User talk:Ardfern/Archive 8

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 → Archive 14

File:Bank of Ireland, Donegal, June 2012.JPG

File:Bank of Ireland, Donegal, June 2012.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion 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, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

64.150.8.12 20:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This was a nonsense nomination by a random IP. Closed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Centre Jean-Moulin, Bordeaux, July 2014 (02).JPG

Pay attention to copyright
File:Centre Jean-Moulin, Bordeaux, July 2014 (02).JPG has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Benoît Prieur (d) 10:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

London Gatwick Airport

Hi, The template "London Gatwick Airport year" used in the Categories "Category:XXXX at London Gatwick Airport" currently puts its categories in "Category:Transport in London in XXXX" or "Category:XXXX in London". Is it possible this could be removed from the template as the airport is not actually 'in' London, it is in West Sussex where the template also adds its categories? This would be in line with how the other airports that serve London are treated in Commons. I ask you to make this change as I believe you are responsible for creating this template, if not can you tell me where to ask to implement this change? Example of categories affected: Category:2015 in London Category:Transport in London in 2014. Oxyman (talk) 11:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the modification, best Oxyman (talk) 17:23, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Airline Info on Categories

Hello. I liked the idea of you adding the details of each aircraft registration, so I have added this to other aircraft which have not been done, Only change is that the months are included for each year the aircraft moves to a new operator. Do you think we should add anything else? I added a note for a special colour scheme note for G-EZUI if that's a good idea? --MKY661 (talk) 00:38, 18 February 2016 (UTC): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:G-EZUI_(aircraft)[reply]

Looks good to me. Sufficient level of detail. Glad to see someone else working on thisArdfern (talk) 10:38, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jetline_International_aircraft_at_Domodedovo_International_Airport

Category discussion warning

Jetline International aircraft at Domodedovo International Airport 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

78.186.55.101 21:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apollo Aviation Group / GECAS

Dear Ardfern, I'm writing regarding your correction of pages Category:B-5080 (aircraft), UR-PSN (aircraft) & TC-SUB (aircraft). I have noted that you added into "Template:Cat see also" 2 categories of aircrafts - N614LS (aircraft) & N310CQ (aircraft). As far as we can see from aircraft story it had this registration numbers during the period of storage in Apollo Aviation Group and GECAS agencies. These periods lasted couple of months only. And I really doubt that the photos of these aircrafts with these registration numbers exist and will appear at Wiki Commons. Was it make sense to add it into "Template:Cat see also"? --Vasyatka1 (talk) 13:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • To leave them out would render the information inaccurate and therefore useless and leave gaps in the timeline. In many cases there are indeed photos of aircraft while in ownership of lessors or in storage.Ardfern (talk) 14:33, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:A6-EMA_(Boeing_777)

Category discussion warning

Category:A6-EMA_(Boeing_777) 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Conifer (talk) 06:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete vs. rename

Concerning your recent edits akin to this, two things:

  1. The category names you created are certainly better, being more clear and matching other such names of categories about other types of vehicles (I didn’t do that back when I worked in these categories to avoid too changing both scope and name of each category — but now it’s certainly later enough to do so.)
  2. However, why not renaming/moving these misnamed categories instead of deleting them? It would minimize file editing (one edit on each filepage, instead of two) and keep the history of each category.

(Also: this page needs archiving. Badly.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 10:42, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cessna or other

Hello Ardfern. This edit suggests no Cessna is shown in the picture. If not, can you tell me what we do see there? Regards, Apdency (talk) 09:26, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mailboxes_in_England

Category discussion warning

Mailboxes in England 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Rodhullandemu (talk) 16:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flickreview train files

Under your name (PK-LMN) a load of train files are being wrongly loaded into Category:Aviation files (check needed). Please cease immediately and revert all the files. Ardfern (talk) 18:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Brendan Fraser

Hi,

Thank you for your work on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Fraser Is it possible that we use a more flattering image such as this? https://i.imgur.com/P2pNGCz.jpg

Or How could we go about doing that.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnah Hill (talk • contribs) 23:02, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ardfern/Archive_8&oldid=403623569"