User talk:Chowells

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

Hi[edit]

You may want to consider [1] as a better place to upload images. They can be referenced from any language Wikipedia.--Son of Paddy's Ego 17:48, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am now using commons.

Pontypridd Graig railway station[edit]

Just to let you know that Pontypridd Graig railway station is now where it should be. -- Francs2000 | Talk 00:59, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot!

link vs links[edit]

It is common to use "External link" singular when only one link exists. Pavel Vozenilek 17:02, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IMO it's wrong. Please see this page. chowells 18:43, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I have seen preference of singular for most of the time being here and even changed few pages this way. Pavel Vozenilek 18:55, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'd actually have said there was a preference towards the plurar, particularly since there was a project to convert external link -> external links even if there was only one link. I consider most of the points for using external link sometimes to be invalid, so I consider always using links tomake more sense.

Individual locomotives[edit]

Firstly, can we fill in the details about classes of locomotives before creating stubs on individual preserved engines please?

Secondly, can you upload your photos to the Wikimedia Commons http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page you link through just the same as normal. Dunc|☺ 21:53, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and can you learn the difference btween a train and a locomotive please? Dunc|☺ 21:58, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the point of wikipedia was that people could contribute whatever they wanted to it (within reason)?. Where I have photos of preserved locos I see no reason why I shouldn't create a stub including the photos since I have every intention of expanding on them in the future, though I may not have the facilities to upload the photos in the future. For example if I'm visiting my dad's and only have dialup then I can perfectly well expand text articles, but uploading photos of several megs is out of the question. If your interest lies in filling in details about classes of locomotives then I'd suggest you do it rather than complaining about others for not doing at it. Thank you, I am aware of the difference between train and locomotive now. I am now also using the commons to upload images. chowells 00:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Alright mate, calm down. If you can provide something along the lines of an engine history card of a locomotive's allocation throughout its life, okay. But otherwise, let's fill in the info about the classes first. There's room for a few photos in each article. There probably were (as a guess) 5,000 British steam locomotives produced, and several hundred of those are preserved. They're simply not ntoable in themselves, unless they happen to be City of Truro or Duchess of Hamilton. To cover that would be like having an article on every primary school in the country. Dunc|☺ 00:42, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am perfectly calm, although I find it frustrating when you're contributing stuff "for free" and people try to "manage" you by asking you to contribute somewhere that doesn't interest you as much -- I have quite enough of being "managed" in real life, not when I'm contributing to WIkipedia in my spare time. I'd agree that not every loco is notable, however a good many are. If for example someone briefly saw a preserved loco and wants to find more about it and types all of the known info about it into the search facility and it comes up with a stuff giving maybe a photo and details of the class then that is better than having no information at all. That, to me, is the point of Wikipedia.
Please note that I'm not saying that contributing to wikipedia does not have obligations. I am aware of those that are published and I accept them. I just consider telling someone to do someting else to be pushing it. chowells 01:00, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if I've offended you but managing newbies is part of the job. I'm an admin, I know what I'm doing. If someone creates an innaccurate substub on an unnotable subject with only a underexposed photograph, then that's clearly not good. It does not give any information to anybody requiring it. The articles on the classes are longer and more appropriate to contribute to at this stage. Dunc|☺ 14:56, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm, well I've my wikipedia account for > 18 months so I'm not quite sure I'd consider myself a newbie. However that is not really important. The only inaccuracy I believe was that I confused the term "steam train" with "locomotive". If someone creates an article you feel to be appropriate then the stated wikipedia policy is to either mark it with speedy delete if it meets the speedy delete criteria (which is quite specific) or if not to list it on Articles for Deletion where the community will decide whether the article is appropriate or not. I don't think insisting that you are correct because you are an admin is the correct procedure. So now we have several articles from the class pages linking to the specific locos which redirect back to the class page. I think this would be considered a circular redirect. An improvement? Not IMO. I therefore kindly request that you revert what you did and if you still disagree, take it to AfD. If the community decides that it is not worthy of having its own page, then I will abide by that deciscion happily. chowells 00:05, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

GWR locos[edit]

I removed the links to locos 9400 and 9466 simply because they were redirect pages back to the GWR 9400 Class article, so there seemed little point in having them. If specific pages for 9400 and 9466 are recreated then the links should be added again. Our Phellap 14:10, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Votes without reasons are ignored in AFD[edit]

Re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henley Management College. Please note that *some* admins in some article-for-deletion votes, will discount your vote, if you don't include a reason. The reason can be as short as a two-letter abbrev, but some reason is needed. --rob 19:00, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thank you, I'll bear that in mind chowells

GWR 6000 Class 6024 King Edward I[edit]

Hi Chowells. Just to let you know that I appreciated your voice of support re the merge of GWR 6000 Class 6024 King Edward I, so I reverted the merge and put it up for deletion instead. Regards, CLW 21:09, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There were quite a lot of similar changes see [[2]] so in theory these should all be reverted and go up for deletion too chowells 21:14, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler's Pope afd[edit]

Please accept my apology and see my comment Here Paul 00:21, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, apology completely accepted chowells 00:26, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

images for deletion[edit]

You removed a comment of mine from the Image page where I had placed it Image:Lance aka david alan reis nude.jpg, with the edit comment "please comment on the images for deletion page, not here". I have replaced the comment: the page exists precisely for the purpose of sourcing images!. I think, further, if you feel a comment belongs on another page, if you remove it, you should place it on that page. Move, rather than delete. (And you also should specify the page precisely, with a link.) Frankly, since you nominated the page for deletion in the first place, your actions seem rather improper. You should not tamper with comments in this way. - Keeper of Records 20:29, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? The page you are meant to comment on is clearly linked to from the ifd tag. I did not move your comment because I thought it would look even more dodgier if someone viewed the diff. chowells 00:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the appropriate place is on the page proper: do not remove comments merely because they are inconvenient or because you disagree with them. - Keeper of Records 21:42, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm afraid you are wrong. As it clearly states on the ifd tag, the appropriate place for discussing whether the image is appropriate or not is on the images for deletion page: "This file has been listed on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see that page for justifications and discussion." NOT the page for the image. chowells 00:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:GWR 5572.jpg has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file you uploaded, Image:GWR 5572.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Image:GWR 9400.jpg has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file you uploaded, Image:GWR 9400.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Dunc|☺ 18:41, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page[edit]

Thanks! Molotov (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tender number plate(?)[edit]

Can you add more detail to this please?

Where was this on the locomotive? Usually the tenders had a separate number to the locomotive and were frequently swapped between them. Mallard is 4468. This shows 1870. It helps to upload a little information about the photograph when you upload it. That notwithstanding it is an interesting view of a Shinkansen! Dunc|☺ 21:28, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Argh. It quite possibly was on the tender, I can't quite remember. Might be able to work it out by looking here but there's a lot of photos and a lot of them are crap (getting used to new camera). Thanks for the info about the tender, I wasn't aware of that. It is indeed an interesting view of the Shinkansen ;) 00:16, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Okay never mind. It appears to be on the cab side, so maybe its it's work's number? Anyway, what is the status of your other photos? Are they GFDL? I could probably find room for the dyanamometer car, Aerolite Mallard backhead?, long boiler 0-6-0, Lankey tank 1008, front half of Load Star, J69, Replica Rocket... Dunc|☺ 08:28, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No I think it's its works number on the basis that Silver Link was works no 1818 [3].
Just for clarification, it's definitely not from the tender, it's attached to the exterior of the cab. chowells 20:41, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dunc|☺ 09:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy for the other photos to be used under the GFDL, I've always been intending to upload more of them. Also happy for any of my Didcot to be used under the GFDL too [4]. I'm just pissed off how many of the photos have come out poorly, having trouble making the camera work well in low light conditions without blurring. Of course the flash isn't suitable for illuminating large areas, and the flash has a habit of over exposing everything if the area is too small. Stupid fujufilm. And I keep hitting the switch to put it into manual focus mode rather than auto focus. :( chowells 13:32, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to I already uploaded a pic of the dynanometer car, it can be found on Dynamometer_car chowells 14:30, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In museums the lighting is troublesome and photos are difficult because everything's so close together. You really need a tripod to prevent the blur... Dunc|☺ 14:44, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've bought a tripod now. Would have been useful in the engine sheds at Didcot too. Will try to make it back to York sometime chowells 20:41, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Harbour Bridge picture[edit]
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Sydney Harbour Bridge night.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. ~~~~

Thanks for finding it. It truely is an exceptional picture. Raven4x4x 06:30, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Liverpool Blitz[edit]

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that I've added your new article, Liverpool Blitz, to the Did you know? section of the War portal. Kirill Lokshin 16:47, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ta :) chowells 17:07, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd just like to thank you for your great work on the Liverpool Blitz article! Call me biased (i'm from Liverpool), but I'm going to give you a barnstar now :-) SoLando (Talk) 21:25, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I award Chowells a barnstar for his work on the Liverpool Blitz and his contributions as a whole. Keep up the great work! User:SoLando

Southend Pier[edit]

Re: User talk:MrWeeble#Southend Pier I got this from http://www.pier2pier.org/flashindex.html (click on southend and scroll to the bottom - or for a direct link, http://www.pier2pier.org/southend.htm ). Not the most verifiable of sources admittedly, but it is out there.

In order to get some more verification one way or the other, I have made a post on his forum[5]. hopefully there will be a yay or nay there.

DYK[edit]

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Liverpool Blitz, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

AfD John Larney[edit]

Please revisit AfD John Larney as it has been cleaned up and is now definatly not a hoax. Verifiable sources have been added. Also the matter of "puppetry" is hopefully cleared up. Thank you for your reconsideration. JesusSaves 00:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


vandalism[edit]

sometimes it is nescisary to edit peoples coments. i am but one man trying to do what is right and when facing a large groop of uneducated people i need to cheat to ensure that the worthy articles are not deleted by people who simply do not understand them.

Vandalising votes is never acceptable. Please do not do it. Please read Wikipedia:Consensus. chowells 20:44, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

clean-up??[edit]

If you'd like to clean-up others' pages, could you also kindly state the reasons why (instead of just adding the clean-up logo)? e.g. Hong Kong Commercial Daily

I explained in the comment when I re-added the template. chowells 13:01, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cedars Maths[edit]

Thanks. I didn't reason vanity was a reason for speedy delete. Flapdragon 18:23, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is since quite recently thank god :) chowells 18:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops[edit]

Sorry for not catching that mis-reverted reversion -- I was on my way out of the IRC channel with that one and didn't look carefully enough. I'll try and be more on my toes in the future! — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 15:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pssssssssst[edit]

I think you would be a great admin!. / M
 01:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words and support :) chowells 01:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Present for you[edit]

File:813 (Port Talbot Tank).JPG
Present

. Dunc|☺ 13:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Another present, of peace[edit]

FireFox 20:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV on Green Tortoise[edit]

I tried to make some improvements to the article. What do you think? Kit 04:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kat, thanks for making the improvements. I'm still not convinced it's neutral, though unfortunately I'm lacking suggestions on how to improve it -- I really don't know enough about the subject. Hope this helps somewhat, might be a help to try and get the opinions of another editor. chowells 13:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence in Adolf Hitler[edit]

If i will change the words "Hitler came out in peace" to "Hitler came out without a harm" the sentence will be fine? "secluder" means a man who seclude a lot. Toya 05:21, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Hitler came out uninjured" would be better English. I'm afraid I don't think "secluder" is a word, it's not in my dictionary. chowells
So what is the word? Toya 13:50, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
My Oxford English dictionary lists "seclude" and "secluded". Maybe something along the lines of "Hitler was secluded" was what you were trying to say. chowells 14:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
So I can write there "secluded"? Toya 15:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What is the entire sentence? chowells 15:13, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The entire sentence that I suggest to put is "Hitler was usually known as one who seclude a lot, brave and lucky. For example, in a battle between Hitler's unit to British and Belgian forces 2500 out of the 3000 unit soldiers were killed. Hitler came out unscathed". Toya 16:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's not particularly great English either. However, a bigger problem is that it's POV. Whether someone is "secluded", "brave" or "lucky" is very subjective. To paraphrase someone else, state the facts and let people form their own opinions over whether he was "secluded", "brave" or "lucky".chowells 16:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this sentence should be in the article, because its about time that this information will be in the article. It's already written in the article about Adolf Hitler in the Hebrew Wikipedia that Adolf Hitler was known as one who seclude a lot, brave and lucky and that in a battle between Hitler's unit to British and Belgian forces 2500 out of the 3000 unit soldiers were killed and Hitler came out unscathed. Toya 16:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, they are your _opinions_. Being on the Hebrew 'pedia doesn't change a lot, they quite possibly have different policies regarding POV. I don't particularly care about the bit about the British & Belgian forces as long as you can provide a source to prove it. chowells 18:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It written there that he was known as one who seclude a lot, brave and lucky. That's what I suggest to write there. Toya 04:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Those are OPINIONS. People are not banned from forming opinions, however they are not encyclopaedic and as such should not be in Wikipedia. Please have a look at Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view. There's even an example regarding Hitler on that page. chowells 13:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can I write there that Hitler came out unscathed from a battle between Hitler's unit to British and Belgian forces in which 2500 out of the 3000 unit soldiers were killed and that many times he moved from one place to another minutes before a bomb or a shell fell in the place from which he moved? My source is the Hebrew Wikipedia. Toya 15:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think you first need to find a reliable source to verify that it is true. For example, a book from a historian that is widely considered to be reliable. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and WP:CITE. I don't think, I'm afraid, that the Hebrew Wikipedia counts. chowells 17:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What do you say about this source? Look there for the yellow words. Toya 09:32, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFA[edit]

Hi, As you know, your RFA nomination did not receive the necessary support votes to secure adminship, so I had to fail it. This does not mean that you cannot be an admin, you can always try again after sometime. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chowells, it's a pity you didn't make admin :-( As you know, if you maintain your impressive level of editing and become more involved (as Splash said) in the Wikipedia namespace and the like, you'll probably make admin in a few a months or so, assuming you decide to go for a second nomination. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 05:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting my RfA[edit]

I know I've been slow in saying this, but thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was an honor to be both nominated and approved as an admin. If there is ever any adminish (is that a word :-) things you need help with, please let me know. In addition, I didn't know you were up for an RfA. Next time you are nominated, please let me know and I will support you (b/c you seem like a very good user) Best, --Alabamaboy 16:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FireFox RFA[edit]

Chowells

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (96/2/0), so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any queries about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks!

FireFox 18:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Industrial D[edit]

I need to do some stuff at home right now, but I'll get back to you as soon as I can. - Mgm|(talk) 19:22, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • I guess this was indeed a bit controversial. I mainly closed it as a merge for two reasons:
  1. User:Paolo Liberatore found a reference the nominator didn't find in a Google search and which the other delete voters didn't take into account.
  2. When I checked Tutorial D there was already some text on the subject included, so I didn't think having the editors of that article figure out how much of it to include.

As I see it there's two things we can do.

  1. Talk to Paolo and see if you two can come to an agreement on if and how to include in Tutorial D about it.
  2. File a request at Wikipedia:Deletion review for relisting on AFD because the voters didn't have the reference available that was dug up at the end of the voting period.

What do you think? - Mgm|(talk) 20:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was the nominator of the AfD. There appears to be one single google hit which is pure speculation. WP:NOT a crystal ball so it's debatable whether it merits mentioning in an article, let alone having its own article or re-direct. I would personally like to see it re-listed on AfD. chowells 16:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just for clarity, the reason I'd like to see it re-listed on AfD is because I can't see how you can justify closing it with "merge" considering there was one merge vote and three delete votes. I perfectly understand that closing AfD isn't just a "let's count the votes" but also requires applying some common sense and discretion, but really I don't think there was anything close to a consensus particularly due to the lack of participation in the voting. chowells 16:54, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Biography[edit]

Template:Infobox Biography has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Infobox Biography. Thank you. DreamGuy 07:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dates for NS photos[edit]

Do you have dates for the following:

Dates are important when trainphotting. Remember to note them! — Dunc|☺ 16:02, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Exif data aren't being shown in the commons. http://gallery.chrishowells.co.uk/view.php?display=images/2005/Netherlands/Amersfoort/DSCF2485.JPG looks like departmental stock, probably something to do with the OHLE, but it won't be in the main classification. You could try w:nl:Portaal:Openbaar_vervoer — Dunc|☺ 22:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There was Exif Image:Dutch_Railways_1700_Class.jpg Image:NS loc 6452.jpg though the other was cropped, so, as you say, did not maintain its Exif -- though it is there in the full sized originals in my gallery. Thanks, I might ask the guy. chowells 22:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Photos & Steam[edit]

Hi - I got to your user page from FPC, and noted that you're an avid steam train fan, just like me! The only difference is that I work in 1/8 scale... Here's a couple of page that are almost all my work: Live steam, Backyard railroad - on the latter page, I built the 4-4-0 from scratch, also the model shown on 0-6-0. Greetings from Finland! --Janke | Talk 16:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • Cheers, that is pretty cool hobby, I didn't know that people did such large models. In the past I did model trains, though they were AA gague so quite a bit smaller than that :) I definitely like the real things too -- after University I might be moving to Manchester close to the East Lancashire Railway so with any luck I'll be able to volunteer and get my hands on the real things :) chowells 22:57, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DAMN YOU!![edit]

Now I want a 20D. :( --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lol :) Seeing the work of User:Diliff and his 10D (I think he has a 5D now) was one of the reasons I wanted the 20D. It's a lovely camera. Cheers. chowells 19:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick Hawksworth[edit]

Regarding the page Frederick Hawksworth, thanks for correcting me. When I came across it and saw the phrase "big four" without an internal link, the American "Big Four" was the only one I could find on Wikipedia. Glad you caught it. –Sommers (Talk) 01:10, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, it would have been better to explain what the "big four" referred too -- I've added links now. Cheers. chowells 01:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dribble?[edit]

I think most people would prefer to read half a page of excellence than 500 pages of tedious dribble.

drivel, surely? I don't think I could manage one page of dribble :) -- Solipsist 20:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lol indeed, but I guess that is what would make people prefer the alternative :) chowells 20:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I'm amazed we don't have an article on dribble? Off to Wikipedia:Requested articles we go. -- Solipsist 20:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good point. I think I'll let someone else do the photography for that one though :) chowells 21:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Compression on your JPEGs[edit]

Hey there. I'm sure you no newbie to jpegs and compression, but I've noticed that some of the pics you've uploaded for FPC have been overly large and I suspect you were using PS with compression of Max (12). I did a few experiements with your pics and saved them with compression of 9 or 10 on that scale and it basically halved them or better with no discernable difference in quality whatsoever. 9 or 10 is what I personally use and I find it to be pretty much perfect. I just think anything higher is perhaps overkill and using up valuable bandwidth/space on wiki's servers. This is just a suggestion, by the way, but its just been my experience. Oh and lol. I just read a couple of lines abovs and noticed your tipping of the hat to me. Thanks. The 20D is indeed a lovely camera, and while I much prefer my 5D, particularly when working with panoramas there isn't a substantial difference! Whatever downsides you have with having a 1.6x crop factor, you can make up for by simply stitching a few more images together to get the same angle of view (with the same overall resolution, too)! Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 11:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi. Thanks for your comments, always nice to have useful comments on improving your work :) Yes you are right, I did save them as 12 in Photoshop. I think I tried 7 or 8 or so and I was not particularly impressed, so I just went for the highest. Your comments regarding bandwidth and storage space are a good point, I will try 9 or 10 next time. Heh regarding seeing the comment. I think I'd miss the 1.6x crop factor, it's nice having my 70-300mm lens act as something a bit bigger for free :) I'd also miss the EF-S 17-85 on the 5D -- the lens seems to get bad reviews but it's got a very useful range and IS is nice and I don't have any issues with image quality myself. I'd like to get the EF-S 60mm macro lens at some stage. Thanks. chowells 23:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is little reason to reduce your compression, in any case where you 'thumb' or change the size of the image to place it in the article (I.e. almost all the time) the JPEG is completely recompressed by MediaWiki using imagemagick with a quality setting of approx 85%. Sometimes this causes ringing artifacts, especially when the input image was not saved with a very high jpeg quality setting. --Gmaxwell 23:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Picture[edit]
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral at dusk (reduced grain), corrected perspective.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

Congratulations, and thanks for taking it for us. Raven4x4x 07:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm... Canon 30D[edit]

I want one. :( --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Liberty FPC[edit]

Please consider changing your vote. Someone addressed our concerns and cleaned up the artefacts in the sky of the image. - Mgm|(talk) 13:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Typeset_writing_examples[edit]

I have uploaded, and propose supporting the original, unmodified scan - historical significance. If you agree, please feel free to re-consider your vote. Greetings, --Janke | Talk 14:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VeryCD[edit]

Hi Chowells,

Thanks for your message. I don't take nominator's vote into account, hence the AfD is recorded as 1 delete, 3 keeps (75% majority). This gives a consensus to keep the article. Even if there is no consensus as you have claimed, the article will not be deleted as it is kept by default. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 03:21, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Picture[edit]
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, Image:Another_Place3_edit2.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution!

Thanks for this outstanding picture! Mikeo 12:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FIPA[edit]

I understand your reasons for removing my comment about FIPA's name, however I don't really think it offends anybody (FIPA was always about how agents interact rather than how they are built internally) and the name has (at least for the last 5 years of my experience) been something of a standing joke in the agents community...(it was for instance one of the first issues raised in the FIPA planning meeting at AAMAS last last year when the IEEE group was being formed).

Feel free to revert my edits again (and i'll leave it at that) if you feel very strongly about it. Zootalures 16:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, thanks for your follow up. It probably would have been prudent to check the history of the article to see who added it :) I was researching the FIPA ACL for some university stuff and I assumed it was somewhat of a snide comment added in disgust by someone. I am not bothered in the slightest by its presence, if you feel it's appropriate, you clearly know more about it than me, so no problems. Thanks. chowells 17:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof![edit]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Chowells! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Xyrael T 15:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your vote on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bruno Senna[edit]

Hi Chowells,
Sorry to bother you, but I've updated the captions on the edits to make it perfectly clear which version you support. Please update your vote and state which version you support. Please use the naming located under the main caption in bold, large text. Thanks, --Fir0002 09:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"My photo gallery" link[edit]

FYI, I believe the "my photo gallery" link on your User page is broken. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 07:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, my server is currently offline while I move house -- hopefully it will be back next week. Cheers! chowells 22:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use of your images[edit]

Hi, I'm not entirely sure on the terms of the public license under which you posted your images (specifically the cathedral at dawn and the liverbuildings). I'd like to use them as part of my GCSE IT course. Is that ok? Jay.Rehm 08:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, you can use them under the [Commons Attribution 2.5 licence]. Basically all you have to do is give me credit for taking them, and state that they are under that licence. So in your bibliography state something like "Taken by Chris Howells, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence". Hope that helps, good luck. chowells 17:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Trains[edit]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Are you aware of WP:Trains and the WikiProject Trains? It could use some of your nice choo-choo pics! Greetings, --Janke | Talk 17:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks -- yes I'm vaguely aware of it, though I haven't taken many photos recently. I will try to contribute soon :) chowells 21:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The RAW file for the spitfire image[edit]

Hi. I'm happy to work from the original raw file. I downloaded the file and opened it up in photoshop before realising that the raw file is quite a bit more blurry than the one on FPC. Then I also noticed that the perspective is a little different! I think you uploaded the wrong RAW file! ;-) The propeller isn't in the same place. If you could upload the right one, I'll gladly have a go but I didn't want to process the file if it was inherently blurry to begin with. As for ISO 100 vs 200, you're right that it is a bit noisy but with noise reduction software, it is usually pretty safe to go up to 400 without worrying about how it will ruined by noise. Its better to be noisy than blurry when you're working with fast-moving objects like planes. Noise can be minimised, blur isn't so easy. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats![edit]

I hereby award Chowells the Photographer's Barnstar for his three awesome Featured Pictures and other photo-contributions on Wikpedia! NauticaShades 18:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion![edit]
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Supermarine Spitfire Mk XVI edit4.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. howcheng {chat} 19:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Supermarine Spitfire Mk XVI edit4.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on December 20, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations!


List of rail accidents[edit]

There is currently a discussion about whether we should set criteria for inlcusion of accients on the List of rail accidents page, and if so what the criteria should be.

The discussion is located at Talk:List of rail accidents/Criteria for inclusion, where your input would be most welcome. Thryduulf 00:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irish History[edit]

You seem like you have a lot a knowledge with respect Irish history so maybe you would like to comment on the historic basis of this term here Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-02 IRA 'Volunteer' usage —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DownDaRoad (talk • contribs) 00:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Dynamometer car[edit]

Was the image of the LNER dynamometer car you uploaded taken at the York NRM? Simpsons contributor 21:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Your absence has been noted[edit]

Everything ok? :-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 19:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Chowells. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for Delisting: Another Place3 edit2.jpg[edit]

A picture you were involved with has been nominated for delisting. You may join in the discussion here: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Another Place3 edit2.jpg. -- Veggies (talk) 13:11, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Black Edelweiss[edit]

Notice

The article Black Edelweiss has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-sourced and apparently non-notable memoir. Non-mainstream or academic publisher. No evidence of notability found online.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chowells&oldid=1146387038"