User talk:Dcrjsr

File:TriosePhosphateIsomerase Ribbon pastel.png

This is a wonderful image, and, as a student, it's simply amazing to see the history of something that's become so ubiquitous. I just have one question, simply for documenting history of science and that sort of thing: Could you tell me which publications this was used in (I mean, obviously, if it was just used in lectures, it was still designed by you, which makes it highly notable, but knowing the details is useful for any people documenting this in future.

Thanks again so much for this,

Adam Cuerden.

P.S. I've nominated this for featured picture on English Wikipedia as well. I hope you don't mind - I just thought it was so incredibly wonderful that everyone should see it =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello! I'm not clear where I should be putting this reply - but I hope you see this.

Thanks so much for your generous comments - it's really satisfying to know that other people value this image. The large original drawing is up on the wall in my office, and I still enjoy looking at it. I definitely intend to see what else our lab has that would be useful in the Commons. Of course, I'm certainly fine with TIM being nominated for FP on Wikipedia. I finally learned enough to get the image onto my biography page there, and have been correcting a few mistakes and adding a bit more facts & references to that page and a few of the related pages on protein structure and graphics - I hope I've hit an OK balance on improving the info without biasing anything (in some cases, I think, improving coverage of other people & programs).

The TIM line drawing from which the pastel version was made (in pen, on 8 1/2 x 11 translucent drawing paper, since it was made on top of a primitive printout of the backbone coordinates, and with B&W shading done by cut-out-and-stick-on plastic film) was published in the original Anatomy & Taxonomy article, Fig. 90, and in Richardson (2000) "Early ribbon drawings of proteins" Nature Structural Biology 7: 624-5. After a bad experience earlier, we had made a point of copyrighting drawings & figures ourselves, in Anatax (footnote on first page). The slide verson of the pastel drawing was published in Richardson et al. (1992) "Looking at proteins: representations, folding, packing, and design" Biophysical Journal 63:1186-1209, doi 0006-3495/92/11/1186/24 (it was the Biophysical Society's national lecture that year, and they paid for all the color figures!). It is also the background on the main page of our website (http://kinemage.biochem.duke.edu). It has probably also been in or on various textbooks, and perhaps in some other papers or chapters - but color used to be expensive, of course.

Dcrjsr (talk) 21:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello again! First, let me apologise if this is a bit meandering - it's been a long day, and I have a slight cold. Basically, you're doing fine, the rest is largely just advice about Wikipedia. With some other stuff worked in.

Right! I just checked your edits to your page - and discovered that I had accidentally undid some of your changes while fixing a mistake I had made. Oops! I've fixed that. Your changes are fine; however - and of course this next bit does not describe you - there have been problems with people using Wikipedia to shamelessly advertise themselves: creating articles about their wonderful snake oil, promoting their books, that sort of thing. Hence, Wikipedia can be a little sensitive about people editing their own articles, so it may be best to, say, copy the article to en:User:Dcrjsr/Jane S. Richardson, make the changes there, and then ask someone to review your changes and copy it over, or suggest the changes on en:Talk:Jane S. Richardson, that sort of thing. And yes, it's silly in your case, but it's far easier to get sensible people to voluntarily jump through some easy hoops than to get the really problematic people to agree to rules that other people don't have to obey.

All the above does not apply to en:ribbon diagram or any other articles but biographies of you and maybe your husband. By all means, edit en:ribbon diagram, en:protein, anything else you want. Now, Wikipedia does require a bit extra documentation - all the facts need to have a source given. This is solely because it's a collaborative project. You know a lot of things about proteins, X-ray crystallography and so on. But the articles are going to be edited by other people, and after a while, it becomes difficult to sort out the facts you added from information added by people who may not know what they were talking about. Giving a source makes it easy for someone to go through and clean the article up again.

Oh yes, I edit under another name on Wikipedia than here, mainly because, well, I don't want Wikipedia conflicts showing up under my rather unusual real name, but don't mind people seeing my productive and unlikely-to-result-in-real-conflict work on Commons. I'll send you a message with that account.

The details on how you made the original black and white drawing - film over printouts - is really interesting. Have you ever published the details of how you made them (your webpage, being, well, your webpage, would be sufficiently authorative for information like that)? If there's a source for it, it'd be interesting to add to the history section of en:ribbon diagram.

Finally, for the record, the ideal place to put replies is on the other user's talk page, as they get notified that way. Most people will still find replies if you do it on your own talk page, though, and some people insist on replying there. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. One last thing: Don't worry about potential problems editing Wikipedia too much. I mean, there's a few nasty people on Wikipedia, like everywhere, but most people are pretty helpful, and will be willing to talk you through any difficulty. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Gentiana algida (Arctic gentian).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I don't know what you've done when nominating your picture, but it is something you shouldn't do again :-) Nomination cleaned up. --Eusebius (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment I tried to follow the instructions but clearly missed something - any ideas? Dcrjsr (talk) 17:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

  Apparently you added template substitutions after nomination. Well, no problem anymore now. --Eusebius (talk) 17:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me (after the clean-up ;-)). Lycaon (talk) 22:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I added the vernacular to the scope. Lycaon (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 09:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello,

My company, DCS Congressional, is working on a redesign of Congressman Lloyd Doggett's website, the 25th District of Texas. We'd like to use your picture (found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WildflowerCtr_lupine_close.jpg) as part of the skin of the homepage. If you could please let me know if this would be alright, I would greatly appreciate it.

I can be reached at bwall@dcspolitics.com, or by the number 202.544.2950.

Feedback at your earliest convenience would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks! Ben -- Ben Wall DCS Congressional 202.544.2950 bwall@dcspolitics.com

FP promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:TriosePhosphateIsomerase Ribbon pastel photo.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:TriosePhosphateIsomerase Ribbon pastel photo.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--D-Kuru (talk) 21:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Two people using one account

Two people using one account, as you have indicated on your userpage, is not allowable per our licensing. When you edit Commons, you are releasing your edits under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Because of how things have to be attributed, only one person can use one account. Please see w:WP:NOSHARE. I realize that link leads to Wikipedia, a sister project, but that rule stands for all projects that are run under Wikimedia. Killiondude (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

OK - I'm the only one that's actually used this account, and I've changed the statement on its page. My husband & I have worked together for nearly 50 years, run a lab together, share an email account, etc - so that was the natural thing for me to set up.Dcrjsr (talk) 00:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, and for understanding. Killiondude (talk) 00:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Wonderful Eastern Sierra photos!

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		Thanks so much for your very well-done Eastern Sierra photos. I put them in a few galleries: Sierra Nevada, USA, Ansel Adams Wilderness, and Sequoia National Park. Hike395 (talk) 07:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

• I'm really pleased that you like them, and put them out in a more accessible place! Maybe you'd be willing to weigh in one way or the other on my current FP candidate, Vertical_cliffs_above_willows_Emigrant_Wilderness.jpg. My husband & I have loved hiking the Sierra for over 50 years now - but our cameras were not Wikimedia-worthy until fairly recently. I have (and will take, I hope) more good images that I'll gradually continue selecting & uploading. Incidentally, I was blown away by the night picture from Mt Whitney that you found! Dcrjsr (talk) 15:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

{{Helpme}} How can I change an image I uploaded to the more open license I intended? By mistake, I've tagged some of my uploads as SA, which I did not mean to do. Thanks for any advice! Dcrjsr (talk) 04:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I think if you just changed the license tags you'll be fine. Especially since you're giving it a "more free" license. Killiondude (talk) 06:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I'm now checking them and doing that where needed. Dcrjsr (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ansel Adams Wilderness.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Particularly striking about this image is the excellent depth cueing from the wind perturbed water on the lake. Many small islands are visible in this composition, making it very appropriate as a depiction of this area. The clouds on to the right of the peak in the center of the image are characteristic of the area and captured quite well here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremyblock (talk • contribs) 22:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
• Side comment I haven't reviewed yet. My side question: as Jeremyblock (talk • contribs) and Dcrjsr have both a connection with the Duke University, according to presentation on user page or contributions, I simply hope that they are two different users. --Myrabella (talk) 08:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Yes, the two users are different people. But I'd very much appreciate someone else explicitly reviewing the VI criteria, esp. comparative value. Dcrjsr (talk) 14:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Of the pictures in the category, this is the one that I'll most likely recognize if I see it again, or among other mountain images. --Ikar.us (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Magnolia grandiflora (Southern Magnolia), flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Please format and link the scope according to guidelines. Lycaon (talk) 10:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Advice You could link the scope to the gallery Magnolia grandiflora where I've added this image in the"Flowers" section; I guess a subscope "Flower" should be added => see the recommendations for scopes about plants. --Myrabella (talk) 10:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Done - thanks. -- Dcrjsr (talk) 15:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria met, good photo -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 06:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sphenosciadium capitellatum rangers buttons.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. Lycaon 08:57, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

wow!

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For exceptionally artful and thoughtfully-composed photographs of Emigrant Wilderness and other landscapes, I award Dcrjsr this Barnstar. Thanks!--ragesoss (talk) 04:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Protein sheets and strands.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Perhaps word the scope Beta sheet (proteine structure), to make it unambiguous and understandable for non-biochemists? --Ikar.us (talk)
• It is in Category:Protein sheets and strands, with no text and no wikilinks. And there is a neighbouring Category:Protein helices, which explains that it contains α-helices, π-helices and 3-helices. Are all sheets β, and all β-structures sheets? --Ikar.us (talk) 13:39, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
• Comment Yes, all protein sheets are β, and all β structure is at least 2-stranded so can be called a sheet (can be a β barrel, propeller, jellyroll .. as well). Thanks for catching the typo of putting "beta" for "protein" in the category. Is it now OK this way, or should the scope be different? -- Dcrjsr (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
• Then it could be linked to the category, couldn't it? --Ikar.us (talk) 12:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• Done -- Dcrjsr (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Ikar.us (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

your candidate statement

Please note that the link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TriosePhosphateIsomerase_Ribbon_pastel_photo_mat.png is broken in your statement in Board elections/2011/Candidates/en. Ofrahod (talk) 13:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I am translating the candidate statements. Could you clarify a few things in yours for me? My first question is: what does "ww" stand for? Ofrahod (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the heads-up! ww means worldwide, and should be spelled out if I have enough characters left. I think the link problem is probably those parentheses - I should put them outside the whole link. But presently I can't edit on that page - presumably it's blocked for the translation step, and so we won't change things. Do you know who could make those corrections for me?Dcrjsr (talk) 14:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• I am sure that the translation step is not to be blamed for the blocking, because it is an ongoing process, involving dozens of languages, and takes forever. If it were blocking the candidates page, there wouldn't have been any changes in it... Besides, when I am translating, I am making all the changes in my language's page and not in the original English page, and I believe all the other translators do the same. Anyway, I suggest that you publish a question about your editing problem in the English page's Discussion. Ofrahod (talk) 06:44, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks, it's been fixed. Dcrjsr (talk) 04:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Interview request

Hello Dcrjsr, would you be willing to answer some questions about your own work and background for a blog post? It would be nice for the newer candidates to have a chance to say a bit more about where they are coming from. Warm regards, and best of luck in the election, --SJ+ 21:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Dcrjsr (talk) 21:33, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Help compile Objective Data about the Candidates

Posted to all candidates talk page:

To aid in the fair evaluation of all the candidates, especially those not active on EnWiki, verifiable data about the candidates is being compiled. Anyone is invited to help compile the data since it is all publicly available on-wiki.

But since the people best qualified to help are the candidates themselves, it seems reasonable to ask:

• Which languages do you speak? (voter statement)
• Which projects do you contribute to?
  • For each, when was your first edit?
  • For each, how many total edits? (exact figures not need)
• Which projects are you an admin on?
• Are you a bureaucrat? which projects? when?
• Are you a CheckUser? Which projects? When did you start??
• Are you a steward? If so when were you made one?
• Have you served in a verifiable leadership role on a project? (e.g. Like EnWiki's Founder or Arbcom member)
• Have you served in a verifiable leadership role on at the Chapter or Foundation level? (Trustee, etc)

Are there any objectively verifiable facts that should be included in this guide but aren't?

(Incidentally, this document won't reflect my own personal values or wikipolitical opinions. Ideally it will come to exist outside of my userspace in some neutral, visible location. -- Alecmconroy)

• For use in editing, I only speak English. I know a little bit of German, Russian, Spanish, and Portuguese, but I tend to lean on the abilities of my linguistically talented sister (whose career was in the Foreign Service and was also a professional translator for Knopf).

• I am most active on Commons, contributing scientific and other images. About 800 edits; first edit 2009-01-21. About 300 edits on en:wikipedia; first edit 2009-01-20. When I retire, I'll probably also get involved in WikiSource and perhaps WikiSpecies.

• This is my first foray into wiki administration of any sort, and I am not a chapter member. I mostly want to put what time I have into adding and editing content, but (as well as research, writing, and teaching) I do have wide experience in scientific societies and collaborations, and some in large software projects - those are the perspectives I would bring to the Board. -- Dcrjsr (talk) 15:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for running

Hi, Dcjsr. I hope you won't be too discouraged by the election results and that you'll consider running again the next time. I rated each contender, based on their candidate statement and their answers to the questions, and you came out with the highest rating. I suppose that incumbency and name recognition played significant roles in the outcome. If voters' leading criteria had been the ability to articulate concise, sensible statements and answers, I think you would have won hands-down. Cheers, Rivertorch (talk) 05:03, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the analysis and encouragement! On balance, I'm actually happier not having won. I realized after finding out the true extent of commitment that the present time was not very sensible for me, while dealing with an unusually large lab, several international collaborations, and the presidency of the Biophysical Society. I do indeed intend to run again, when we get to a semi-retired status.Dcrjsr (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Rename requests

For a simple rename request, it would be great if you would use {{rename}} by preference. We usually reserve {{badname}} for situations where the file has been uploaded twice. Thanks. Request has been done.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:36, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and noted - I'll do that in future. Dcrjsr (talk) 02:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

My new project - WWC

Hi Jane! I hope all is well. I wanted to stop by to share a new project with you that I am developing, called the WikiWomen's Collaborative. I would love your input about the project.

WWC needs you!

• You can find the project page here.
• On the talk page, you'll find a number of questions I'm seeking input on. I'm especially seeking thoughts about hosting the space off of Wikipedia (in the WordPress section). I hope you will join in on the conversation.
• Finally, this project will be developed with volunteers from around the world who want to engage and support bringing new women to Wikipedia. If you think you'd like to be involved in some capacity, that'd be awesome. We're still working on developing roles, but, you can learn more about volunteer opportunities here.

Thank you for the consideration and I hope you'll participate in developing this exciting new project to bring more women to Wikipedia! Sarah (talk) 23:53, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Purshia tridentata

Ceanothus gregii

Hi Dcrjsr; Would you be kind enough to have another look at the bush in File:California quail on antelope brush close.jpg, please? Purshia tridentata has three-lobed fan-shaped leaves and terminal solitary flowers on short leafy lateral spurs, not the oval entire leaves and many-flowered clusters of this individual. Forgive me if I'm mistaken. Best wishes, --Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the note - I think you're right, but now I'm not sure what it actually is. I'll take a closer look at that bush next time I'm there, and see if I can figure it out. Dcrjsr (talk) 14:52, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what it is either; I'm not as familiar as I might be with the flora of California. Thank you for having a look. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:52, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I did get a better look, and the bush turns out to be Ceanothus Gregii (cupleaf ceanothus), as in File:Cupleaf ceanothus C greggii close.jpg and File:Cupleaf ceanothus C greggii bush mountainside.jpg. I'll ask for a file rename on the quail image, and thanks for alerting me to the problem. Dcrjsr (talk) 16:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Greetings from WikiProject Open Access

Dear Dcrsr,

SEM of bacteriophages.

it is now one year since WikiProject Open Access was started by en:User:Bluerasberry on January 10, 2012. Since then, the project has advanced modestly, but we have not interacted much. For the coming year, we certainly want to improve on that.

We also plan to overhaul the project pages to make them more conducive to collaboration, and we are pondering the idea of expanding the concept of a WikiProject Open Access to projects other than the English Wikipedia, e.g. to other languages or to Wikimedia Commons. You are warmly invited to add your voice to all that. We would also appreciate if you would share some of your OA-related activities by way of our news ticker or via the monthly Open Access report that is part of the GLAM newsletter (to which you can subscribe here), or as you see fit otherwise.

As a visual token of the anniversary, I am adding today's Open Access File of the Day. Feel free to nominate files yourself. As of today, Category:Open access (publishing) contains more than 15,000 files, of which about 2/3 are video and sound files uploaded by the Open Access Media Importer.

Thanks for being part of the project, and looking forward to more interaction. With a smile, -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I hadn't been aware of your role in the Biophysical Society, but I am glad to have learned of it from the Signpost interview. I would be glad to discuss how Wikimedia and the Society could collaborate beyond WP:BIOPHYS on the English Wikipedia. The contest is a nice start, and it opens up a wide range of possibilities around openly licensed and collaboratively curated materials on biophysics. For instance, what about a Wikimedia spin to papers in the Biophysical Journal, as already implemented at RNA Biology and PLOS Computational Biology? Or Wikimedia workshops at the 2014 annual meeting (example), or liberating materials from the Society's archives onto Commons or Wikisource? With a smile, -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 11:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The default license at PLOS journals is CC BY, as indicated at the very bottom of each page as well as in the copyright section of each article (example & background). -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 06:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

At meetings this year of both Biophysics and American Crystallographic Association, I've made some progress toward convincing Council members that society photographs should be given open licenses. Almost no one I talk to yet understands the distinction or its importance, so there's a big educational effort needed. Dcrjsr (talk) 21:05, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

What about proposing a Wiki(p/m)edia session (example) or one on reuse of openly licensed materials (example) for the upcoming Biophysical Society meeting in SF? What is the current state of the contest - has the jury already made a decision? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

For the contest, we're down to 7 finalists for the 6 prizes, but haven't yet decided which one to drop. I think perhaps that instead of yet another general Wikipedia-edit session at the meeting, I may propose one on "Wikimedia - the importance & impact of open-license images to our science", and have the contest next year be specifically for uploading open media relevant to biophysics. If that idea is accepted, would you, or someone else you know in the Open Access project who'd feel connected to the scientific end, be willing to come to the meeting (Feb 16-19 in San Francisco) to talk briefly at such a session? We gained a lot by having User:Phoebe 2 years ago and User:Keilana last year, and the society can provide a one-day registration and some level of travel support for such a speaker. Dcrjsr (talk) 17:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I would very much like to be part of that but it looks as if I am going to be in another meeting during those days, so I could only chime in remotely. But given that there is a very active community of Wikimedians in and around SF, it shouldn't be too difficult to find someone to give a talk that would be useful to such an audience. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:22, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry you're tied up then, but I sympathize with that problem and appreciate your interest in what we're trying to do. Could you help me with a contact to get started looking in the SF wiki community? I've never gotten involved in a local chapter, and don't understand the ropes of that aspect yet. Dcrjsr (talk) 15:47, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Brief update: I have contacted some people and am confident that someone will be there. Still trying to free myself for this, though. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 15:57, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the various efforts! I've added myself to the email list for the SF group, in preparation for sending out a query - but I'll hold off for now and see what you come up with. Dcrjsr (talk) 23:14, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Nothing wrong in sending that query out now already. I will probably need until the end of next week to be sure, which is not too far from the deadline. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:32, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll do that. It's a good point that the abstract deadline is really close. Dcrjsr (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Did you hear back from them? I am now available at least for Sunday Feb 16 and probably for one or two more days too, so I think we can start drafting something. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:07, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I've gotten the meeting organizers to schedule the wiki session for Sunday afternoon Feb 16, 2:15-3:30. Can I tell them you'll be there as a local expert on open media & wiki editing? They'll provide you with a free one-day registration. The session will soon be advertised in the Biophysical Society newsletter. You'd also be very welcome & appreciated at the dinner we'll have for the 4 of our 6 contest winners who'll be at the meeting, along with wiki folks from the society (probably Sun evening, perhaps Sat). I can also now send out a sensible message to the SF group to see if anyone else is interested in coming - perhaps some of the local SF grad students & postdocs might end up joining the group. At the society's Council meeting last Sat they agreed unanimously to make meeting photographs taken by the society's photographers open license, as feasible, and will try to persuade entrants in their yearly image contest to do likewise. Dcrjsr (talk) 05:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

amelanchier rename

hello;

just wanted to double-check with you about the rename of this file.

not that i'm an expert, but the plant doesn't seem exactly like either alnifolia or utahensis, going by leaf-shape.

was wondering if the classification might be erroneous for both types?

Lx 121 (talk) 19:32, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment - of course they could still be classified wrong; do you have an alternative suggestion? All 3 of my Sierra Amelanchier images (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Dcrjsr/gallery_of_Sierra_flowers) definitely have the characteristic thin, ovate leaves with serrations toward the tip but not all the way back - as opposed to Vaccinium laeves, for instance), and are more like utahensis in being slightly hairy esp on the underside, and at higher elevations than alnifolia - so I'm pretty sure alnifolia was wrong. My Sierra-Nevada-specific books list only those two species. Comparing images in CalPhoto looks consistent, but not definitive. Dcrjsr (talk) 20:58, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Convert

I noticed that some of the great flower pictures you have uploaded use an incorrect option in Template:Convert. In case you do some more, here are two examples (from File:5-fingered cinquefoil Potentilla gracilis leaf.jpg):

• {{convert|2500|m|abbrev=on}} → 2,500 metres (8,200 ft)
• {{convert|2500|m|abbr=on}} → 2,500 m (8,200 ft)

As shown above (hover the mouse over the error message), "abbrev" is not correct; it should be "abbr". In case you are wondering why you did not see that message before, it's because the convert templates have just been switched over to a new system. Johnuniq (talk) 03:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much! It seems that I had the right form in my crib sheet, so I hope most of my uses of it are correct - I must have done some wrong from memory, but now I'll probably not forget. Dcrjsr (talk) 04:00, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	Your fantastic Vault protein structure image just got used (along with some others you made CC on this site if I'm not mistaken) in the Biophysical Society's “Biophysical Highlights from 54 Years of Macromolecular Crystallography” (Richardson and Richardson, Biophysical Journal Volume 106 February 2014 510–525), OA Cheers for sharing your work :~} Maddo16 (talk) 08:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Ribbon drawing photograph

Hello,

I'd like to use your ribbon photo in my PhD dissertation. Do I have to attribute it to you? If so, how do I do this? I'm sorry if there is an obvious answer to this question somewhere, or if I'm asking it in the wrong place, but I'm fairly new to using Wikimedia Commons and unfamiliar with how this goes.

Agnes

Glad the ribbon will be useful - I'm curious which one? (You can find a great many on my Commons user page, or under the Ribbon drawings category.) All you need to do is mention Jane Richardson in the caption to your figure. Dcrjsr (talk) 13:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I want to use the alpha helix.

Your voice

Hi,

Please would you make a short recording of your speaking voice, to go on the Wikipedia article about you? Details are at Commons:WikiVIP. Andy Mabbett (talk) 16:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I do have two short audio clips in the Protein design section of my Commons user page; the better one is . It's a pronunciation of the one-letter code sequence of our designed 4-helix-bundle protein Felix (Hecht et al, 1990, Science 249: 884). Dcrjsr (talk) 16:27, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Irwin Fridovich in his office.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Irwin Fridovich in his office.png. 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.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 13:21, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Dcrjsr. You have new messages at Jarekt#copyright_for_File:Irwin_Fridovich_in_his_office.png's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Jarekt (talk) 15:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Dcrjsr. You have new messages at Jarekt#Fridovich_picture's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Jarekt (talk) 20:58, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

hi, love your work, fyi, you've been mentioned in the Atlantic [1] cheers Slowking4 ♡ Farmbrough's revenge 21:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Maybe I'll buy myself a stroopwafel to enjoy. Dcrjsr (talk) 19:26, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Request Permission to Use a Photo

Hi, Dcrjsr.

The Missouri Botanical Garden is designing a book on native Missouri gardening in memory of a beloved, local horticulturist who passed away in 2014. We would like to use your photo of a serviceberry blossom found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amelanchier_arborea. Your photo will be unaltered and attributed to you. Please let us know what name you would like for us to use for the photo credit.

The Missouri Botanical Garden is a non-profit organization and our mission is “to discover and share knowledge about plants and their environment in order to preserve and enrich life.”

Kind regards, Amy

Amy McQueen | Publications Assistant | Missouri Botanical Garden | www.mobot.org

Yes of course -- I'd be delighted! The image has a CC-BY-3.0 open license so you didn't actually need to get permission, but I'm very pleased to know you'll be using it. You can attribute it to Jane Richardson, and perhaps say it's from Wikimedia Commons if there's room.

We make something of a hobby of visiting botanical gardens when we travel, and we'll try to stop by you folks in St Louis when we get the chance. - Dcrjsr (talk) 20:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thank you very much. Hope you can make it to our Garden soon.

Amy

Round Fire / Swall Meadows

I don't know whether you're a homeowner in Swall Meadows, but if so, I hope your property escaped the horrible fire. Best wishes and good luck! — hike395 (talk) 15:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately we had a second/retirement home in Swall that was torched to the ground. You can see it burning above center in the video at 30-50sec. We are at Duke University in NC in our other life. I'll be out at Swall for most of a week at the end of March to start on arrangements, and perhaps we could get together to share more positive thoughts about E Sierra on Wiki. - 50.111.89.171 16:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry - apparently my log-in had lapsed. - Dcrjsr (talk) 16:16, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

That's terrible! I am so sorry to hear about your house. How did you find out about the fire? You've probably already seen this recovery information page: [2]. — hike395 (talk) 02:07, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

One of the neighbors called us a few days afterward, which was very good of him. Our son has been out to take pictures, and I'll be there Mar 27-30. That link was in some of the info we've gotten, but I had not looked at it yet -- it's quite useful. We are of course in less dire trouble than the full-time residents, but the emotional impact and the time and money it will take are huge, and it will be many years before our incomparable view really returns. - Dcrjsr (talk) 04:47, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Fred Richards article FA nomination

Hi Prof. Richardson, thank you for your article on the late Prof. en:Frederic M. Richards. If you look through the article's talk page, you will see that it was nominated for featured article status in late 2014, and failed. (I wasn't involved in that process.) If you look at the comments for featured article, one of the main reasons given for rejection was that it wasn't clear if you supported the nomination as the original author. (They had a bunch of stylistic/technical quibbles as well, e.g., citation parameters.) This should be a featured article IMHO. The main advantage of featured article status, as far as I can tell, is that Wikipedia will then make a greater effort to have the article translated into other languages. Prof. Richards work was of international stature; the article deserves translation. It appears likely the article would achieve featured article status if you renominated it after making their minor stylist improvements.--Prot783 (talk) 05:17, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Blundell Tom BIO 0031adj1-1.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Blundell Tom BIO 0031adj1-1.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 (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). 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). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Animalparty (talk) 21:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Blundell Tom 280306 crop.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Blundell Tom 280306 crop.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 (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). 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). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Animalparty (talk) 21:52, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

The permission letters for these two files have been sent to OTRS, so their formal permission is pending. - Dcrjsr (talk) 18:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

File:Foxtail pine Pinus balfouriana subsp austrina Big Arroyo.jpg is during this week on Estonian Vikipeedia main page, because foxtail pine is article of the week. Thank you for nice photo! Taivo (talk) 19:16, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Glad you liked the photo, and thanks very much for letting me know! Dcrjsr (talk) 20:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:178-EbolaVirusProteins VP40.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:178-EbolaVirusProteins VP40.png. 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 (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). 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). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Diannaa (talk) 12:23, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

The permission website at the RCSB PDB was already specified in the Commons category for this entire set of continuing Molecule of the Month images, and I have now sent that information to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Dcrjsr (talk) 22:17, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Location?

Hi Dcrjsr - do you have a location for where you took File:Western juniper Juniperus occidentalis berries.jpg, please? It'll help identify which subspecies of J. occidentalis it is. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't have all the photos from 2010 on my current laptop. But the photo is likely to be the same subspecies as for File:Juniper_berries_lush.jpg taken in 2013 (an especially good year for Juniper berries in the Sierras). The 2013 photo does have complete location info, and the 2010 photo would need to be within about 30 miles N or S of there, up into the Sierra Nevada mountains west of Bishop California, and not a wildly different elevation from 8000ft. It would indeed be nice to know the subspecies - thanks for help with that. Dcrjsr (talk) 04:39, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

It's highly likely to be Juniperus occidentalis subsp. australis. I recategorized the image. — hike395 (talk) 04:56, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Dcrjsr (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for image of needleleaved tree

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Whitebark_pine_Pinus_albicaulis_needle_clusters.jpg - I am using it in editor of OpenStreetMap data ( https://github.com/westnordost/StreetComplete/pull/1465 ) - thanks for making it available! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 06:58, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! I do try to make images that are prototypically representative of what they show, and also aesthetically pleasing but not because they look unusual. Dcrjsr (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sevehah Cliff.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ximonic 03:08, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

One of Dave's photographs got 15,000+ views

Because en:Vogelsang Pass was shown on the Main Page of English Wikipedia, File:High basin S of Vogelsang Pass.jpg got more than 15,000 views on November 19. I believe that it is now your most viewed photograph. Congratulations! — hike395 (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much for alerting us! Dave is of course very pleased. We (me, Dave, and Cleo his mobility-assist Akita) finally got out to our place in Swall Meadows for 3 weeks last August, which was marvelous after the 2-year hiatus. Dcrjsr (talk) 03:57, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Copied your flower gallery

I started to make a Sierra flower gallery, but then I realized you had created the large majority of the high-quality flower images, and you had put a huge amount of effort into your own gallery, so I simply copied it to Flowers of the Sierra Nevada (United States). If you find this objectionable, I can delete the gallery. But I think it's quite wonderful and the world should benefit from all of your work. — hike395 (talk) 04:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

That's great ! I'd love to have other ways of spreading it around. 50.52.133.205 01:21, 31 December 2023 (UTC)