User talk:Kurpfalzbilder.de/Archive 2

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

Category:Burgenkunde

Das gibt ja einmal eine Kategorie mit über 600 Einträgen. Da wäre es vielleicht sinnvoll, solange man nur an 47 Einträgen herumdoktorn muss/kann, wie man diese Kategorie sinnvoll aufbaut. Mein Vorschlag:

  1. Man nennt sie um in "Burgenkunde (Otto Piper)", sonst landen dort über kurz oder lang alle möglichen passenden und unpassenden Bilder.
  2. Man sortiert die Bilder in der Reihenfolge in der sie bei Piper auftauchen. So lassen sie sich nachher auch besser finden. (Ich habe das mal für 4 Bilder gemacht).

Bevor ich aber weiter mache, möchte ich erst Konsens mit Dir erzielen. --Wuselig (talk) 17:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Ich bin in beiden Punkten einverstanden, und mache noch einen weiteren Vorschlag:
  • Unterkategorien nach den Kapiteln des Buches, am besten gleich jetzt schon damit anfangen, denn wenn es mehr Bilder werden, ist die Arbeut um so mühevoller.
gruss --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendam (talk) 18:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Schei..., warum hab' ich mich nur eingemischt? ;-)--Wuselig (talk) 18:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Das ist gar nichts im Vergleich zu meinem Vorhaben, die Kategorie Castles in Poland übersichtlicher zu gestalten ;-) --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendam (talk) 18:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Please link images

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello Kurpfalzbilder.de/Archive 2!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images uploaded to Commons should be useful to all users of Wikimedia projects. This is possible only if the images can be found by other people.

To allow others to find the images you uploaded here, the images should be in some place that can be found by navigating the category structure. This means that you should put the images into appropriate topic pages, categories, optionally galleries, or both of them (see Commons:Categories). To find good categories for your images, the CommonSense tool may help.

You can find a convenient overview of your uploaded files in this gallery.

The important point is that the images should be placed in the general structure somewhere. There are a large number of completely unsorted images on Commons right now. If you would like to help to place some of those images where they can be found, please do!

Thank you. BotMultichillT (talk) 21:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ordensburgen.jpg

Hallo Andreas Rockstein, vielen Dank für das sehr schöne Bild zur den Deutschordensburgen! Ich finde die Beschriftung allerdings sehr klein. Man muss das Bild stark vergrößern um sie lesen zu können. Wäre es nicht sinnvoller, den Bildausschnitt auf das eigentliche preußisch-pomerellische Kernland zu beschränken? Dann könnte man einen größeren Maßstab für die Karte wählen. Die genaue Lage dieses Kernlandes innerhalb des Ostseeraums könnte dann ja in einer kleinen Zusatzkarte in eine Bildecke dargestellt werden. Grüße --Furfur 00:05 3-Dez-2008 CEST

Ich habe mal eben selber so einen Ausschnitt gemacht → Image:Ordensburgen Ausschnitt.jpg. Die grosse Karte sollte m.E. aber erhalten bleiben, schliesslich ist da noch ganz Litauen mit drauf. Eine weitere Karte mit Lettland und Estland folgt noch. p.s. hast Du eine vollstaendige Liste der Ordensburgen in den baltischen Staaten. Ich hatte nur eine für die polnischen und russischen Gebiete... Gruss --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendam (talk) 23:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Category:Stone churches in Spain

Dear Kurpfalzbilder: congratulations for your work on categories about art and architecture in Spain. It is a pleasure to share project with editors of your level. I have a question for you: you have deleted the Category:Stone churches in Spain in several pages like Category:Cathedral La Seu, Urgell ‎and Category:Sant Climent de Taüll‎. I created that category to make another way of finding buildings by their main apparent material. It is somehow ambitious because thousands of churches fit for each category (brick, stone, concrete...) but it can be useful to find the images for people who don´t properly know the historical styles, and also to make differences between branches of each style. In Spain we have plenty of Mudejar Romanesque and Mudejar Gothic churches which use brick as their main material. Have your deletions been typos or do you have another point of view about the matter? Thank you for your kind attention. See you at Commons!--Balbo (talk) 11:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I thought, when you will fill the category "stone churches" consequently you have to put in tens of thousands of churches which makes not many sense (the same would be for "roman catholic churches in Spain" or "anglican churches in UK"). But I will not touch this category in future. The category "brick churches" makes more sense in my eyes, I have myself started the category Romanesque brick churches in Spain which can be extended in future by subcategories ("... in Castile and León" etc. or "mudejar-romanesque") --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendam (talk) 12:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Ok. The category can also be divided in subcategories. The main category is only a beginning. Also sandstone churches in Castile and León or Granite churches in Galicia and so on. Thank you very much for your kind attention. Cheers!--Balbo (talk) 12:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Categories in English

Hi again! I see that you are creating new categories for the cloisters in Spain. I have heard several times that the rule in commons is to name the categories in English when possible, using cloister better than claustro or claustre, and Church better than iglesia, esglèsia or ilesia. As you possibly will create other categories about this subject I thik it can be useful for the new ones. Cheers!--Balbo (talk) 15:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Jes, Categories schould be in english in general. But I prefer the original language names when I create categories for individual buildings, and I am not allone by this way, see the categories for castles for ex. And, but this is not your area, I would like to change the category "palaces in italy" into "Palazzi in Italy" due to the very different sense of the Italian "palazzo" comparing to the English "palace" --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendam (talk) 15:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks: I like your work.
Bad name: Category:Puerta meridional (Santiago) it's not of Santiago, it's of Cathedral of Santiago: Category:Porta meridional (Catedral de Santiago de Compostela). Also, there are Santiago of Chile... & Santiago de Compostela have 7 "puertas" (portas, doors). Perhaps you want say Category:Pórtico meridional (Catedral de Santiago de Compostela).
Also, if you can not use the language of Galicia (Spain) (it's gl)... please, you can use english. --88.24.115.134 15:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
At least I have changed the category into the original galego Name: Fachada das Praterías --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendam (talk) 16:25, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I understand your point with palazzo vs palace. I have myself created Category:Azulejos in Spain and Category:Patios of Spain for the same reason. Not that I have a strong opinion about all this, I am only trying to avoid problems when possible: as you know, in Spain there is a host of languages and dialects (official and also not official) and this stuff is mixed with politics, and sometimes it can be polemical which local language to choose. English is more aseptical, but indeed you are free to choose any other. Cheers, and congratulations for your work!--Balbo (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

New category: Romanesque porches in Castile and León?

Hi again! I know very well this phenomenon. They are called galería porticada, and there are plenty of them in Castile and León, especially in Segovia, as you said. The translation is not so evident for me, and I will think a bit about the matter before I answer. Cheers!--Balbo (talk) 16:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I am wavering between gallery and arcade, and I think about Category:Romanesque attached arcades in Castile and León, but I am not completely sure, for it doesn´t mention that they belong to churches, as they do, and I am not also very sure about the grammatical correction. If I find something better I will tell you. Cheers!--Balbo (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Category:Romanesque church porticoes in Castile and León may improve the former.--Balbo (talk) 17:12, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Architectural miscelanea

Apses: I don´t agree in removing the images of corbels and windows in apses. They are most of the times the most characteristic decorated elements in Romanesque apses and I don´t find areason to exclude them from the category if they belong to an apse.

Choirs: I am sorry I don´t understand your thoughts about the meaning of choir[1]. Now I don´t have properly good English dictionaries available but I will have tomorrow. Choir is the place used by the singers, and not a kind of apse. In Spanish ábside can cave that sense of semicircular element, and if not we just call it cabecera. There must be an equivalent English name. I Spanish architecture, choirs (the place for the singers) can be in the middle of the central nave, at the pies (feet?, the end of the nave) and ellevated (is this what you call gallery?).

Romanesque in Basque Country: when I have some time I will look for more (indeed there exist more Basque Romanesque churches).

Today I won´t be able to continue at Commons, but tomorrow I will be pleased to talk with you about all these matters.

I am glad to see that you are working hard around here!--Balbo (talk) 17:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

First about choir. The definition at es.wikipedia is very short ( a bit better at pt.wikipedia) but it makes clear that ist is the main room of liturgy generally in the east of a medieval church. In many spanish churches the liturgical choir was west of the transept (prominent example: Catedral de Leon → plan) while the "architectonical" choir (plan) is situated east of the transept, which might cause some confusion but it is never the west gallery (plan)... --Ceterum censeo capitalismum esse delendum (talk) 22:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I will be gald to add a heading to that new page about Romanesque. Congratulations. Yes, there is a lot of work to be done, as there are more or less the same quantitiy of Romanesque in the other provinces of Castile and León, but also in Aragón, Navarre, Galicia... And there is nott that much information (and even more free licensed information) about them in the net.

About the choir, it is the place for the community to sing the liturgical offices. But the altar is, indeed, the main liturgical place of a church. In Spain, as you say, ther existed a long tradition to host the choir in the middle of the cathedrals, as it is in the cathedrals of Burgos, Toledo...[2] [3]. In the latter link choir is number 17. But there also existed another tradition that placed in lots of churches the choir ellevated and in the top. I know that in Carolingian architecture and German Romanesque the Westwerk was an extended phenomenon and that there exist a West Gallery that has its own personality. But in Spain that gallery at the west ("los pies de la iglesia") emerged at the end of the Middle Ages: it is named choir, and has the use of a choir. The most characteristical style that thas this scheme is the Isabelline Gothic. See San Juan de los Reyes [4]. See also this page. [5] Last two paragrafs talk about it. El coro se desplaza a los pies y en alto. means "The choir places now at the pies end of the church and ellevated" (pies: Sorry, I don´t know the correct word. Literally, "feet"). In the Renaissance and later in the Baroque a host of churches and convents placed the choir at this position. Here [6] an online debate about the correct translation of the term. They achieved High choir at the base.--Balbo (talk) 10:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The Monastery of El Escorial, among others, has also a very famous high choir, and references to it can be found everywhere where the Escorial is described. Even more famous that the choir itself is the lower floor under it, called the Sotacoro (under-choir), because of its amazing plain vault. Here you have the proceedings of a lecture of the First Congress of Construction history analizing the vaults of the underchoir, with plans and images. [7]. I hope this helps. --Balbo (talk) 10:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Iglesias, ermitas y monasterios románicos en la Provincia de Burgos is fine, although it would be more correct Iglesias, ermitas y monasterios románicos en la provincia de Burgos. --Balbo (talk) 10:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

About the situation map you requested, I have to look for it for a while. I don´t have all me bibliography available when I am at Internet. Cheers!--Balbo (talk) 10:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

OK! I am going to an specialized library soon, so I will have a look for the map. Although it may be not so easy to find it. As the list has the name of the villages and cities, it can be easier to create the map locating the villages. Anyway I will look for something more ellaborated. Cheers!--Balbo (talk) 18:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I think both categories can coexist, and that was the consense at the debate of the general scheme [8]. This is because one may not be an expert in Spanish political geography and just want to find some image about a city or a province without knowing previously the autonomous community. So categories by location and by province are useful to make an easier search. --Balbo (talk) 10:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Now I have seen your proposal clearer at Catalonia and Castile and León. Well, it is a possibility, although I prefer a pure list of provinces, for the reasons I told you before; anyway if you are categorizing the Spanish churches by province, your scheme has some advantages. By now I don´t have a strong opinion about this.--Balbo (talk) 10:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kurpfalzbilder.de/Archive_2&oldid=609312131"