User talk:Σπάρτακος/Archive 1

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Σπάρτακος! Thank you for your contributions. I am Way2veers and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Way2veers 18:57, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guestbook[edit]

Thanks for your sign... I love The Cranberries too!! :) Time Is Ticking Out is my fav song.. Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Σπάρτακος. You have new messages at Flat Out's talk page.
Message added 02:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Flat Out let's discuss it 02:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your change of the photo in the infobox of the Segesta article[edit]

Hi, I noticed you changed the photo in the infobox of the article on Segesta. Not only did you not give a summary of the edit, but more importantly I'm not convinced that the new photo is an improvement. For comparison, I've added the old and new photo here.

Even though your photo benefits from a much higher resolution, the position of the sun is at a disadvantage. In your photo the sun is hidden behind the pediment of the temple, which we see in shadow as a consequence. The old photo was taken in such a way that the temple is lit by the sun, which makes the photo more appealing in my opinion. With all the shadows in your photo it's more difficult to see the temple itself. Also note the perspective, in the old photo it isn't frontal, which allows us to see a little bit more. I'm curious why you decided to replace the old photo with your new photo? --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 14:10, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Simple because for me is better the new,bye--Σπάρτακος talk please 15:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

however if you want to change isn't a problem--Σπάρτακος talk please 15:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for reverting to the old photo. --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Don't spam your own pictures when better images are available. Le Lapin Vert (talk) 21:55, 15 November 2013 (UTC)'[reply]

if you don't like open a discussion,bye--Σπάρτακος (talk please) 21:58, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the other images are older, you see a lot of people have not changed, have not you wondered why? we must not do so, if an image is present and no one takes it perhaps does not think like you, however you want photos of 1996 (!) ok, I'm just trying to give a more recent as possible, no one pays me no , and I do not make it, do you think, peace--Σπάρτακος (talk please) 22:55, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Σπάρτακος, I would like to echo Le Lapin Vert's request above. Please stop replacing images with your own inferior pictures. Just because yours are more recent doesn't mean they are necessarily better; in fact, in many cases they are very obviously worse (out of focus, subject obscured or cut off, unnecessarily wider angle, overexposed, etc.). I have reverted many of your recent changes. I appreciate that you are interested in contributing to the project, but your interest in publicizing your own work seems to be overriding the wider goal of providing quality images for our readers. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:43, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

until now I never had no complaints otherwise I would not have put however your opinion is very subjective--Σπάρτακος (talk please) 14:53, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not an image is blurry, overexposed, or obscures or cuts off part of its subject are characteristics which require little or no subjective judgment, and for the most part it's these sorts of images I've reverted. (In cases where all you did was substitute a more or less equivalent photo from a different angle, I didn't touch it.) I don't think it's correct to say that you haven't had any complaints until now; in the past few months you've had several of them on your user talk page and in edit summaries of your reverters. Please heed their advice. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:03, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

you say,for example,that isn't a not an improvement....but in are you talking about for example a photo of 590 × 401 pixels against a 2,042 × 1,532 pixels! where he also did not even read what is written there...where are these complaints?? I only had a discussion of Segesta, then settled quietly, I would be grateful if you did read me because I do not find--Σπάρτακος (talk please) 15:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

this is the answer of a ADMINISTRATOR of commons, sure they understand most of us: "Ersteres mit blauem Himmel hat eine Auflösung kleinere. beide Sind aber schön. " in English would be "The photo with blue sky has a smaller resolution. But both are beautiful" this makes me understand many things, "be objective is one of the best qualities in a person" Thanks--Σπάρτακος (talk please) 16:35, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]