User talk:MartinPoulter

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, MartinPoulter!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

Cirt (talk) 09:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Help!

I'm having a problem with uploads. My latest picture disappeared. --Matthisvalerie (talk) 17:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

File(s) appeared in Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter

Hello MartinPoulter, it seems that your latest changes or uploads of the file(s) Bodleian Libraries broke a template. This assumption has been made because the file(s) appeared in the maintenance Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter. To fix this issue please check this category for further information. If the file(s) is/are not contained in the maintenance category anymore someone else already did the work and you can ignore this message. Thank you for your cooperation. --ArndBot (talk) 09:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Bodlean libraries

Please stop inputting totally randoms and unrelated categories to that series of files.

Pierre cb (talk) 03:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, @Pierre cb: I am gradually fixing the categories using Cat-a-lot. The categories are not unrelated, but are the subject tags supplied by professional cataloguers. I recognise that mismatch with existing Commons categories is a problem, and I will work to correct it. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 13:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Bodleian Libraries, City of Oxford, 19401941, lower half of map.jpg

Not PD-100, if its from 1940/41. What's the original documentation for this one say? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: Thanks a lot for noticing. This was from a bulk upload of files almost all of which are old, but there are a few exceptions. I've changed it to CC-BY. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Most likley PD-UKGov if it's former defence plans to be honest. You'd be in the best position to check the 'index entry' for this in the Bodleian catalouge.

Please also see the note I left you at Wikisource. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:Russian campaigns of the Napoleonic Wars

Hi ! Would it be possible to fuse this category with Category:French invasion of Russia ? Léna (talk) 16:16, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello MartinPoulter, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Davis (1797) Map of the County of Oxford

Hi Martin! I had fun putting Category:Davis (1797) Map of the County of Oxford back together -- like a jigsaw puzzle, with all the bits having to be turned round the right way then put in the right order -- but it seems that the puzzle has one bit missing (the bottom left corner of the map, being the left hand half of the inset map of Oxford).

Is it possible that this got uploaded somewhere, but didn't make it into Category:Old maps of Oxfordshire or Category:Old maps of Oxford ?

It would be nice to have the complete set! Jheald (talk) 18:35, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

@Jheald: Very well spotted! I must have made an error when uploading- apologies for that. The missing file is now at File:Bodleian Libraries, A map of the County of Oxford 10.jpg Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for that!

There were also another couple of maps of Oxford, where we seemed to have one half but not the other

File:Bodleian_Libraries,_Plan_of_the_University_and_City_of_Oxford_Image_2.jpg (Taylor/Anderton/Jackson, 1751) -- though "Image_1" exists, which is both pages together; and

File:Bodleian Libraries, Plan of the City of Oxford western half.jpg (Faden, 1789)

Are there corresponding images for these as well? But I suppose it depends what the slides were originally taken for.

Thanks very much for your work with these uploads from the Bod -- some very nice images you've uploaded. Jheald (talk) 21:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Those missing halves are missing in the Bodleian's digital database: what's uploaded is all that's there of those items. It's worth asking though, because my bulk upload script sometimes missed out images when there were multiple images for an item, and I uploaded some missing images but there can still be gaps. Glad you find the upload useful. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 12:59, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Expiry of GWToolset user group memberships

There is a proposal on the Bureaucrat's noticeboard to automatically expire GWT memberships after one year unless the user requests an extension. Please add your views and suggestions to the discussion. The reasonably informal process for getting access to GWT access will remain as is.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Revi. 15:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:The school library-a necessity in modern education (ALA 1923).pdf

Copyright status: File:The school library-a necessity in modern education (ALA 1923).pdf

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:The school library-a necessity in modern education (ALA 1923).pdf. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: I mistyped a date, which I've fixed. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The information now consistently supports public domain, or you can go to the source where the file is marked public domain. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Magog the Ogre also fixed the license in the meantime. Everything seems fine now. Jcb (talk) 16:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Autowiki browser

I have approved your request and added you to the check page. Please ensure that you follow the rules outlined on Commons:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage#Rules of use. Enjoy. --Majora (talk) 23:17, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (1573) - Bodleian Maps Collection

Something seems to have gone a bit wrong with the upload at Category:Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (1573) - Bodleian Maps Collection -- there only seems to be half of each map; instead of the other half, a text page seems to have been uploaded. Is it possible to fix this still ? Jheald (talk) 21:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Hhi @Jheald: , I think the matching halves are all there, but due to the odd system of folio numbering, and ordering here on Commons, the corresponding halves appear in very different places in the list. For example the matching half of File:Bodleian Libraries, Theatrum oder Schawplatz des erdbodems Theatrum orbis terrarum 9v.jpg is File:Bodleian Libraries, Theatrum oder Schawplatz des erdbodems Theatrum orbis terrarum -9a-r.jpg. The matching half of File:Bodleian Libraries, Theatrum oder Schawplatz des erdbodems Theatrum orbis terrarum 11v.jpg is File:Bodleian Libraries, Theatrum oder Schawplatz des erdbodems Theatrum orbis terrarum -11a-r.jpg. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 15:31, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes sense now. I think I was thrown by the category going on into a second page, as well as the numbering/ordering issue. I've started adding some keys to force the order. Jheald (talk) 16:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jheald: oh that's brilliant- hadn't occurred to me that was possible. A huge improvement! MartinPoulter (talk) 19:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Khalili uploads

Martin, Great to see these uploads starting! But unfortunately most of our mass upload initiatives fail to achieve anything like their potential because of mistakes made at the start - the catastophic Metropolitan effort is the worst, but there are many others. Readers are presented with categories of up to 50,000, which are completely unbrowseable. I don't know how you are proceeding (and I'm not strong on the technical upload side) but these are key points:

• 1) All files must have a completely consistent term, which you seem to be doing, with "Khalili Foundation" (and other alternatives). For future searchability, it is essential that this is included in all files.
• 2) Get the initial uploads into dedicated Khalili sub-cats of a manageable size at the initial upload. Please DON'T upload anything to Category:Islamic art EVER, or to similar top-level cats. In the Khalili case, there are already named collections, so set up cats for each these, which go into the main Khalili cat and Category:Islamic art collections and so on. For major groups like "Islamic manuscripts in the Khalili Collections" set up sub-cats.
• 3) Include as much metadata as possible - the most basic key points are: type of object, date, country/area of origin, technique, materials, work for manuscripts, style if given. The MET is at least very strong here, as are LACMA & Cooper-Hewitt, however bad they are in other respects. Include the object accession/catalogue number, and a link to the object online, if it has a page. A link to the main collections site is pretty useless.
• 4) Are these the best file sizes they will give you? They are hugely below what recent big museum releases are at - eg MET, LACMA, Cooper-Hewitt - and will greatly restrict usage. There's no useful enlargement.
• 5)Adding precise other categories is certainly a complete pain, especially given the chaotic Commons category trees, but it is important to make at least some effort. Whatever the collection chooses to call it, the "Chariot of Maharaja of Bhavnagar" is obviously not a "chariot" in normal English usage, and does not belong in Category:Chariots, but in some sub-cat of Category:Four-wheeled close carriages and other carriage cats - if one knew when and where it was made, more cats would be possible.

Doing uploads properly is a lot of work, but completely necessary. It's best to ask an expert to help - Fae is probably the best - he did LACMA, Wellcome & others. Sorry to seem negative, it's great to see these. Johnbod (talk) 16:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@Johnbod: Thanks for the advice. I've done plenty of image uploads before and am aware of all these issues. What's happened so far isn't the main image upload- just a transfer of some images to illustrate one article. The process we are going through is getting a CSV of metadata and using that to create Wikidata records with complete metadata, which is included in Commons via the relevant templates. It's not much worth "making an effort" on the manual transfer and categorisation of a few files when a properly-done transfer of metadata and files in in progress. Agreed that there need to be dedicated categories for the Khalili sub-collections, but it's not worth doing this until the bulk upload is about to happen. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Categorization is undoubtedly a pain, however organized the process. I wish I could point to a large upload process where this has been well and consistently done, but I don't think I can. Will the final file sizes be larger? Johnbod (talk) 15:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at Wikimedia Commons.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Khalili Collections A Composite Imaginary View of Japan.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Khalili Collections A Composite Imaginary View of Japan.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Scanned public domain works on Internet Archive...

In light of a news item , you may have heard about from other sources:- https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/publishers-sue-internet-archive-over-massive-digital-lending-program/

Whilst it is very very unlikely Internet Archive would just disappear, it would be reasonable to have some kind of 'backup' plan.

With that in mind, could you perhaps suggest to the relevant people that digitised/scanned public domain works get uploaded to Wikimedia Commons in parallel with IA upload? (Even better would be for Wikimedia Commons to get a mass-upload of appropriately licensed works based on what had already been scanned either by IA or others, so that there's appropriately licensed copies in at least three places.)

I will also in passing note that the National Library of Scotland's efforts to put one of their collections on Wikimedia Commons, is proving rather successful. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

POTD Notification

⭐ The file you uploaded, is on the main page! ⭐ The file File:Khalili Collections A Composite Imaginary View of Japan.jpg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Khalili Collections Set of four padded silk panels 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Khalili Collections Set of four padded silk panels 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

POTD Notification

⭐ The file you uploaded, is on the main page! ⭐ The file File:Khalili Collections Set of four padded silk panels 1.jpg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Bodleian Libraries

I see that you uploaded Bodleian Libaries photos with reduced resolution (1 000 px). Is there an agreement that this is generally allowed or was that just during your time at the library?

--Anneyh (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Anneyh: there was a rights committee which empowered me, as Wikimedian In Residence, to upload images so long as they fit that reduced resolution. Some of the staff who were crucial in that decision are no longer in their roles, but I think the committee still exists. I would assume they are still in principle okay with that policy, but they'd need to be asked. If there's some content you want to see released, I could make some inquiries with my former colleagues. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I came out of a discussion in the French-speaking Biology project, but the manuscript was actually already uploaded in the Biodiversity Heritage Library by the Lloyd, so no need for now. I'll reach out with detail if there is another case. Thanks for the great pictures you upload. --Anneyh (talk) 12:39, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Khalili Collection Hajj and Arts of Pilgrimage Talismanic shirt.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Khalili Collection Hajj and Arts of Pilgrimage Talismanic shirt.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Khalili Collection Hajj and Arts of Pilgrimage MSS 1288.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Khalili Collection Hajj and Arts of Pilgrimage MSS 1288.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Media_needing_categories

Hello Martin

I have a question which is on that link :Village_pump#Media_needing_categories_as_of_29_July_2021

Somebody suggested that I write to you.

Best regards

--Io Herodotus (talk) 03:18, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Image

Hi Martin, hope you are doing well. Would you be able/willing to upload this particular file to Commons?[1] - LouisAragon (talk) 23:35, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Happy to help. I will make an enquiry. MartinPoulter (talk) 05:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Great! - LouisAragon (talk) 19:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm taking a Christmas holiday now, and I think people are occupied with the end of the year, but I will follow up when back in action in early January. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey Martin, was just passing by and was wondering; any updates? (I presume not?) - LouisAragon (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: The request is still going through different relevant people. Thanks for sitting tight- I hope to have updates for you soon, and thanks as always for the interesting stuff you are doing with the Khalili images. MartinPoulter (talk) 20:24, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Now uploaded! I'll crop out the central portrait and give its own file. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 11:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Awesome, Martin! Are you sure it represents Saib Tabrizi[2] though? - LouisAragon (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: I'm not 100% sure. Individuals have so many names and transliteration into English varies. But in w:en:Saib Tabrizi I see "Mīrzā Muḥammad" and "Tabrizi", but not "Taqi", so both people are a Mīrzā Muḥammad from Tabriz, and the portrait is from 1685, not long after when Saib Tabrizi died so could plausibly be a representation of him. So I count that as more likely than not but I could be wrong. I could check the Khalili Collections curator? MartinPoulter (talk) 18:16, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey,

Yeah I stumbled across the same hurdle.

• "I could check the Khalili Collections curator?"

I think that would be a good call, just to be sure. If it ain't too much of a hassle for you of course.

- LouisAragon (talk) 18:33, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: The curator says I was premature in assuming they were the same person, so it's a good job you prompted me to ask. Hopefully I'll hear more about the identity of the man in the portrait. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey Martin. Could you also upload the 4 images listed in this link?[3] - LouisAragon (talk) 00:16, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I've put in a request and I'll get back with the result. Grateful for your interest in the collection! MartinPoulter (talk) 10:53, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I've been given the go-ahead and am uploading now. I'll add links here when done. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@LouisAragon:

• 
• 
• 
• 

MartinPoulter (talk) 13:51, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks yet again Martin! - LouisAragon (talk) 23:44, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

File tagging File:Weston Library Opening by John Cairns 20.3.15-139.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Weston Library Opening by John Cairns 20.3.15-139.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT ([email protected]). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Weston Library Opening by John Cairns 20.3.15-139.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Stemoc 05:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Weston Library Opening by John Cairns 20.3.15-139.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Weston Library Opening by John Cairns 20.3.15-139.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Weston Library Opening by John Cairns 20.3.15-139.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Stemoc 05:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:Russian_campaigns_of_the_Napoleonic_Wars

Russian campaigns of the Napoleonic Wars has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Enyavar (talk) 08:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Libra image

Greetings; 9 years ago you made this edit on enwiki with an incorrect caption. The first image you added doesn't depict the Basilica art, pictured here:

Your image is from some Asian horroscope. Hope this is helpful. 2600:8800:1E96:E900:CCD:D754:ABAD:6ABF 09:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've no memory of that image or of why I thought that caption matched that image. I've removed the whole image. MartinPoulter (talk) 09:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)