User talk:Asdefyn

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hello, Asdefyn! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here. Thanks for your great work starting Busto Arsizio! :) --Nick talk 22:33, 7 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi! Please don't add languages in the region article. It is obvious that Italian is spoken in Italy and that English is widespread due to the tourism industry. Its more designed if there are more than one standard language in a country.jan (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Torre Annunziata[edit]

Hello and thanks for editing!

I am sorry to say I will remove your banner from the Torre Annunziata article. It does not fulfill the size requirements (minimal width 1800 px). Another requirement is 7:1 width to height ratio. For some more information on page banner standards check Banner expedition. Maybe you find another suitable photo.

And one more detail, when you make an edit, don't forget to add the edit summary. Thanks. Danapit (talk) 16:09, 9 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page banner quality[edit]

Asdefyn, I have noticed several banners you created have a very low technical quality:

They might have correct size, but they were probably heavily cropper and re-sampled leading to their inferior quality. You don't have to add a custom banner if you can't find any quality picture. This will just keep other editors busy deleting them.

And please, try to use the edit summary field so that others see what kind of edit you made. Danapit (talk) 23:19, 9 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just reverted some further bad quality banners:

Danapit (talk) 08:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop adding banners! Most of these are of very, very low quality and only make the corresponding articles look worse. Please read How to make a quality banner before adding more. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stanley banner - copyright???[edit]

Asdefyn, Are you sure you are an author of this photo: File:Stanley Tasmania.jpg? I have found it on internet under with a watermark. How about your other pictures you uploaded to Commons and used as page banners? --Danapit (talk) 15:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suspect you are using copyrighted photos from other authors by simply googling pictures and uploading them to commons and claiming you are an author. I hope I am wrong in this. Danapit (talk) 15:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop uploading banners before you can explain this issue. Danapit (talk) 15:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please respond[edit]

Asdefyn, it is extremely important that you stop adding banners immediately and begin discussing the issues that other editors have tried to raise with you. If you do not respond soon, you will be blocked from editing until you respond to these messages. LtPowers (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The image you just added to Lorestan, and which you said was your own image when it was uploaded to Commons, can also be found at [1]. If you are using images that are not your own this is a violation of copyright law, so please clarify where you are getting these images. If we don't get a response soon then your contributions will unfortunately all need to be undone. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Similarly, the banner added to Saronno appears to be an uncredited modification of File:Lago di Lugano Panorama.jpg. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Given the copyright concerns raised I've reverted your banner contributions. PLEASE respond to the concerns raised on this talk page before making further edits. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now the banners are not the same you can check. —The preceding comment was added by Asdefyn (talkcontribs)

Just to make sure this is clear, if you select "This file is my own work" when uploading a file on Wikimedia Commons, you are stating that you took the photograph with your own camera. If you find an image via a Google search or other method that you did not create with your own camera, it is someone else's image and should not be uploaded to Commons, even if you have cropped the image for use as a banner. If you have questions please ask, but please understand that it is very, very important to ensure that all images used on Wikimedia projects are properly licensed and not a violation of anyone's copyright rights. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see you are adding default banners to itinerary articles, but I am afraid it is contraproductive, as we didn't decide on itinerary default banner yet. Once we do it, a bot will do the job.
Now, it would be really useful if you can tell us if all the pictures uploaded by you to commons as your own work were taken by your camera. If not they must be removed from commons due to copyright violation. Danapit (talk) 19:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have reverted the itinerary banners. As Danapit clarified, such tasks should be undertaken by a bot and with a distinct default banner. If you want to help out in this matter, cooperate at the Wikivoyage:Banner Expedition. Globe-trotter (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have nominated all your files for deletion at Commons due to copyright issues. Respond there. Globe-trotter (talk) 20:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Darwin International Airport[edit]

Hi. I turned your very brief article on that airport into a redirect to Darwin, after inserting the airport codes into the appropriate section of that article. There is an Airport expedition to create good articles about the world's busiest and most complex airports. I seriously doubt Darwin Airport is high on the list, but please look at that page at the discussion on its associated talk page if you'd like to participate (which you are most welcome to do!).

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi. I don't necessarily agree with you combining these three provinces into one, because together the area already contains well more than 9 destinations, which usually means it is time to subdivide, and of course the original 3 provinces we had would be the most logical choice. Would you mind reverting your changes? Texugo (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Normally it is best to start a discussion on the talk page before starting a significant rework of region structures. Please do so. Texugo (talk) 13:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I understand your concern, but please stop doing this and start a discussion at Talk:Italy. We are under no obligation to agglomerate our province articles just because the government decides to do so. We don't always follow official administrative division, and we still must break the country into bite-size chunks so to be most useful to the traveller, so there is a good possibility that we will keep the current breakdown. Please revert your changes and discuss before making further changes of this type. Texugo (talk) 13:37, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Go next sections[edit]

Hi. Thanks for all the content you're putting up - much appreciated! However, I'm not sure about the long lists of red-linked places you're putting in "Go next" sections of articles about Italian towns. I think it would be better to give links to places of real interest to visitors, and perhaps to give short one-line descriptions of them. I'd suggest not including any red links, unless they are of truly interesting places you plan on writing articles about quite soon. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photo captions[edit]

One other thing: Thanks for putting up thumbnails of some nice photos that are on Commons, but please include instructive captions for each photo. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:10, 26 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]