User talk:Liamdavies/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Tip: Categorizing 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, Liamdavies!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BSicon BHF yellow-blue.svg was uncategorized on 4 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image:BSicon BHF yellow-halfblue.svg was uncategorized on 4 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image:BSicon STR yellow-blue.svg was uncategorized on 4 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image:BSicon KBHFa yellow-blue.svg was uncategorized on 4 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image:BSicon BHF yellow-halfblue2.svg was uncategorized on 9 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 17:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image:BSicon KBHFe yellow-blue.svg was uncategorized on 9 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 17:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Orleans streetcars

Hi, thank you for your work on categorization of New Orleans streetcars! Your input would be welcome on the category naming discussion at Category talk:New Orleans Tram stops. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:13, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 18:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

العربيَّة ∙ Deutsch ∙ español ∙ English ∙ français ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（中国大陆）‎ ∙ 中文（台灣）‎ ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hi Liamdavies, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

INeverCry 16:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

US copyrights

At Commons:Help_desk#Copyright_help_regarding_File:USS_Cree_ATF-84.jpg: apparently one of us knows more than the other about this, but I have no idea which way around. I chose to give my answer more or less independent of yours, but you might want to take a look, and please speak up there if you think I'm specifically wrong. - Jmabel ! talk 23:54, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rename File:Oil Mining across the salty lake (3861625766).jpg‎ and other

Hi, These files have been uploaded by User:File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske). I do not know what these numbers in the title, in the source of these figures are not available. They do not carry the semantic load.--Ray Garraty (talk) 10:33, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I understand that the numbers are meaningless, but that alone, or even in combination with the lack of full location or date, are not enough to justify a rename. To be eligible under Criteria #1 the name should be meaningless, not contain something of dubious meaning. For example if the name was solely "3861625766.jpg" it would be a meaningless name, but a name that contains a meaningless element, but otherwise has meaning, is not meaningless and therefore fails to satisfy Criteria #1. I would like to thank you for all of the work you have put into suggesting new names for files, and don't wish to discourage you, but in this case these files were simply not eligible. Please look over Commons:File renaming again to see the full criteria. If you disagree with this still, I would be glad to talk about it more. Liamdavies (talk) 13:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're exaggerating. These criteria are in fact exist that would not offend the author. In this case, the files have been uploaded by bot, it does not offend.--Ray Garraty (talk) 13:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's not right, the criteria exist for many reasons (every time a file is moved digital artefacts are created, and any links to that file are redirected, this is why caution is always taken with highly visible files), one of which is the uploader, and irrespective of if the upload was a bot or not, the bot was given instructions by a user. There are discussions about the guidelines here and here. Liamdavies (talk) 15:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

look for similar solutions. [1], [2], [3]. (1:2)--Ray Garraty (talk) 14:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'd point out that Billinghurst is a long time admin and steward, his denial was correct, and this was that filemovers first move, neither of the two that were moved should have been moved, they failed to meet the move criteria. Liamdavies (talk) 14:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an additional statement, those files had been subject to move requests for close to 20 hours. Many many files had been through the requested move category in that time, and files are usually renamed quite promptly. This means many other filemovers had seen them and were not comfortable enough that they meet criteria to move them. After seeing them there after three visits I decided to fail them, as I felt they failed to meet criteria. I apologise if you take this personally, it isn't personal, it's simply that they don't meet the criteria as set out at Commons:File renaming. Liamdavies (talk) 14:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's in the interpretation of the rules [4], [5], [6].--Ray Garraty (talk) 15:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can provide as many diffs as you like, but I stand by my choice to decline them, the renamed requests failed to satisfy the rename criteria. The names were not meaningless, they were not misleading (well no more or less so than the proposed new names), they are not biology related, the images are not used in templates, and they are not rude or otherwise offensive. There is no reason within the rename criteria to justify a rename and just because other users may have renamed files in a similar state doesn't make justification, it simply highlights that sometimes images that shouldn't be renamed are renamed. Liamdavies (talk) 16:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Files should NOT be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better.--Steinsplitter (talk) 16:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nanjing Massacre images

Do you have any proof that people in this image are civilian, they were killed, and the picture was taken during the battle of Nanking ? In this situation, unfortunately this image became useless. Takabeg (talk) 16:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any proof that this image shows heads of chinese civilians ? The original caption of the image says "Decapitated heads of bandits at Tieling" (鉄嶺ニテ銃殺セル馬賊ノ首). Takabeg (talk) 16:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any proof that this image shows killed children during the Nanking massacre ? According to the original caption of the image, Korean children slaughtered by local bandits (土匪之為メ虐殺サレタル鮮人ノ幼兒). Takabeg (talk) 16:58, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can't read the Japanese text that you've posted, and when put into Google translate it comes out as gibberish. Do you have a page or website that gives different names? I couldn't find any, but I can see that you have a history editing files to remove reference to the Nanjing Massacre, so I want firm third party en:WP:RSs or an agreement from the uploader that the names get renamed. Liamdavies (talk) 17:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Google translate cannot accurately translate them. Those Japanese are old-fashioned because the original captions were written in 1930s - 1940s. Takabeg (talk) 18:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that that may be the case, but it still doesn't help me understand any of it. The names are simply so different that without any form of third party evidence I don't feel comfortable renaming them. I suggest that you try to find another source that has the images clearly captioned, or try to discuss this with the uploader. Liamdavies (talk) 18:24, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Войска радиационной, химической и биологической защиты.gif

About Your rejectoin renaming the file into the English [7]. It's not a simple change from Russian to English. New name — more accurate & full. «Войска радиационной, химической и биологической защиты» means literally «Radiation, Chemical & Biological Protection Troops» — it is not «the Troops», but «the Big Emblem of the Troops». Besides Russian name doesn't mention state attribution (is it the Russian Federation, the Soviet Union or the Russian Empire). Moreover, Category:The Russian Federation Armed Forces branches' big emblems consists chaotic combination Russian & English file names. How do you think, which language it should be harmonized into? Scriber en (talk) 17:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can ignore the language-change reason, if it really harmonizes the file names in a category. However, my personal view is that since these files pertain to Russia, Russian names will be more appropriate. English description can be added in addition to Russian, and the policy is that Commons categories are in English, so if the person needs a Commons category, then the name must be put into the Latin alphabet. Cf: a discussion on one of our noticeboards, if you are interested. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 18:09, 27 July 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Honestly speaking, I'm not much interested in the discussion you've just mentioned. I simply intend to harmonize the category with chaotic files names principle. So, as you rejected the file renaming, I just want to recieve simple answer what language should I harmonize the category into not to be rejected from you - English or Russian (even if it would be Russian on the Latin alphabet, I don't care). Scriber en (talk) 18:59, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked the check the category and found most files are in English, so probably English will be a better choice. However, for Harmonization, it is necessary that some part of the files have commonality in the names. See the Category:Sandville Court Self Help Centre, all files have at least "Sandville Court Self Help Centre" common. Can you, in your effort to harmonize these files, suggest something - be it in Russian or English - to be common for all files for the sake of harmonization? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 19:49, 27 July 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Of course, I could suggest such a pattern for files names in the category: «The Russian Federation <an object name> big emblem». Scriber en (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any objections? Could I rename files according to the suggested pattern? Scriber en (talk) 12:41, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

None from my side. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2013 (UTC).[reply]

So, I continue to harmonize file names according to the suggested pattern. Scriber en (talk) 18:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've declined the emblems that were request with criteria #6 and directed to this discussion. The images are rather used and Commons:File renaming Criteria #6 is to "Harmonize file names of a set of images (so that only one part of all names differs) to ease their usage in templates (e.g. diagram symbols, scans of pages of a book, maps)" (emphasis in original) requesting a harmonisation for categories is not supported by Commons:File renaming criteria. Liamdavies (talk) 09:52, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The even greater issue here is whether there is a value addition through harmonization effort or is it just an ornamental change of name? I suggest seeking the intervention of a Russian-speaking admin / experienced uploader. IF there is a concurrence of opinion between such a person and Scriber en, then the efforts of this user are really justified and should be carried out. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 14:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC).[reply]

It's really interesting, how a Russian-speaking admin / uploader could decide wheter files names should be in English or in Russian. I'm Russian-speaking myself (see my user page in RuWiki). May be I was not persuasive enough but if you would be more attentive you could mention that I requested renaming only files with English names. According to the Commons:File naming policy «Titles of media files should be meaningful and helpful in the language chosen». Could you decide whether it is more meaningful and helpful the name «File:RAT great emblem.png» or‎ «File:The Russian Federation Airborne Troops big emblem.png»? Scriber en (talk) 17:43, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File Artania to Boudicca moved

Thank you for your help,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 09:03, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, I'm glad I could be of assistance. Thank you for taking the time to comment, it makes it worth it! Liamdavies (talk) 09:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mencey Romen.jpg

Thank you!--Koppchen (talk) 11:03, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It really makes it worth it when people take time to make such a gracious edit, it is truly appreciated. Liamdavies (talk) 14:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:1936 MG TA Park Ward Drophead Coupe 8083404221.jpg

Is there really a good reason to keep the long string of random numbers on the end of the filename? --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 21:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really shouldn't have to explain this to someone with filemover rights elsewhere. But, Criteria to decline #1, we don't rename files because the new name looks a bit better, yes there is a string of numbers (that relate to it's flickr address), yes the numbers are largely useless, but why do they need to go? Do they make the file any harder to find? Will a new name be easier to understand or locate? No to both, your proposed name will add no value, simply take up your time in proposing it, and mine in either changing or denying, in the process slowing down meaningful name changes. I'd point out that we would have hundreds of thousands of files from flickr with a number sequence at the end and it would be a huge waste of time to rename them all to remove the numbers (see these categories here, here, here just to observe the enormity of it). Finally I would add that it is incumbent on you to provide a good reason (within the move criteria) to move an image, not upon me to provide a good reason to deny (although I feel I have). Liamdavies (talk) 06:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correct obvious errors in file names

And where is obvious error in Ilyinka? It is transliteration from Russian, instead of Ukraine, and not error. COM:FR says Files should NOT be renamed only because the filename is not English and/or is not correctly capitalized (Remember, Commons is a multilingual project, so there's no reason to favor English over other languages). So this file should not be renamed.--Anatoliy (talk) 16:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I moved files that were requested to be moved by the uploader (which is almost always followed through with). I did have a look and it seemed to be correct, the category in which they sit is Category:St. Elijah Church in Illinka, and I know (Serbian) Cyrillic so tried to transliterate this pages title as Illinka (Іллінка - Serbian doesn't have i, but I assumed it to be the same as in English). I'm sorry if I caused offence, but was simply acting upon a move request that I saw as correct, and was requested by the uploader. I understand that we don't change language, and wouldn't have moved it if it was a user who wasn't the uploader and I thought that was the only motivation. I see that you are an admin, and if you feel my moves were done in error, please feel free to revert them. Liamdavies (talk) 16:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No< I won't revert them. Current names are good too. If I revert them, it will be also abusing of COM:FR. Btw, if you move by uploader request, it will be not c.5 but c.1 of COM:FR.--Anatoliy (talk) 09:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did actually write (Uploader) at the end of each reason, but obviously that was too long for the edit summaries and they got clipped. I feel I know the move criteria quite well, and am not afraid to deny move requests, if it weren't the uploader I would have put the names to more scrutiny. I however, must admit that I did think the names were wrong (obviously only from a Ukrainian perspective) and will be more diligent in the future, although I still believe I made the moves correctly, and within policy. Liamdavies (talk) 09:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Profiles and File:Murray Waas profile 19408832926.jpg

The file is clearly not a profile, thus the name is misleading. From the profile gallery: "A profile is the shape, view, or shadow of a person's head from the side; a side view." --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 20:34, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A profile picture is a picture used on a profile page of social media, ie facebook, the name makes sense. The idea of filemoving is to rename pictures that are completely incorrect or deceptively wrong, as I have said many a time, it is not to make them look better, remove something you don't like, or remove superfluous words, unless they create a deceptive idea. I would highly recommend you do more file rename requests like this or this, and none like this or this if you would like file mover rights. Liamdavies (talk) 08:12, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the file renaming.--Melburnian (talk) 07:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all, thanks for taking to time to post a nice note here! Liamdavies (talk) 08:16, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National Bus

Ventura Bus Lines owned Category:National Bus, reason why it was placed in just Category:Ventura Bus Lines. It shouldn't be placed in the Category:Buses in Melbourne category. Bidgee (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for renaming the image of the giant Pacific octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini). --Necessary Evil (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Always a pleasure, thanks for the note. Liamdavies (talk) 15:45, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Karpfenzuchttteiche Wilthen.jpg

File:Karpfenzuchttteiche Wilthen.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 ∙ +/−

Fiver, der Hellseher (talk) 13:32, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

re: Your question on rename/edit of Aulops alpina image

Howdy,

In answer to your question in this edit: The taxon has a long history of being re-re-re-named between Panorpa alpina and Aulops alpina, but is mostly known as Aulops and this is also the current accepted status as per Fauna Europaea. So, as opposed to putting this image in category:Panorpa alpina the category and/or "page" Panorpa alpina (if it exists) should probably be renamed to Aulops alpina with redirects to it from Panorpa alpina versions. Cheers Pudding4brains (talk) 18:47, 2 September 2013 (UTC) P.S. I didn't "change" the language to French - I just applied the appropriate language tag to an existing French description and added an English description to boot ;o) Pudding4brains (talk) 18:50, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I assumed you had changed language as the French wiki page was the only one that come up when I searched for Aulops alpina (the page en:Aulops alpina does not exist on ENWP, but it does on French - fr:Aulops alpina). I therefore fail to see a valid reason to rename. It seems that the image too would be renamed back and forth with the taxon, this is not ideal. I suggest you move the image back to category:Panorpa alpina and start a CfD as the first step. Liamdavies (talk) 11:33, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm totally done involving myself in useless discussions and adhering to all sorts of endless rules and procedures enforced by selfproclaimed forces that beon WIki(m|p)edia projects. Even something supposedly simple as the rename procedure/template is a proper pain in the bumm for casual users - who the f*ck wants to remember the sequence of parameters and the meaning of the different numerical identifiers anyway? I gave you a correct ID and the info on how the taxon should be named. That's as far as I will get involved. Cheers anyway Pudding4brains (talk) 12:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and sympathise with your position. I just don't see how having one cat of images spread over two cats is a great outcome, and (as I'm sure is clear to you) I know nothing about insects - just someone trying to help out. I'm not opposed to renaming, I just don't wish to have the file yo-yo (it becomes a hassle and people yell at filemovers), that is why I suggested a CfD. I'm assuming from what you're saying that pretty much the whole Category:Panorpa tree needs to be moved, but suggest that CfD would be the best avenue for that (although the backlog is horrendous, small things like this should be dealt with quickly, or quicker at least. It does however seem that the current name is vague, would you have a name suggestion that would be slightly more robust, ie would "File:2013-06-09 16-04-25- Panorpa alpina - Aulops alpina.JPG" be an appropriate name? Liamdavies (talk) 14:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, yes I understand your point of view too, but I don't even know what a CfD is and I'm not going to search for it. Here is the situation in short:

category:Panorpa is correct and should be left as is - most species are and will be Panorpa. It is just this one species (in Europe) that has been subject to historic yo-yo-ing. It has originally been described as Panorpa alpina, but later the genus Aulops was erected because it differs from most 'Panorpa in some ways. Other authors have later critisized the erection of the genus Aulops as some of the crucial characters uded in defining the genus are not always constant, and reverted to placing the species in Panorpa, sometimes in a subgenus as in "Panorpa (Aulops) alpina". Lately, in part based on new species from the Far East, the genus Aulops has been revived for alpina and one other European species, and the coordinator of the Panorpidae for Fauna Europaea (Willmann) has indicated that a new definition of the genus is in preparation (I have not seen it yet however). To me it makes sense to have this species in a seperate genus, even if it is somewhat of a pain joggling names (Panorpa sp. becomes a problematic generalisation).

Historically the species alpina has been named Aulops for a long time and many (still) current publications will refer to it as such. Willmann has decided to classify the genus name as "currently valid" for this and one other species in the Fauna Europaea database, but to my knowledge there has been no official publication on the matter, so some other databases have not followed suit. The other way of putting this would be that Willmann has refused to follow the most recent synonymization of Aulops with Panorpa (some decades ago). Anyway, the European databases tend to use the name Aulops for this species (not for other Panorpa) and it is a European species after all ;o)

The only things in need of a "move" would be the category:Panorpa_alpina and/or page Panorpa alpina. Working redirects from those names to the new Aulops-versions would be in order and the corresponding images (some 6 orso?) would need a recat. I do realise that this would leave the speciesname out of synchronisation with ENWP and Wikispecies, but one would have to start somewhere. Alternatively the cats can be left/moved to Panorpa alpina, but redirects from Aulops alpina to those would certainly be needed.

As for filenaming - it doesn't really matter a whole lot if you use Panorpa or Aulops as long as the speciesname alpina is included. Whatever name is currently valid, the other name will be a valid synonym. One might choose to use the old (hardly used) notation as subgenus Panorpa (Aulops) alpina as it gives you both names. In this specific case file, just using "alpina" and leaving out any genus name might also work.

Hope this is clear enough - things do not always have easy solutions that will satisfy everyone :o) Pudding4brains (talk) 15:16, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my. Thank you for an exhaustive explanation. I apologise for using jargon; a CfD is "Category for Discussion". I have started one requesting that Category:Panorpa alpina be moved to Category:Aulops alpina, with a link to this discussion. If there is any need for further explination, would you mind if I requested you to elaborate further at the CfD? It can be found at: Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:Panorpa alpina. Thank you for your patience, I have also renamed the file. Liamdavies (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liam, okay I've added the CfD-page you created to my watchlist - we'll see what comes up. Pudding4brains (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File move requests for drawbridges named as bascule bridges

Hallo Liamdavies , If i understood things correctly, you refused two file "moving" (renaming) requests of mine, with the explanation: "(No valid reason stated, see the rename guidelines)". Could you explain? As far as i can see i ticked "Criterion 3", for incorrect or misleading file names.

A photo of the riveted iron bascule bridge near Kadijksplein, Amsterdam; high resolution image by FotoDutch, June 2013
A photo of the iron bascule bridge near Kadijksplein over Nieuwe Herengracht, Amsterdam; high resolution image by FotoDutch, June 2013

Both files held images depicting bridges of the type drawbridge but were incorrectly named as bascule bridge which is the most common type of moveable bridge. Drawbridges are very different from bascule bridges.

Yours , --Paulbe (talk) 23:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pauble,

I declined the request after looking at the page en:Bascule bridge, and reading the first line "A bascule bridge (sometimes referred to as a drawbridge) is a moveable bridge with a counterweight that continuously balances the span," I then look at some pictures (such as this and this) and determined that this was a picture of a bascule bridge. Of course I am not a bridge expert, and am open to being wrong, but without an explanation I failed to see a valid reason to rename. Can you elaborate on why this is not a bascule bridge? It seems very much to fit the description on the ENWP page, and therefore not eligible for rename.

Regards, Liamdavies (talk) 11:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please...

... explain me this?

I reviewed the bot from wikivoyage message after verifying what the picture was about, I correctly categorized it and requested a name change in order to make it understandable. What was the problem? BTW, no possibility to discuss anything, as the uploader didn't do it to commons but to wikivoyage (where he's no longer active). Best regards --Stromare (talk) 22:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You offered to explanation for your changes, and the building in the cat looked very different to the new name/cat you placed the image in. So I declined the rename and rolled back the changes. Endeavour to use edit summaries and explain the reasons - with an evidence based backing - for a proposed rename in future. Liamdavies (talk) 14:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you fot all the renames you all ready did or wil do with all my photos Agaath (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dank je veel! Glad I could help. Liamdavies (talk) 16:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:World map by skin color for modern populations.jpg

I see you have removed the rename requests for this file without taking any action. [8] Could you explain why? AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:26, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: never mind - I see you are proposing to delete it as a duplicate, which solves the problem. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alice Barbi, Baronesse Wolff von Stomersee, by Philip Alexis de László (1869-1937)

The correct noble title of Alice Barbi after her marriage with the Baltic-German baron "Boris von Wolff a.d.H Stomersee" was "Alice von Wolff aus dem Haus Stomersee". If that seems a bit long you can shorten it to "von Wolff a.d.H. Stomersee" or "v. Wollff-Stomersee". But "Wolff von Stomersee" is simply wrong. Please see the article about "Johann Gottlieb von Wolff", the great grandfather of Alices husband Boris, in the German Wikipedia.SDoderer (talk) 09:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the search I did had it show up as Wolff von Stomersee ([9] [10] [11]) including from Christie's auction house when they sold the painting. Do you have a reliable English source so support your rename request? Liamdavies (talk) 16:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Being of German origin most sources about the Family von Wolff are written in German. There is almost nothing written in English. This is the only English source I could find: http://www.stamerienaspils.lv/index.php?id=vesture&lang=en As you can see from there the "von" is always between the first name and the surname e.g. Boris von Wolff. In Germany a person with a "von" in his name is a member of the aristocracy. "Stomersee" is the name of the family seat of this particular branch of the Wolff-family. So "Boris von Wolff aus dem Haus Stomersee" simply means: Somebody named "Boris" is a member of the noble family "von Wolff" living at "Stomersee-manor". Christies simply got the name mixed up.--SDoderer (talk) 23:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@SDoderer: Sorry, aber laut artenet ist Baronesse Wolff von Stomersee korrekt. Kannst du bitte eine vertrauenswürdige Quelle nennen für deine Behauptung? Danke. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dieser Link http://www.bbl-digital.de/eintrag/Wolff-Boris-Frh.-v.-1850-1917/ bezieht sich auf "Boris Freiherr von Wolff", den ersten Ehemann von Alice Barbi. Nach dem Eheschluss hat Alice damals selbstverständlich den Familiennamen ihres Mannes angenommen und hiess somit "Alice Freiin von Wolff". Weil das Ehepaar auf dem Schloss Stomersee im Livland lebte und die Familie von Wolff weitverzweigt war, führten sie zur besseren Unterscheidung von anderen von Wolffs den Namenszsatz "aus dem Haus Stomersee" bzw. "a.d.H. Stomersee". Dies ergibt natürlich einen sehr langen Namen und ist entsprechend umständlich, weshalb man in der Literatur auch oft schlicht "Alice von Wolff-Stomersee" oder "Alice Wolff-Stomersee" findet. Man wird aber niemals "Alice Wolff von Stomersee" finden. Diese Namensversion stammt von der Internetseite des englischen Auktionshauses Christie's. Hier wurde versehentlich das "von" an die falsche Stelle des Namens gesetzt. Daher schlage ich vor, den Dateinamen dieses Wikipediabildes auf "Alice Babi, Baronesse von Wolff-Stomersee" zu ändern.--SDoderer (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für deine Rückmeldung. Habe das Bild (nachdem ich mir eine zweite Meinung eingeholt habe) nun umbenennt. Kling okay für mich, auch wegen drinker-institut. LG --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:29, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Galouti Kabab from Tunday Kababi Lucknow 2009-01-06.jpg

Hi!

I am pretty sure that you are not from India :)

I'll help you understand the difference between the words. 'Galouti' is Ga-lo-u-Ti and 'Galawati' is Ga-La-wa-Ti in Urdu. 'Galouti' is meaningless whereas, 'Galawati' means something cooked with raw papaya used as marinade... :) So please change the file name. Here is google search string for your reference.

Regards from India. In Transit (talk) 16:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Galouti kabab also comes up as a google search, and as a page on EN wiki. As I said in the edit summary, discuss this with the uploader. Liamdavies (talk) 16:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:DemocraticPresidentialCounty1908Colorbrewer.png

Hey, no problem (I made the same mistake myself :) ). If it wouldn't be too much of a hassle, would you mind attempting to make it ".gif"? Thanks. --Tilden76 (talk) 00:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File Renaming

Dear Liamdavies, recently you declined some of my filemove request. Like File:Ellora, maharashtra 1997009.jpg or File:Khannagar durga puja.JPG. Your reason was "file should not be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better". It's decline criteria 1. Now when I requested them, my reason was for the maharastra file:- Maharashtara is an Indian State. Which means it's a proper noun. A proper noun should not start with small letter For that durga file my reason was:- Durga is a proper noun. Durga is also a Hindu Goddess. As I knew when you type a proper noun which is a Goddess's name too starts with capital letter. That's why the small letter should be changed to capital. It's a big mistake. I requested to fix that. I didn't request cause that looks good. What do you think now?--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 14:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant of if it's a proper noun or not, changing case is to make something look better. The file will still be found either way and any external links will be maintained (Commonsdelinker and I will only change wikimedia projects, whereas or files may be linked to anywhere on the web), a search will show it up regardless of if the first letter is upper or lower case. Look at COM:MOVE and the second criteria to decline example has the same think (proper noun starting with a lower case letter) and is listed as not a valid move. Finally, moving files takes a large amount of server resources and takes a considerable amount of time, it should only be done when there is a need or advantage, changing case just isn't good enough reason. Liamdavies (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kasatochi Island

Hello Liam - You declined my rename request on File:Alaska maritine national park Kasatochi island.jpg to File:Kasatochi Island. Alaska Maritime NWR so I thought I should explain a little further. The island is in the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. This fact can be confirmed by examining the original image page at the FWS site. There is no "Alaska Maritime National Park"; the confusing and incorrect title was added by the image-scraping site Public Domain Images.com. FWS titled the image Kasatochi Island, which title is already in use here for another image. I would appreciate it if you would revisit this issue, and if you still disagree let me know why. Thanks, Dankarl (talk) 13:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done We generally don't move images just because a new name looks a little better. But given that you feel it to be confusing I've undertaken the move. Liamdavies (talk) 14:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dankarl (talk) 14:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Liamdavies (talk) 14:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Russian Royal Family 1911 720px.jpg

Regarding this edit summary, are you sure? The file is 1,820 × 1,515 pixels. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs 15:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the preview is, either way there is no valid reason to rename it. Liamdavies (talk) 16:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: File renames

Hi, I try to make better names, thanks for your message. Regards, RepliCarter (talk) 18:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed some rename requests. Some others remains where there is really the Sümeg castle walls from outside or inside. I hope they are all right now. If not, tell me, pls. - RepliCarter (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Dear Reviewer

If you use the helper-the scripts, you will find the links next to the search box (vector) or as single tabs (monobook). They are named `license+` and `license-`

Hi Liamdavies, thanks for your application to be an image reviewer. The application has been removed as successful, and you've been added to the list of reviewers. You can review all kind of image licenses on Commons. Please see Commons:License review and Commons:Flickr files if you haven't done so already. We also have a guide how to detect copyright violations. Backlogs include Flickr review, Picasa review, Panoramio review, and files from other sources. You can use one of the following scripts by adding one of the lines to your common.js:

importScript('User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js'); // stable script for reviewing images from any kind of source OR

importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); // contains also user notification when review fails, auto blacklist-check and auto-thank you message for Flickr-reviews.

You can also add {{User reviewer}} or {{User trusted}} to your user page if you wish. Thank you for your contributions on Commons! --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Liamdavies (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined renaming

Hello Liamdavies, you declined several renaming requests, such as Die_Gartenlaube_(1863)_b_077.JPG->Die_Gartenlaube_(1863)_b_077.jpg. As i understood you refer to the fact that "Files should NOT be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better". I do not agree with this argument because i currently try to streamline the naming of pictures of the historical newspaper/magazine Die Gartenlaube. The editorial guidelines (which also define the correct naming) are agreed in the community so that i find that it is a good reason for renaming the pictures. Btw, other renaming have already been accepted. --Arnd (talk) 08:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a valid template or symantic reason to rename, feel free to revert, if it is stylistic or not in technical manor I will decline. Renames place a heavy burden on the servers, and take a lot of time to process. Liamdavies (talk) 10:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maly kosciol.JPG

Hello! I was requesting renaming File:Maly kosciol.JPG file to File:Ostrow Wielkopolski Virgin Mary Queen of Poland church.jpg because Maly kosciol means just small church. There could be many "small churches" in Poland. IMO this file should renamed either to File:Ostrow Wielkopolski Virgin Mary Queen of Poland (preferred by me) or to File:Ostrow Wielkopolski kosciol Najswietszej Marii Panny Krolowej Polski.jpg (same in Polish) or File:Ostrow Wielkopolski Maly kosciolek.jpg (last choice). I will be very appreciate for your answer. --Pnapora (talk) 21:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this church known as the little church or not? That's what the description states, and was one reason I declined the rename, the other being language, the new name should be in Polish, not English. Liamdavies (talk) 12:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no correct answer in English for your question. Correct local name for this church is maly kosciolek (mały kościółek) and mały means - small and kosciolek means - little church. Name shouldn't be small church/maly kosciol anyway. If language should be Polish the best choice would be File:Ostrow Wielkopolski kosciol Najswietszej Marii Panny Krolowej Polski.jpg if you agree I will move the file. --Pnapora (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Liamdavies (talk) 13:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

rename a photo File:Jerusalem, Armenian Quarter, Habad Street.JPG

You canceled the rename of File:Jerusalem, Armenian Quarter, Habad Street.JPG with this comment : "No valid reason stated" However, the reason for the renaming is obvious: it is the real name of the street instead of a wrong one. Was it really necessary to specify the reason? If yes, here it is :

File renaming criterion #3: Correct misleading names into accurate ones. this is NOT "armenian quarter" but "jewish quarter", and this is NOT "Habad street" but "Jewish Quarter road"

Djampa (talk) 11:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done I declined because you hadn't entered a reason, now that you have I've done the move. Next time enter a reason, without knowing why a file should be renamed it becomes very hard to judge. You are the one making the request, it is incumbent on you to provide a reason, what is obvious to you may not be obvious to someone who has never been to Jerusalem. Liamdavies (talk) 13:34, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Astrik-Statue Kakocsa.jpg

File:Astrik-Statue Kakocsa.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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 19:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hakusanjima, Tsuruoka -March 2011 a.jpg

Please review files more carefully. Your careless action has wasted other users' time. If you ever did the same action to any other files that I had uploaded from livedoor pics, please restore them. Thank you. --トトト (talk) 00:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake and will be more diligent in the future. Please accept my apologies and understand it was a sincere mistake; I hope you can at the very least understand why I made such a mistake though. Liamdavies (talk) 07:27, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editor @ ar.wiki

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, hopefully this will mean less work for administrators at AR:WP. Liamdavies (talk) 07:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trams

Hi. Electric trams have not their own tree of subcategories because the main category tree of trams considers trams as electric by default (and non-electric subcategories as exceptions from the most common propulsion). However, this is not reason for total absence of electric trams in the category of electric rolling stock. Thus we need to accept categories of trams as both, categories for all trams and categories for electric trams. --ŠJů (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a dicussion to back up that assertion? Trams, like trains, are powered by a mulitude of sources not just electricity. Liamdavies (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a hard reality that electric trams have not their own subcategory tree because trams are considered as electric by default. There is clearly minor error when the category tree of electric rolling stock contains also some inappropriate subcategories than when lacks such an important content as electric trams. --ŠJů (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion was copied to Category talk:Trams#Missing subcategory tree of electrically-powered trams. Please diccuss it there if needed. --ŠJů (talk) 20:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should remove the caontested category until consensus for its inclusion has been established. Warring it in when contested does not show good faith. Liamdavies (talk) 20:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you will rectify the problem that electric trams are missing generally in the category of electrically-powered rolling stock? Do you really mean that none solution is better than the my solution? Are you really not capable to understand the current situation and the problem described and analysed in the discussion? Such debaters are called "a frog on the spring" in my language. --ŠJů (talk) 10:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rename: Tobiolo, con l'arcangelo Gabriele, cattura il pesce nel fiume Tigri.jpg

Hi Liamdavies, I'm italian so sorry for my english translation. Some times ago I have suggest to change the name of this file because I tink It's wrong. And you have stop my request because I have't link a source that states this to be Raphael. Now I hadn't found the name of this picture but I have found the book of the Bible that speak about the event represented in the picture. At the following link http://ebible.org/kjv/Tobit.htm you can find the history of Tobias and Raphael (in italian Tobiolo e Raffaele). Also on web you can easily find works by other artists that represent the same scene. I hope you can again take into consideration the idea of changing the name and description of this image. Thanks for yuor work and attention --Oudeis G (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but when I do a Google images search all that comes up is arcangelo gabriele. I don't know if this is circular or not, but I would request you discuss this name change with the uploader, or provide evidence (ie a site that captions this image). Liamdavies (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just click on the link you provided I found the solution to our dilemma. In fact, in the last result Page 21 (the only one that does not references to wikipedia) there is the image with the followin caption "Savoldo: L'Angelo e il Tobiolo (Genova Coll. Viezzoli)" and you can find the description of the picture onpage 23 precisely on the ninth line of page 23, which speaks precisely of the picture with the title of "Tobio and the Archangel Raphael of coll. Viezzoli di Genova". Unfortunately, the text is in Italian and I do not know if it's okay with you, if you need clarification are at your disposal. I hope you correct the title of the painting because I'm afraid remains wrong. Happy Holidays.--Oudeis G (talk) 18:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay, this slipped my mind. I yet again ask, can you please discuss this with the person who uploaded the file? And if they agree simply put in the rename request again. Liamdavies (talk) 04:06, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Travancorehistory (talk · contribs)[edit]

All these photos uploaded by Travancorehistory appear to be photographs of a book, or books. Without knowledge of the copyright status of both the book and original photo we should delete them per COM:PRP File:Malika Muhammed Abdul Khadar.jpg File:Kochu hassan kunju bahadoor.jpg File:കൊച്ചു ഹസ്സന്‍ കുഞ്ഞു ബഹാദൂര്‍.JPG Liamdavies (talk) 07:58, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

how can i use this images, what you want me to do if it need to be attached with relevant article in the same name, kindly advice me in a simple manner..Travancorehistory. -- 14:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but the files you refer to were deleted some time ago, and my memory isn't perfect on what they contained. As a general rule, any image which you did not solely create requires the permission of any creator/co-creator (see COM:LICENSE). The best way to get the images listed undeleted would be to contact the person who originally created the image and get them to go through the (easy) COM:OTRS process. Liamdavies (talk) 14:07, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hello, Liamdavies. Check your email—you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

INeverCry 20:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Changes without finished

Hi, please do NOT do changes without finished discussion. BTW: Attacking another people in the discussion is against one of the main Wikipedia rules. Please read the guideline about discussing, PARTICULARY linked part. Thanks a lot, — Jagro (talk) 18:50, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liam. This has been brought to AN/U. INeverCry 19:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks INC. Liamdavies (talk) 19:58, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep your comments civil and assume good faith in future, comment on the contributions and not the contributor, this comment is very borderline and isn't helpful. Bidgee (talk) 03:28, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. In my defence I have had nothing but belittling warish behaviour with numerous accusations that because I don't agree with Sju I do not understand. The subtext of that is that I am so stupid that I could not possibly comprehend his actions as I am too stupid. Liamdavies (talk) 05:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lawline socks etc.

Thanks for taking the time to wade through all that. It's getting to be - voluminous! JohnInDC (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I understand your concerns, and after a little examination it is clear that there is socking going on. My going though it simply helps the admins (gives them more time), so it's one of my little ways of helping here. Also, I've read much much longer :) Liamdavies (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Re your comment at Commons:Help_desk#Remove photos, thanks, that was probably a better answer than mine; I was on my way out the door & maybe shouldn't have tried answering at all right then. - Jmabel ! talk 06:42, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, glad I could help. Liamdavies (talk) 16:13, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trams

What is the point of renaming the various Prague tram categories? You've simply added the word "media" it seems, which would be rather silly as all Commons contents are media. You linked to a talkpage edit here as an explanation but I don't see much of relevance there. Please explain. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 08:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not understand what the meaning of your categories are? Perhaps you could make some sort of illustration to illuminate your thinking, because I cannot make heads nor tails out of what you are doing. Categorizing is not all that complicated, and having the occasional overlapping categories is not the end of the world. I would appreciate a clarification. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 01:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Media_of_Tatra_KT8D5_in_Prague

Media of Tatra KT8D5 in Prague 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.