First archived talk at User talk:Arpingstone/ArchiveMar3-2003
Second archived talk at User talk:Arpingstone/ArchiveJul10-2003
Third archived talk at User talk:Arpingstone/ArchiveFeb20-2004

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

I'm no expert on cameras. My Fuji Finepix 4700 is mechanically and optically good, but only 3X optical zoom, not interchangeable nor screw-on to my telescope. Jim. Incidentally, this page is at 39kb. ---

==USAF Museum photos== On futher looking, you are probably correct (that they are *not* normally okay to post). I just *assumed* USAF photos and did a real quick look thru the USAF museum info itself. Guess I should learn to look closer! Anyway, I found replacement photos (from NASA!!!), but can't seem to get them to replace the old ones (using the same filename)... Guess this is gonna be one my 'stupid' days. Thanx for pointing it out though!!! ---serak 21:34, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi Adrian. Cameras ..... Tough choice! I can only really comment on the Nikons in any detail. I have a Coolpix 4500 (well, two of them now) which is a little over-priced, 4MP, 4X zoom, very neat and clever in lots of ways, and drives me crazy with its shutter delay. The delay is about 0.7 sec. Doing wildlife stuff (as I do) that makes it mega-frustrating, but for digiscoping the CoolPix 4500 is petty much the only game in town. Nothing else fits onto a scope and performs as wel as the Nikon does. (With nearly all others, you get a lot of vignetting.)

That estimated 0.7sec is including focus delay, so you'd stil find it better than your Oly, but I doubt you'd be saisfied.

What would I get if I were you? (i.e., not digiscoping.) First, I'd listen to EricD's advice (on my talk page). Eric is much better informed than I am about cameras in general. Second, I think I'd bite the bullet and make up my mind to wait another 6 to 12 months, and then buy an SLR.

Digital SLRs are really starting to threaten decent value now. There is the new Canon, essentially a 10D with a plastic body and slightly downgraded electronics, that is getting excellent reports and about 2X the price of a Coolpix. More interesting still is the new small Pentax. Give the Pentax three or four months to start biting into Canon's market share at the DSLR entry-level point, and it's price war time. Good for buyers! Say ... oh ... any time from Octover or so onwards. Better yet, just after Xmas is usually a good time. Retailers are flat and manufacturers try to sweeten things up for them.

I know that isn't what you wanted to hear, but I am not aware of a non-SLR digital camera that will really do what you want yet.

Finally, some random thoughts.

• Ignore "digital zoom". It's complete maketing crap. Serves no purpose whatever. Optical or nothing.
• Try to avoid non-standard flash card formats (i.e., Sony Memory Stick, XD, all those other weird ones. Real cameras use genuine Compact Flash.
• When calculating the cost of the camera, be sure to include the cost of at least one set of spare batteries (more likely two sets - I have 5 batteries plus an in-car charger, and it's only just enough), and plenty of flash cards. The more megapixels the camera, the faster you go through flash cards, as your images take more space.

Best of luck with your purchase! Tannin 11:57, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I have a Canon G3 (now superseded by G5 model) and I'm very pleased with it. It's not an SLR, but it offers a feature set that comes very close to one, but at a lower price point. The lack of true through-the-lens shot composition isn't a problem, since you can see what you get on the screen, and once you get used to it, this mode of operation is easier than holding it up close to your eye anyway. The main benefit I can see from a true SLR is lens interchangeability, but the new generation of digital SLRs do not accept standard analogue lenses of old (for good optical reasons), so you will have to reinvest in lenses if you go that route. The G3/G5 uses Compact Flash, and I agree with the above - avoid the proprietary formats. On a 256M card, I can get over 400 shots at good workaday quality, and still well over 100 with ultimate quality. The Canon has enough manual modes to keep the creative photographer in me happy, but will still point and shoot for snaps in "auto" mode. Shutter lag is acceptable, better than the Fuji models around at the moment, though could still be better. There is a way to get rid of most of the lag using a "fast shot" mode, where it sets the camera up just short of taking the actual picture, then when you press the button it completes the shot. Seems to work. Optical zoom is only 3x (maybe the G5 extends this, not sure), sometimes I would like a bit more. Asd Tannin mentions, digital zoom is not worth paying too much attention too, though one time I used it the rseults were better than I expected, since the camera is able to interpolate using all the data from the CCD, so the result is better than what you'd get if you just zoomed up a JPEG image later in a software package. Anyway, I recommend it, but trhe market is moving fast, so there may already be something better for the same money. Graham 21:53, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've just noticed you're in (or near) Bristol. So am I. Do you know of any other Bristolian Wikipeidans? Apart from me there are a couple of other people I know from my hall, but they're just casual editors. Has there ever been a Bristol meet-up? CGS 23:14, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC).

Thanks Adrian - it's a lot easier to take pictures at Slimbridge. I'd recommend Sri Lanka to any one as a holiday, even if they are birders. Jim

Dear Arp: Hi! AntonioMartin here. Good news, the onoly good news in my family today actually. We were granted permission to use a Mexicana photo on the Mexicana de Aviacion page. Let me know your email and I will send you the link so that you can upload it. Like I aiways said Id do it myseklf but my conouter doesnt have the memory space so I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

My uncle and his wife were injured at a shooting yesterday night. My family is going through a terrible time right now. The injuries are non life threatening , through but you can imagine how we are.

Thanks and God bless you! See ya in a while!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Shaken Martin

Hi Adrian and thanks for the message. I'm keeping a low profile at the moment while I work out what to do next! I do hope that all is well with you. Nevilley 08:52, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Greetings Adrian. I have changed the pic on Undercarriage to better fit the article. Maybe you have an even better one somewhere, a clear closeup perhaps? Cheers. Moriori 01:43, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Adrian. The original pic was excellent. Is. No question. However, if you read the page history you will see where a user insisted on "a tripod effect" to describe undercarriage configuration. It clearly isn't, and it isn't an aeronautical term anyway, so that's why I swapped to an a/c showing five sets of wheels. The user seems to have done a bunk and maybe "tripod" won't reappear, so I'll revert the pics. Gladly. But if he comes back, and tries his "tripod" silliness, then ...... Cheers. Moriori 19:44, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

Hey Adrian nice to hear from you again! Lots of things have happened here: My computer is next to my door, and since my uncle and his wife were forced to open the door before they got shot Im worried about that because of that I dont collaborate much here anymore. We think it was a robbery.

Anyways, about the photo, I have been granted permission to use photos on the Avianca, Delta Airlines and Futura articles. Problem is, all the owners keep asking to have their names under the photos. I figured out I could put it there, send them the link, make them happy, and then erase it.

I was wondering if you could help me with the uploading of some of these photos.

Thanks, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio La Loca Martin

Hi Antonio! I notice that Dori has sugested you try really hard to do the uploads yourself but I don't think there's much chance you would succeed so I'll certainly do them for you. Just let me know, here on my Talk Page, the URL and I'll put them on.

On the subject of copyright, I'm afraid we simply don't (as far as I know) allow copyright notices in pic captions. Surely your suppliers would be happy with a link at the bottom of the article? If they insist that the copyright notice be directly under the pic then I can't help you. It's certainly not a solution to do the notice then erase it later!

I'm very sorry to hear what happened to your relatives, Best Wishes,

Adrian Pingstone 09:21, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dear Arp: Hi! Thanks for your work! I greatly appreciate it and I will wait for the photos to be there, dont worry I know youre loaded.

I hope you dont get mad at me for this, but I also got granted permission for photos to be uploaded at the Dominicana de Aviacion, Aeroperu, and Aeromexico articles. I have requests in process for Eastern Airlines, China Airlines, Tame and South African Airways. As I get permission, I will let you and others (so that I dont OVERLOAD YOU with work) about them. I will ask others only because I appreciate you most, and I dont want you to have a lot of work, and I know you do as it is. Brace yourself, through, I will ask you to put a few of these..:)

Once again, thanks, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, your friend, Antonio Loaded with Jet Fuel Martin

---

Thanks!! Dear Arp: Hi1 Thanks for the Avianca upload1 It looks excellent now. Duarte saw it, and he loved it, he might even become a collaborator too, he seemed impressed with our website.

Once again, thanks buddy! Keep uo the good work and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, your friend, Antonio Tequila! Martin

Hello, thanks for your gentle comment. It was just natural to get rid of that picture, given its dubious © status and the residual advertisement graphics. Had I checked the talk page, I might have even done what you suggested there (and what the user who had included all those images in the first place has done now). Cheers, Lupo 08:31, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dear Arp: What would I do without you?? Sam told me recently he enjoys articles more with photos, and it made me realize how stale they look without pictures, specially airline ones. Im very picky when it comes down to choosing which photos to ask for rights to inclusion here, I like ours to show the airlines name and logo clearly so people can see what their livery looks like.

That said, you came through again! The next rights I got granted, although I have many, many rights granted, but the next ones are for the Dominicana de Aviacion, Aeromexico and Aeroperu articles. I will send them to you ASAP and dont worry, I know youre a busy man so Im not in a hurry:)

Thanks from the bottom of my heart and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, your friend , Antonio Gotta see the London Underground in my lifetime Martin (ps: I discovered why I cant upload photos from one site of the net to another: low memory in my ancient (1999) model..lol)

Hi, I agree that 300px is at the "outer limits" ;-) for thumbnails; so far, I just tried to keep the images at their original size. But, I will try to remember reducing the thumbnails to 250px in the future, which ought to do just as well. For those I already did, feel free to fix them. BTW, thanks for uploading so many great images in the first place! --Magnus Manske 22:07, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dear Arp: Hi! Thanks again for the photos. Once again you come through! Now, Ive been noticing you havent been answering my messages. I hope youre not mad at me!

I know that you must have a long list of pictures to be uploaded, let me know if you need a breather. But youre one of my favorite persons to work with aat wikipedia. I have the next batch of airliners ready to be sent, let me know if you want them.

Thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Pink Cat Martin

Dear Adrian: Thanks for uploading the new photos! Its good to hear everythings good at home! As far as here, my mother is getting tested for Cancer again. If no bad news comes before the weekend I will be busy pursuing my other hobby besides wikipedia, planes and boxing: autographs. Muhammad Ali, Celine Dion, Prince, Evander Holyfield and Ali's daughter Laila, who is making quite a name for herself as a boxer too, are going to be in town Saturday at a charity event and God willing that mom comes out ok, Im planning to be there.

Well, soon I will send you a new batch, specifically a Midwest Airlines photo that was supposed to be sent with the last batch but because of a small misunderstanding I had with the airliners.net people (I clicked on the wrong photo ID and thought they'd changed the photo I had permission for was changed into one of a United Airlines plane) I wasnt able to send it. Thats clarified now, so that one will be sent to you soon, as well as one of Skyservice and NCA.

Ive been asking for photos to include on articles Ive written about airlines, being specially good to those who have sent me plane models for free but also to hispanic airlines. Monarch was excellent , they sent me one, they were real nice. So was NCA, they, British Airways and Palmair each sent me two plane models for free. I see it as a favor back to them. But in BA's case I already saw they have photos at their article anyways...I also have Fina Air, Fine Air, Cubana de Aviacion and other airline photos coming up pretty soon.

Well keep mom in your rayers. Thanks angain and God bless you! Idf I were to write an article about you what can I say it would be very POV because youre an excellent friend and wonderful man.

Sincerely yours, your friend, Antonio Wikijunkie Martin

Hi Adrian. The Opera House pic at Sydney is not viewable in the smaller size but ok expanded. Don't know how to fix, so.......Ta. Cheers. Moriori 02:12, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)

---

I've started a new WikiProject: WikiProject Trains. I'm inviting all Wikipedians who are interested in trains and railways to take a look and decide if they want to get this going. Thanks, —Morven 23:32, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi! I took your great photos of Victor and Vulcan bombers into Polish Wikipedia. Aren't both of your Victor photos the same machine? (of 1961?) Wouldn't it be Victor B.2 variant? As for Vulcan: wouldn't your photo be Vulcan B.1 ? Thanks. Pibwl 18:50, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

After searching the Net for pics for the last several days, I'm quite convinced they are the mentioned variants. But do you remember, if these towo Victors are the same plane? (it would make the things easier). Thanks for sharing such exclusive photos. Pibwl 22:51, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

About Yate article--struck close to home, eh? ;-) I find that it's usually easier to just change text than it is to try to get someone else to change it to match your ideas (unless I'm being paid as a tech writer mentor, which I sometimes am, but even so--I think people can learn a lot from seeing their writing edited). The current Yate edit could be even more NPOV and downplay the surveys even more. Coincidentally, while I was following some other dubious edits, I found this--check the history for original version and very POV editor. I just went in and changed the article (what there was of it to salvage). It's still pretty trivial info but probably accurate and probably NPOV. 'Course, you've been around Wikipedia much longer than I have. I don't think Dash was really throwing down the gauntlet and he might or might not get NPOV and encyclopedic writing, but he did make a lot of edits trying to address some of your concerns, and maybe he benefited/would benefit from seeing stuff edited as well. So I'm all for more/more interesting info on Yate. Imagine--they have a McDonald's! Do they have a Starbucks, too? (trying to keep a straight face...) Elf | Talk 20:17, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)