, what program do you need ect.

I wanted to ask how much did you enjoy your experience at Britih Aerospace? Must have seen a lot of airplanes from different airlines ah? I know if Icant become famous Id surely love getting a job at Airbus, for example, in the future..LOL I mean, imagine, Ive seen many different North American, European and Latin American airliners in person,but I was lucky one time that I saw one of Saudi Arabian Airlines after an unscheduled stop herein Phoenix once! So I bet it must have been fun seeing all those planes from airlines worldwide while at BIa!.

Well, Thats all for now. Thanks and Godbless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Flying High Martin

Hi Adrian. You might be interested in what I wrote at User talk:Hike395 just now. I adressed that to Hike, and won't waste server space by copying it over here as well, but read it over and feel free to jump in with a comment if you like. Best -- Tannin 11:00, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I went ahead and replaced the discussion at Talk:Giant sequoia with a 2 sentence summary. If you think that was a mistake, please feel free to revert or re-summarize. I think the discussion at User talk:Tannin states our positions nicely. -- hike395 18:19, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text-align:center doesn't work with all browsers, and mess the page up. IE 5 place the image in centre of the page instead. Nico 16:50, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Ok, I see. I guess it's not a very big problem, though (it looks like this). Anyway, I think there now are a new and more simple standard for pictures, see Prussia. Nico 17:05, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hello, Adrian Pingstone, and thank you for the good point and corrections in the iris photo caption and iridology talk pages. Highly appreciated :-) Now, we are begging for an iris photograph :-) Sincerely, irismeister 14:18, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)

250 pixels is certainly good; especially when you're using the 'thumb' parameter that puts that (rather ugly, so far) border around the image. Good thing with the new code is that it's just a quick edit to change the size! However, when not using 'thumb' in the attributes, 300px doesn't look over big, IMO.

I've been putting up pics of most of the US military types that lack them, too. —Morven 20:19, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi. We've decided that we need to tag all images because of all the dodgy images on wikipedia. As you release your (really good) images into the public domain I've been tagging them with {{msg:PD}}. As you point out the wording of this needs to be changed as yours are public domain internationally. Secretlondon 12:20, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

I think we should make the international PD the default. The current message is really designed for images that are copyright expired in the US. The idea behind tagging is so that images can be filtered. At the moment some using wikipedia can't really use any of the images as there is no way of filtering out American fair use, etc. This is what I'm doing - so a third party user can keep the legal ones. I hope this makes sense. :Secretlondon 12:28, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

Adrian - I've sorted it. Please add {{subst:PD}} to your images. I've made the US specific one {{subst:PD-US}}. It reads This image has been released into the public domain by the author. This applies worldwide. See Copyright. ::Secretlondon 13:22, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

That's good. I'll add the worldwide message to future pics and go back little by little over the relevant old ones! Thanks for sorting that out.

Adrian Pingstone 18:21, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

As I updated the message, it seems to have updated it on the image pages. But do check, all the same. Secretlondon 18:27, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

You may be interested in the Public Domain Dedication and dedication form from Creative Commons. Martin 18:09, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Dear Arp: Hi1 How are you? I discussed with another friend, the other Puerto Rican guy, about the addition of a photo in the Menudo article. The website has not been updated in two years, and my friend told me something that I could download it based on free usage or something because the site hasnt been changed in two years so the webmaster probably doesnt keep it anymore etc, etc. I asked for permission but wasnt answered.

Anyways Im gonna send it to you and if you believe it grants being here, let me know.

Thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Menudomania at full Martin

Hi Adrian, do you still object to deleting the thumbnails listed on Wikipedia:Images for deletion now that the thumbnail code has been in for a while? silsor 00:10, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)

Hi - yes, it was me who moved Embraer ERJ 145. I used ERJ-145 because searching the web, it seems to be the most common way to render the name. However, you're right - there should be no dash and I've corrected this. Will add appropriate redirects. Cheers --Rlandmann 22:11, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

You might also like to take a look at what we're doing over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft and perhaps especially at the civil aircraft benchmark at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/checklist (civil) - we still need an article on the BAe Jetstream, for example ;) --Rlandmann 23:57, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Oops again. I was working from a US Navy fact sheet, but further investigation seems to show the USN using both "Sea Hawk" and "Seahawk" interchangably, but with "Seahawk" more common. I'll revert. --Rlandmann 14:27, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Adrian, I'll write articles as and when I get the chance. jimfbleak