User talk:Blackcat/Archive 18

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/12/Category:History of Czechia

When you closed this discussion, was it your intention or understanding that the term Czechia should not be used for any category names? I noticed that User:Cmuelle8 renamed Category:Paintings from the Czech Republic by museum to Category:Paintings from Czechia by museum, possibly to match the parent category name. Should we be renaming categories to use the same name (Czech Republic), per the discussion? --Auntof6 (talk) 22:12, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, @Auntof6: . -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 00:28, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware of any discussion banning the term Czechia. As far as I am concerned both are synonymous and may be used interchangably. Please note that most templates are aware of the term Czechia (even the very official Countries of Europe template is) and detect its use when Czechia is used instead of the Czech Republic. So there are many (again: many) places where handling of both terms as synonyms have already been handles (like is true for United States/United States of America synonyms for example). I do not see the point to do the burden of renaming all Czechia named categories just for the sake of burning this term. A lot of people in Germany, for example, do not have a problem using Tschechien and Tschechische Republik synonymously either. If this is to be banned, please quote official sources. That said, the reason of redirecting Category:Paintings from Czechia by museum to Category:Paintings from Czechia by museum was simply that within the scope of czech paintings, Category:Paintings from Czechia subtree had already been filled with lots and lots of subcategories (czech paintings by year esp.), while for Paintings from the Czech Republic only two category titles existed.
Again, there are lots of places depending on Module and Template code that support both ways to refer to the country. It will cause a lot of work to remove this term just for the sake of political correctness in the here and now. Commons hosts media from historical epochs and it would be problematic to correctly categorize historic media without this term (which is probably why you do find it here in the first place). Additionally, there is high probability that the term will be re-introduced by new uploaders/users. Imho, there are a lot of arguments against such a pruning endeavour and I'd strongly urge the people supporting it to reconsider.
If you go for that, you might also want to streamline US/USA/United States of America to United States, search into uses of Great Britain/UK/United Kingdom and so on. It would be better and adhere to scientific understanding to try to bind the usage of the terms to their time period, if they are seen as problematic in the here and now rather than to try to rewrite history (on commons) without them: Another example, Tibet is not a recognized country, but plenty of art is from the country Tibet, if you consider the time it originated.
If you are serious about pruning the name, than start with the template and module code and end with moving categories around. For starters have a look at Module:Countries/Europe. The data seems to have less dissent with the term than the claims of people in this discussion. If you want to educate people about how and where and why the term is inappropriate then please refer and link to suitable places that do so, instead of doing a biased and more importantly unweighed cleanup of a single term. Without understanding you might be closer to the group that burned the term than you may think, just my rants. --84.135.117.105 05:51, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anonymous friend, there has been a discussion about the term, and there was no consensus to adopt the name Czechia. We had offered a fair compromise, using "Czechia" for anything that wasn't official or administrative but even this compromise was ruled out. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 10:28, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but why don't declare 7 and 13 as evil and invalid as well. After all, these numbers were related to occultism at times and should not show in any of commons category titles or text. There are a lot of people that do not like these numbers and have strong belief that they are ill and evil - there's no consent on earth that these numbers may be used with faith. We truly should find another term for them and try hard to live with a pool of numbers without these, just because they are so ill and cause discomfort. Let's have a clean commons without these numbers.
No offence, but this decision is somewhat ill. It remembers of historic periods in time when people tried to kill the number zero or certain other numbers and symbols in general, because they conveyed emotions in special areas of their lives and because they had to project and funnel their hatred into something, any thing, 'ban-able'.
Its useless e.g. to delete and prune de:Aberglaube just because its a term for a phenomenon I or a group of people do not like or understand. Neither will the phenomenon vanish with such baning (or renaming) of the title, nor will I have understood how to deal with it.
History has had lots of points where bans lead to peculiar interest into the baned subject. Will your consent be worth that? Do you feel the need to spark that interest here or somewhere else? Imho, there's no need to proactively prune things on commons that had 'no consent' in a secluded briefing room or time. There are a lot of things on commons that do not agree to each other, its not a clean room of a semiconductor fab or anywhere near that. --91.55.174.116 15:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To add some "third" party thoughts on this, have a look at

Sie weiß, dass der Gebrauch des Wortes Tschechei in Deutschland immernoch weit verbreitet ist, und viele Menschen "Tschechei" nicht mit bösen Hintergedanken sondern schlicht aus Gewohnheit benutzen.[..]
- Darauf hinweisen dass Tschechien eigenltich das bessere Wort sei: Wenn man das für wichtig hält - Ok!
- Empört sein weil jemand Tschechei gesagt hat: Definitiv - Nein!

  • en:Czech Republic claims Czechia to be a valid short form of Czech Republic
  • it may not be clear if the english Czechia is a translation to one of the german terms Tschechei / Tschechien, or both
  • Tschechien in Germany is perceived as a valid short form of Tschechische Republik, see de:Tschechien
  • Tschechei has been perceived by czechs as a problematic term, because it was a term used by officials of the en:Third Reich
So according to all of these sources the short form is officially adopted, in widespread use and most importantly acclaimed by the country officials themselves. Since commons does not use Federal Republic of Germany in commons titles, but the short form Germany (actually most country titles are short form and not stated full form), it seems to be very "special" to use the long form for the Czech country name.
These arguments, the adoption of the term in various parts on commons by various authors, the use of the term in Europe and the Czech Republic itself, support that it may be an error to solely perceive Czechia as an historically charged term (it is also that). And it may be an error to believe that the wounds of czech people may be healed by demonizing a single word to be evil. That czech officials have adopted the term as early as 1993 may be the most mature you could do with that term: accept and honor its history without giving it away based on fear, superstition. The act of this official recognition may be interpreted and perceived differently, for the good or bad. But the fact of official recognition of this term remains.
Imho, it seems to be overly pedantic for wikimedians to work against this historic timeline (read: official misuse of the term, official reuse of the term with all the political steps in years in between) - but even more pedantic to work against WP sister projects. But erm, ok, who said that commons hosts rational decisions.. Go on and delete and move, give way to any urges. Do it the Dylan way, don't think twice; it's alright. --91.55.174.116 17:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, I am Italian and can only read Italian, French, English and Spanish. Cannot read German. That said, en.wiki is not a source for Commons. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but thats not an excuse to not understand the subject matter, the official recognitions of the short form are not bound to a single language. Also, it is wishful thinking on your side that en.wiki is not a source for Commons.

Addendum: arte contribution, french version in 2016 that reflects on the issue of the Czech Republic requesting the United Nations about using the short form of the name anywhere the long form is not needed or unusual, quote

[..] Landesnamen nur noch in seiner Kurzform zu nutzen, also „Tschechien“ auf Deutsch, „Tchéquie“ auf Französisch, „Czechia“ auf Englisch, „Chequia“ auf Spanisch usw. Diese Kurzform war im Tschechischen bisher unüblich, soll nun aber überall dort genutzt werden, „wo der offizielle Name des Landes nicht notwendig ist“.

Jeudi 14 avril 2016, dans un communiqué de presse, le gouvernement a annoncé qu’il allait demander à l’ONU d’enregistrer la forme abrégée "Tchéquie" en français, "Czechia" en anglais, "Tschechien" en allemand, "Chequia" en espagnol, etc., pour désigner le pays "partout où il n’est pas nécessaire que figure le nom officiel". Autrement dit, "République Tchèque" pourrait désormais être utilisé aussi peu fréquemment que "République française".

The abstract of the video compares the term Czechia to France, quoting that it would be unusual to speak of the French Republic in most places where the official term is not needed. It also states the information that de:Václav Havel was not in favor of (the link uses hated) the short form, because it reminded him, as Česko is in Československo, too much of czechoslovakian times (however, one should keep in mind that he also was an author of theatrical plays, specifically within the field of the en:Theatre of the Absurd which may make it hard to decide on the seriousness of such a quote). Critics of Havel argued that Czechia/Česko have a tradition dating back to 1634, which makes it implausible that this term would be ownable by a relatively short, but devastating first half of 20th-century. Also note that the arte contribution seems to partly conflict with de:Tschechien#In anderen Sprachen in that the short term has officially been used since 1993 already, not just since 2016 with the UN request. --84.135.117.63 18:30, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, yes. That said, Czech Republic about 1,080,000,000 results; Czechia about 27,100,000, 1/40. No doubts about what is still the most diffused version. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 19:47, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is way more problematic to use google search result count, then en.wiki as a source. Afair google's search algorithm is not published as of today, and its a private, for-profit organization. You can safely use their results as an indication to maybe do further research, but please do not depend on or argument with it to decide which tongue to use.
Please remember that our discussion is not about whichever version is better. At no point of this discussion challenge on the validity of the term Czech Republic was made. The argument is solely about Czechia being a valid synonym. There is really no need nor want to generally replace the term Czech Republic on commons, it is of course just as valid.
The only intention to use the short form in some places is/was to adhere to evolved semi-standards, i.e. when the term is embedded in a context with other country names that prefer a short form over another. From a programmatic point of view it seemingly makes no difference, because (existing) code supports both forms. For humans however, working with and organizing uploaded files into commons' categories, it is an extra burden to care about two subtrees organizing exactly the same files and subject matter, just with different labels for otherwise the same entity:
There's no library in the world sorting the same subject x per country name y and then uses c1 and c2 as labels for a specific/same country instance, is there?
Deducting from your argument above you're not in favor of en.wiki as a source, but there are further, interesting articles on this issue, namely en:Name of the Czech Republic and en:Hyphen War. If you dislike the source itself, I suggest reading the references stated in the articles that are unaffiliated with en.wiki. --84.135.115.50 17:22, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A quote from the first article:

Multinational technology companies that adopted the name Czechia include Google and Apple.

--84.135.115.50 17:40, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When Czechia will become the most used and searched name we will follow. So far, being both equivalent and valid names to indicate that country, we register the most used one. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 17:42, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but problems remain, most notably an awkward feeling about the method most used is determined with. Considering that commons may not be feedback-free, an active rectifying may impact those results on a long-term scale, in other places on the net and thus Google search results. While this is more on the theoretical side, there is another practical argument against the method you use to pick a specific variant from both terms:
  • Neglecting the domain a term is used in (and google search results do exactly that), the results are biased or distorted.
  • If official documents are over-represented in the pool of crawled documents (possibly factored by law-demanded availability of x copies per official language, server-hosted once per country), then of course the result count of the official long form will dominate.
(interestingly, this holds even if the same official source docs suggest to use the short form, but are not as repetitive about it; adding to the question on purpose, usefulness and authenticity of such word counts) --93.201.163.245 07:15, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likewise, if google search algorithm or robots are set in a way to avoid sources of official documents from state legislators, that domain would wrongfully be under-represented in an overall term count.
  • Day-to-day spoken word usage is not indexed nor registered in Google search results, and thus a short form may be under-represented in a search count evaluated by machinery, adding to the distortion claimed above.
The absence of consideration of the domain a term is used in, makes correct interpretation of search engine results hard, if not useless. Likewise, on commons, category subtrees are domains of their own and a claim of a correct/best/fitting term to use within these should ideally be based on grounds considering these or similar domains when doing external research. A context-free research for prevalence (which search-results usually are) may or may not yield useful results, coincidence will choose.
I'm unsure if a long-term poll open to commons users and viewers would be more appropriate considering the bullets above, lets assume a form of questioning is found that a group of people can agree on as "unbiased". But I'm pretty sure that a raw decision based on Google's numbers is flawed. Rectifying to one form or another based on that seems a waste of time, its an argument easily challenged and thus an argument hard to defend for a group of people that want to stick with it for a large time-frame. --93.201.163.245 06:46, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Now tell it to IOC, FIFA and UEFA. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 07:05, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That would be no problem to reflect on commons actually, all three are relatively closed domains and within these (read in categories dealing with or reflecting these), the Czech Republic can and should be used, because of the very arguments you've just given.
It is exactly what I'm talking about, research based on the domain, use the term as used in the domain, on commons. Way better than imposing a specific term for all domains based on Google ranking. --93.201.163.245 07:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Of course this is work we can't do alone or on our own, just talking about an ideal to keep in mind going on, at best. Something that may suit a commons community in this matter. --93.201.163.245 07:32, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For reference, in en.wiki there is no uniform usage of short or long form either. Doing an "intitle:" based search, the long form currently dominates, while a lot if not all titles with short form redirect to titles using long form. This may be explainable taking into account that a lot of articles originate pre-2016 when the UN-request for official short form had not been made yet. A first article to adopt that circumstance seems to be en:Czechia (disambiguation), which changed 25 September 2016. Even in non-political titles the long form is found, e.g. en:List of non-marine molluscs of the Czech Republic. For simplicity, a lot of long-form titles will probably remain unchanged and a link will acknowledge the short form:
Hot redirecting as is done for articles has high transparency to the user, it is less of an issue than with Template:cat redirect on commons. The semantic is not quite the same, while an article redirect is semantically more in the realm of this redirect title is as equally valid as the target, the cat redirect, requiring user interaction, is more in the realm of you really should use that target title, the template text is open about that. Currently we do need cat redirect to be a "cold" redirect, because it serves to inform media uploaders to not categorize into the redirect, but the target - if a hot redirect was used, media categorized into the redirect title may be overseen.
All of this, however, seems to be a technical issue. If we had an active bot user, that automatically moves media categorized in cat redirects to the target, we could return to hot linking between categories just as is done for articles, both types would be in the same realm, cat redirect would loose its special status compared to article redirect. Navigating templates would need to care less about linking to the target variant, always. The burden of deciding on a "correct" spelling per domain is less prominent.
The easy part is changing Template:cat redirect to be a hot redirect, the hard part is installing and testing a recategorizing bot user; writing code for that; dealing with special cases (i.e. cat redirect used twice on a page). But it would ease the burden of deciding on a "correct" spelling (not only in czechia/czech republic case). We'd have "reconquered" the same mechanism for category titles as exists for article titles, that had been lost because of the need for manual review and eventual recategorizing work.
That said, I don't know who came up with Template:cat redirect in the first place; and sorry for the length of this post. --93.201.163.245 08:58, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Partecipanti a Sanremo

Buon anno! Me n'ero accorto ma facendo riferimento all'Eurovision Song Contest ho letto la categorizzazione dei partecipanti con la preposizione of. Dall'alto della mia ignoranza ho seguito l'esempio (e qui si aprirebbe un dibattito socio-politico senza fine). Buona giornata --Caulfield (talk) 09:11, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Meran

Ciao! Perché?–XanonymusX (talk) 16:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao @XanonymusX: , certe volte mi stupisco della naïveté di queste domande. "Merano" è l'esonimo inglese della città, e qui i nomi delle città hanno l'esonimo inglese, così come "Roma" è "Rome", "Milano" è "Milan" e "Bressanone" è "Brixen". -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mi lascia perplesso che tu non abbia neanche sentito il bisogno di dare una motivazione prima di spostare la categoria che era chiamata Meran da ben undici anni, se vedo bene. Solo per la mancanza di motivazione sarebbe da rollbackare tutto. Poi come adeguamento alla voce su en.wiki, che dopo lunghe discussioni e molti spostamenti, alla fine è diventata Merano, è anche accettabile (la tua “"Merano" è l'esonimo inglese della città” dimostra una più che sana naïveté, però), quindi lasciamo perdere. Un saluto –XanonymusX (talk) 17:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
nonsense. --Goesseln (talk) 23:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also the WWI was a non-sense for Austria-Hungary. It's not my fault if the English exonym for Meran is Merano. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 23:35, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bormio_in_2008

L'ho creata per sbaglio. Me la elimineresti. Grazie mille!--Avversario (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dispe: e che ci dovevi fare?? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Category:2008 in Bormio--Avversario (talk) 23:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rugby_union_kit_templates/club_specific_patterns

Category discussion warning

Rugby union kit templates/club specific patterns 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 ∙ +/−

Josh (talk) 23:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Carlin

Ciao Gatto, a proposito di felini, conosci un certo Jack Carlin che non ci va matto? oggi mi fa sapere che sta tentando di cancellare il «mio» gattonzolo (Revision #389346758) in quanto scary and creepy as hell (sic!). Io e ignis l'abbiamo bloccato più volte su it.wiki per attacchi personali e l'idea non gli è piaciuta (cit.) --Actormusicus (talk) 09:40, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, @Actormusicus: , ha bisogno di essere educato il giovane, gli ho lasciato un amichevole avvertimento. La questione è che su Commons, a meno che uno sia stupratore seriale di piccini, sbuca sempre l'anima bella che ti chiede perché hai bannato infinito il trollone vandalo. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 10:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ma pensa te! non ti voglio essere neanche camicia XD --Actormusicus (talk) 10:19, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Questo è il prestigio di cui godiamo, @Actormusicus: . Una volta Vituzzu (mi pare) disse che sei trattato meno da paria alle convention WM se ti presenti come pedofilo su ru.wiki piuttosto che admin su Commons. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 10:21, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Actormusicus: Spero che morirai o ti ammalerai dopo essere stato infettato dall'epidemia di Wuhan Coronavirus che si sta diffondendo in tutto il mondo da dicembre 2019; i nomi ufficiali di queste malattie sono COVID-19 e SARS-CoV-2. Al fine di proteggersi dall'essere infettati, devi lavarti le mani con sapone ogni giorno, indossare una maschera per evitare di essere infettati da persone che hanno la malattia e proteggere ogni elemento che hai in modo che non vengano infettati da germi e batteri. Volevo dire che perché anche se sei stato un bullo con me l'anno scorso o giù di lì, voglio solo tutti al sicuro dal vostro paese d'origine (che è l'Italia) è attualmente in una crisi in cui le parti settentrionali sono attualmente in una situazione in cui si verificano la maggior parte delle infezioni, quindi è così che mi scuserò con te. Inoltre, solo per dirvi questo, non parlo italiano.Jack Carlin (talk) 03:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Je voudrais pas crever
sans connaître la lèpre
ou les sept-maladies
qu'on attrape là-bas (Boris Vian) --Actormusicus (talk) 20:03, 27 February 2020 (UTC) P.S. Grazie Sergio.[reply]

Former x demolished

Hi. I do not think it was a good idea to make the category Former sports venues in the Czech Republic just a redirect of Demolished sports venues in the Czech Republic. Not every former venue was demolished. One of many examples of such former sports venues is Hussite church in Litovel, which used to be a gymnasium of a gymnastics club and now it is a church. After your edit it became a subcategory of demolished sports venues, although there was nothing demolished. Another example is Sokol house in Střešovice, which does not serve as a sports venue anymore, but it was not demolished either. May I ask you to revert the change in the category and populate the category again? Thanks. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:02, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Jan.Kamenicek: , what were exactly the former sports venues that should populate that category? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it depends if you want to keep the category Demolished sports venues or delete it. If you delete it, then all former venues should go back to the category Former sports venues. If you want to keep it, then only those that were demolished can be put there, those which were not or of which it is not clear should go back to the Former sports venues. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jan.Kamenicek: , the category "Demolished" should be kept actually. To be honest there should be a renewal of the category tree, because there - imho - unnecessary overlappings, see "destroyed buildings" and "demolished buildings". Anyway. I restore "Former" keeping "Demolished" as its subcat. Have a look and see by yourself what are to be put into the "destroyed" buildings, last time I visited your country it was still Czechoslovakia, thus I might not be up-to-date, I guess. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:54, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sinaitakala, Crown Princess of Tonga

Hi @Blackcat: , could you please explain the reversion of Category:Sinaitakala, Crown Princess of Tonga back to Category:Sinaitakala Fakafanua, because ‘unlawful and improper move’ certainly does not make sense considering the name of the category is wrong given the fact that she hasn’t been ‘Sinaitakala Fakafanua’ since her marriage in 2012 whereupon she became The Crown Princess of Tonga; given so, current wives of crown princes of Christian monarchies are presented as such in the female form, for example: Category: Mette-Marit, Crown Princess of Norway or Category:Mary, Crown Princess of Denmark. Rereader1996 (talk) 11:37, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rereader1996: , maybe because Sinaitakala Fakafanua is the name she's mostly known with? Even that non-sense: Italy abolished nobility titles in 1948 thus no title has either legal value or right to existence. Indeed her name is Camilla Crociani married Borbone-Due Sicile, not Camilla, Duchess of Castro (a duchy abolished...). -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 12:29, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Blackcat: , kind of an invalid argument considering she’s not officially referred to as the name which you reverted the correctly created category from; also by that same invalid argument, Category:Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge is commonly and popularly referred to as Kate Middleton by most personalities, media outlets and newspapers here in the UK and abroad however she is officially, The Duchess of Cambridge and hasn’t been ‘Kate Middleton’ since her marriage though considering if she’s referred to as “the name she’s mostly known with” then surely you should also move the current category to that?
In regards to Princess Camilla, The Duchess of Castro, yes her title is titular however is officially recognised by the Italian government, Italian media as well as she being popularly referred to as such even though the ‘Duchy of Castro’ not existing which is why it will be revered to the previous category name. Good Day. Rereader1996 (talk) 13:27 20 February 2020 (UTC)
@Rereader1996: you spelt wrong. You're not going to revert Camilla Crociani unless you want to be treated as vandal (apart grounding your agument on false assumptions like "officially recognised by the Italian government". Is a bad policy to attempt to sell false affirmation about the Italian government to an Italian..). Italian titles are abolished and no one is recognized by whatoever title (see i.e. you can see). You're warned. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 13:44, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Churches named after Bernadette Soubirous by country

In its parent category, the naming convention is <name> churches by country. Why have you introduced an exception to this? Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:33, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I've reverted this. Chaanges that potentially break structures or naming conventions are contentious and should be done via a Cfd. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 16:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cancellazione

Ciao Sergio, potresti occuparti di queste cancellazioni per favore? Ti ringrazio --Horcrux (talk) 11:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grazie! Sulla seconda ti do un endorsement volentieri. Sulla prima onestamente non ho un'opinione ben definita. Comunque, perché non chiedi altri pareri tramite {{Ping project|Sports}}? --Horcrux (talk) 14:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

English names vs. Italian names

Per your defining silence for the last four months and double standards in User_talk:Blackcat/Archive_17#English_names_vs._Italian_names, and using your own logic of "official English exonim" (not stated in any policy), and given your inaction to act by your own words, Category:Cimitero acattolico has been moved to Category:Non-Catholic Cemetery in Rome and Category:Istituto nazionale di astrofisica to Category:National Institute for Astrophysics, as this have their own "official English exonim". Lets see if your future actions respect your own words. Tm (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I didnt even read what you wrote on my talkpage as you should answer here, not in others userstalkpages. Tm (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And still waiting an answer to your improper moves and double standards. Tm (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tm: first of all I don't owe you anything. So to put things clear. Second, you've read fine what I wrote, you won't fool me. Third, if there's an english exonym is fine for me. Fourth, just a friendly advice: acting out of spite won't make you last long here. Here one acts for improving the project, not for promoting one's own agenda. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"To put things clear".
First you are an administrator you owe every reasonable explanations to any user, as administrators are not above rules and policies and if you really think otherwise, please resign immediately. So you must follow policies, not your volition or will, to put things cleared, as you make this moves on a elan not based in any policy.
Second i made this question of double standards four months ago and you clearly decided o ignore it, instead of answering why did you created categories in italian, when, using your own words, there was an "official English exonim". Again, four months ago you refused to answer with a straight face and gave an oblique answer, just like a bad politician trying to avoid accountability and now after being confronted with the double standards, you say your are fine just to save face,,
What else, but hypocrisy, do you call the fact that you were warned four months ago that you were not applying to yourself what you demanded from others and did nothing for four months? A friendly advice to you, from someone that is the 2 or 3 more prolific editor with more than 3 million edits and so in here to improve the project and not to "not for promoting one's own agenda", instead of making half baked accusations and innuendos, if you are so sure that i´am here to promote an agenda, please provide evidences that i´am here to promote "one's own agenda" or you will be making an perjury and making patent lies.
Now, after being i´ve shown your hypocrisy of being told four months ago, you are making veiled threats and so you are the one that is "acting out of spite".
In resume, after you decided to be silent for four months and and decided to kept the double standards (that when there is an "official English exonim" other users have to create categories in english, but you can create categories in italian just because) dont say that others are acting out of spite. Be coherent and apply the same standards to you. Tm (talk) 16:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:RAI TV logo Carboni.svg

Va bene, mi ero basato sul fatto che il colore originale fosse quello, ma a quanto pare non è così. Comunque le mie modifiche non erano limitate solo al colore: ho fatto anche delle modifiche ai tracciati stessi del file vettoriale. In caso posso rifare queste modifiche (ma mantenendo il colore nero) e ricaricarlo --Teo.raff (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amarillis

Caro Gattaccio, non so se le ho categorizzate in modo corretto. Ci butteresti un occhio? --Avversario (talk) 23:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao @Dispe: , se la tassonomia è giusta sì, è categorizzata bene. Ma penso che dovresti chiedere su it.wiki al progetto Forme di Vita, perché lì lo sapranno meglio di me. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 07:35, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Un po' di cvio

Segnalo qui sequela di immagini-doppione caricate senza evidente titolo e oltre soglia d'originalità --Vale93b (talk) 16:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vale93b@ so' giovani.... -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox Giuseppe Pauri

Buongiorno, cortesemente avrei bisogno di sapere come poter allacciare il Wikimediacommons alla Sandbox di Giuseppe Pauri, dovendo inserire una galleria di foto scattate da me come ad esempio su altri pittori. grazie -- La più bella fontana del villaggio (talk) 10:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Salve, intendevo Inserire nella pagina Sandbox per poi successivemente mettere in versione definitiva le fotografie in mio possesso in una sorta di galleria fotografica del pittore Giuseppe Pauri. --La più bella fontana del villaggio (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CfD: College athletics programs

Hi, I have started a discussion to rename a large collection of categories, one or more of which you may have created or edited. Please see the discussion thread at Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/04/College athletics programs for details. Thanks, IagoQnsi (talk) 04:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Botte con cocchiume a lato

Ti segnalo questa perla: File:It-botte con cocchiume a lato.ogg. Se non bastasse (o: com'era da prevedere), la speaker è straniera.

Se poi hai tempo, ti chiedo di procedere allo spostamento di File:It-una fabbricca.ogg.

Buonwiki, egregio gatto. --pequod ..Ħƕ 18:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna, @Pequod76: , OSCIENO!!!! Spostare in cosa? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
C'è il tmp rename debitamente compilato. ;) Spostare a It-una fabbrica.ogg, con una sola C. ;)))) --pequod ..Ħƕ 18:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quanto a cocchiume, http://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/cocchiume/, ma la registrazione è errata comunque, perché manca la prima sillaba. --pequod ..Ħƕ 18:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
sì, lo so cos'è il cocchiume, ma è osceno l'audio. Adesso l'ho rifatto io con la mia voce, @Pequod76: , tanto dovevo farne un po' -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, io invece cosa sia il cocchiume lo scopro adesso. XD Invece il file mi risulta ancora con la voce dell'amica tedesca (se è tedesca). Un problema di cache?
Noto, a latere, che ci manca un file ogg con la registrazione dell'alfabeto italiano (completo), nonché (credo sia una buona idea) la registrazione delle vocali, della H (acca) e delle consonanti F, L, M, N, R, S complete di articolo (quindi "la a", "la e", "la acca", senza elisione, "la effe" ecc.). Che ne pensi? Potrei fare io stesso la registrazione, ma... basta il mio cellulare per fare le registrazioni? Come si passa all'estensione .ogg? --pequod ..Ħƕ 19:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
File:It-una fabbrica.oga: occhio, che hai scritto "oga". XD --pequod ..Ħƕ 19:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ho sbagliato io infatti :-) per le "R" non la pronuncio bene, infatti i miei vocali non ce l'hanno, @Pequod76: . -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 21:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Caro, mi sposti poi File:It-una fabbrica.oga a File:It-una fabbrica.ogg (oga --> ogg). ;) --pequod ..Ħƕ 23:56, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Da cancellare?

Ciao Sergio. Questo file è da cancellare? --GC85 (talk) 08:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GC85: , sì. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 09:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Grazie! --GC85 (talk) 09:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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 ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Logan Talk Contributions 22:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Movimento 5 stelle

Buongiorno Mi chiamo Francesco Campanella ex senatore della Repubblica ed ex appartenente del Movimento 5 stelle da cui fui espulso nel febbraio 2014. Un mio contatto mi ha segnalato che sulla pagina Wikipedia del movimento 5 stelle il mio nome è correttamente collegato al link della mia pagina, ma quantomeno in un caso è invece erroneamente collegato alla pagina di un mio omonimo, mafioso. Ho provato a correggere, ma la pagina non mi fa accedere per la modifica. Può provvedere lei? O indicarmi cosa posso fare? La mia mail è francocampanella@xxxxx.com Francocampanella (talk) 13:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Senatore @Francocampanella: , non sono sicuro di avere capito bene la richiesta. Premesso che io sono amministratore su Commons, quindi questo è il progetto meno indicato, vuole intendere che su qualche progetto linguistico diverso da quello italiano il Suo nome è collegato a un omonimo dai trascorsi, diciamo, non edificanti? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:29, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Blackcat/Archive_18&oldid=430047089"