User talk:DDauri

July 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Emilio Carranza, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 22:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image placement

Hi. Please stop placing images at the end of text. If you place them at the beginning, text can wrap around them. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ 01:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doctored photos

You wrote me off-wiki but I am responding on-wiki; I have no wish to know you in real life or vice versa. Your photographs are doctored, doctor, and they scream "LOOK AT ME" rather than reveal the simple truth of the subject supposedly pictured. You are putting these images into articles so that your ability to take 'art' shots becomes more well known—you are using Wikipedia for promotion. I do not wish to see images of Mission San Juan Capistrano that are anything but simple and accurate depictions. Binksternet (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You also wrote me off-wiki but I am responding on-wiki; your images uploaded to Commons would be much more believable if you posted the originals (which had not yet been touched by Photoshop). Also, why are your Flickr photos such as http://www.flickr.com/photos/drdad/4064305026/ marked "© All Rights Reserved"? You have two options on Flickr for license compatibility with Commons: "Attribution Creative Commons" and "Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons". — Jeff G. ツ 20:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One more note: the images that you have given to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons are not the full size originals. They are very small versions, this being the way that copyrighted photos are introduced, so that a fair use rationale for the image can be established. Small images do not harm the saleability of the originals, and are considered promotional to the large image. Somebody who likes the small image might want to buy the large one... Being small, your images cannot in truth be called HDR on Wikipedia—they do not show enhanced detail, which only comes with large size. No reader can click on the image as it appears in an article and go to see a satisfyingly large version of the image, one with great HDR detail. Instead, the images are teasers; promos for your ego as a photographer.

I think of the typical encyclopedia article as a limited chance to help a reader understand a concept, within their attention span. All the flashy bits which distract from the core message are to be limited in an ideal article. Your images are like dangling candy—they do not aid in understanding the core message. Binksternet (talk) 00:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Larger images

To upload a larger version of your image files, don't bother with the intermediary step of Flickr. Go to the image page on Wikimedia Commons, and you will see below "File history" a link that says "Upload a new version of this file". Click on this link, then on the resulting upload page, click on the "Browse" button so you can hunt through your computer to find the high resolution original image. Binksternet (talk) 16:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]