User talk:Oxyman/Archive 4

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

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, –Davey2010Talk 23:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Automobils with license plates from the United Kingdom[edit]

Hi, Oxyman, this file clearly reveals the license plate of the automobile. Can you remove it? Thank you for your time, Lotje (talk) 13:40, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

this one too Lotje (talk) 13:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to do this or what the procedure to achieve this is Oxyman (talk) 15:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
just take a look at what Ies did. Lotje (talk) 04:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
File:Old sewing machines - Long Acre, Covent Garden, London (6446639345).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!

Hiddenhauser (talk) 11:37, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old sewing machines - Long Acre, Covent Garden, London (6446637343).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!

Hiddenhauser (talk) 11:38, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Il96dream (talk) 22:30, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:1920 White House Inn London Borough of Hackney.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:1920 White House Inn London Borough of Hackney.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:1920 White House Inn London Borough of Hackney.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:1mcb.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:1mcb.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:1mcb.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 10:02, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Robert Schumann's Birthplace in Zwickau.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Robert Schumann's Birthplace in Zwickau.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 23:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi Oxyman, I recall a few months ago I had a go at you about categorizing my images however I don't think I've ever thanked you for doing so ... So thank you for your help in categorizing them - It's extremely appreciated so thank you :)
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I honestly can't remember the occasion you speak about, but thanks for the recognition Oxyman (talk) 19:46, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, For some reason I'm convinced I've had a go at you about categorizing them and that you could be wasting your time ... I'm sure it was you ... Perhaps I've got you mixed up with another editor, But anyway you're welcome and thanks again :), Anyway have a great weekend (We'll imagine it's Friday lol), Cheers, –Davey2010Talk 20:31, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Royal Artillery Barracks, Woolwich in around 1900.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Royal Artillery Barracks, Woolwich in around 1900.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 09:03, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you what to know why, ask me why. Don't just revert me. This one unholy mess, because this category had 22 post boxes in it. I can see why, because the distinction is obviously not clear to editors. For that reason I have opened a discussion. Please contribute there. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:07, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it was worth creating a discussion then surely it was worth waiting a bit so it can be discussed, also your discussion is referring to and should be at Category:Mailboxes in the United Kingdom. you are creating far more mess then you are solving. Oxyman (talk) 17:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I only created the discussion when I realised what an abject mess it was as regards England. However, Category:Mailboxes in the United Kingdom refers to mail boxes, letter boxes and post boxes. We could regard "mail" as a generic parent for both incoming and outgoing mail (although there's no need to do that), and leave it sparsely populated as it is, to match Category:Mailboxes by country. However, I'm sure you'll have valuable comments to make at the discussion. But one thing is clear- we have a mess, and it needs sorting out. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well maybe you should have taken more time to consider what you were doing, I disagree there is no mess to sort out Oxyman (talk) 17:21, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Post Boxes[edit]

"undo damage done by someone unexperienced in subject". Really?. Kindly don't make it personal. Rodhullandemu (talk) 10:15, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rally, that is just a description of what I am doing. What was I supposed to say "Correcting mass misuse of Cat-a-lot by someone who had no clue of subject?" It would be better to familiarise yourself with the subject before making such large scale changes. Cat-a-lot is a great tool but it should be used responsibly Oxyman (talk) 10:19, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So should edit summaries. They are not vehicles for what may be misinterpreted as personal attacks. Rodhullandemu (talk) 10:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well I can't be responsible for others misinterpreting Me, using Cat-a-lot to recategorise many files in a category structure you are unfamiliar with is quite another matter Oxyman (talk) 10:30, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 18:38, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

London Categories[edit]

Thanks for what your doing Oxyman. In about 2010, noticed a lot of images of London were being upload either without any location given or the wrong/vague location. i.e., Ealing instead of Hanwell because the Hanwell is in the London Borough of Ealing. Found myself with a up-hill struggle to get agreement that a bot should convert all the borough names to the right format and then created the London Post Code cat and outer London Postal Town cat to make it easier for an uploader to find a meaningful cat. After that I felt exhausted and gave up doing any more. WC has come a long way since then and it appears easier now, for someone wanting an image, to navigate their way there. --P.g.champion (talk) 17:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for the recognition. I know what you mean about the state of London cats in about 2010, I seem to remember there were about 7000 files just categorised under London mostly with limited or no other information about what they were. I mostly use the borough cats because the Open Street maps that files with geodata link to have borough boundaries marked on them, meaning I can usually find out which borough a photograph has been taken in. It's good to know that users are experiencing an easier time navigating the London cats Oxyman (talk) 19:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Special Barnstar
I'm extremely impressed with the amount of knowledge you have of London!, It's a big place and yet somehow you know every building in every pat of London! - You are literally a human London map lol,

Anyway I've come to say thank you for your hard work in categorising these and for you contributions here,
Have a great Christmas and a Happy New Year too :),
Thanks, –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 00:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Seasons greetings to you also Oxyman (talk) 15:40, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your image(s) looks like a City of London coal duty posts and your image(s) were taken with in that very area. Extant Posts Report.pdf. Not going to update your description (and cat) yet, for the obvious reason that this was told to me long, long ago and my memory may be failing. Also of course, it would help to have a more reliable reference or two. For extra cat info to explore, there are other British coal-tax images here : Category:Coal tax posts. Oh, and Mary Chriss Mass (apologies: my spell Czech her has gone on the blink again).--P.g.champion (talk) 16:43, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think these images are very unlikely to be Coal-tax posts, you can see the date "1994" in the image you link to, the last coal tax was collected in 1890. Coal-tax posts were mostly erected in 1861 and where they exist today are ancient monuments. What do you mean "your image(s) were taken with in that very area" ? I can't remember the exact location where I took those images but on one image I state in the description "near Mansion House Tube". The Coal-tax posts were erected on a border about 20 miles from the City of London. Seasons greetings to you also Oxyman (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You do not need to reply to this as it is just for information. The original coal posts where erected in the area that the City of London authorities consider that fell within the city of London. Whether it is an authority collecting taxes or a private land owner collecting rent, the boundary of land is all important. It was much latter that the coal tax was extended beyond the city. The date "1994" does not mean anything at all, as post are often replaced and it is customary to add the date of the new replacement. However, have not gone up to Kew to examine the archives in the National Archives (United Kingdom) for the sake of a couple of images on WC that show the original coal post and a few minutes of googling doesn't come up with very much about the original boundaries of the coal tax, other than it began in the 1400's when London was a tiny town. Google Street view show exactly where they where though, and which are now represented by modern posts. The originals posts were apparently of cheap stone that weathered badly ( back then, iron posts were too expensive). The reason I now know that the records are in Kew is because, in the intervening time, I ran this question past a London Historian who knows about these things. Even today, city of London police wear a red a white check rather than the black and white, the same red and white on the posts you photographed. Appears, what I was told all those years ago was right. However, trust you will will understand why I will not be putting any more effort into improving your image descriptions when there are so many others that are worthy of more attention. --P.g.champion (talk) 01:19, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this information, I was not aware there were coal posts in the City before the the the latter ones 20 miles out. I thought they were just boundary markers Oxyman (talk) 14:53, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
File:Seymour Hicks3.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!

Jcb (talk) 23:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

File:KingArthurS.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!

Jcb (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Allan valve gear.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!

Jcb (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

London's Transport Museum Depot 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!


Blythwood (talk) 13:47, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Single deck LCC tram.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!

Jcb (talk) 11:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sir Alexander Sprot.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!

Jcb (talk) 17:40, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

File:1982 Tamiya 1 32 truck Toyota Hilux 4WD 4x4 pickup.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!

G I Chandor (talk) 02:48, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image location[edit]

Hi Oxyman, Hope all is well,
Sorry to bother you but you wouldn't happen to know where the location is in this Webm would you?, Tried following the route map for the bus route but it took forever ,
If you don't know it's not a problem,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:21, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi no problem, This is Hyde Park Corner to be more exact it is the junction where Constitution Hill joins the roundabout that has Wellington Arch in the middle of it Oxyman (talk) 22:01, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure I circled around there more than once on Google Maps..., Anyway thank you so so much for your help :), Your knowledge and contributions here are more appreciated than you'll ever know!, keep up the great work! :), Thanks again, –Davey2010Talk 22:44, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the kind words Oxyman (talk) 00:40, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
File:( Sometimes the heart sees what is invisible to the eye. - H. Jackson Brown, Jr. ) Passion for Hospitality, The AndaZ LiverpooL StreeT, LondoN, England, United Kingdom (5417984657).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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 11:14, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:HHP8 leading an Amtrak train at Trentron, NJ.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!

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata & times/dates[edit]

Hi Oxyman, You probably haven't noticed but all of the images Category:Davey2010/London as well as at Category:2016 in the City of Westminster all have very close times (16:00-17:30/18:00),
Could these images all have been taken at those actual times ?, Considering I've done about 200 images and have 400 to go I'd say it was unlikely that the times are correct which then makes me believe the dates could be wrong too,
All for we know the images could've been taken in 2015 or 2017 ?,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 23:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I regretted cat-a-lot moving those from Category:2016 in London to Category:2016 in the City of Westminster after I noticed they were in your category and and that you were sorting them out, but by that time I had already moved the files. As for the date/time issue, I really don't know, it does not seem impossible to me to take many photographs in a short amount of time and then upload them all as they come from the camera, as they are from close locations.
I generally take the original information on trust, unless I can be sure there is an error. That's one of the problems with the date categories, they are open to these kinds of mistakes and errors and ultimately we are relying on trust. If the time was exactly the same I would suspect some kind of error, but from what I have seen the times seem possible to me. If you disagree or have many more images from the same times then remove the date cats, or do what you think is best. Oxyman (talk) 01:40, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oxyman, Oh no worries I mean you copied them (I think?) which I don't mind, I only get annoyed if people either move them from my categories or if people removed the cat altogether so not a problem :),
Exactly that's all we can do but having looked again I agree it does seem to be possible, At the time of writing the above I hadn't actually realised some streets were so close, But anyway might aswell leave them I mean I don't like to be incorrect but at the same time I wouldn't of thought the year could be wrong - Unless ofcourse you want to go on Streetview and compare each and every image ,
Anyway thanks for your help I'll probably just continue putting them in the 2016 ones,
Anyway thanks again for your help and thanks for your help with categorising everything too - As always it's much appreciated :),
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 01:26, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
File:BT Tower, London - after sunset (6421430759).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!

AnhaltER1960 (talk) 07:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Southwark Iron Bridge.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!

Jcb (talk) 23:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Great Western King 2.jpeg 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!

 — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 10:54, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CityMetric article on tube stocks[edit]

Just an FYI, but I noticed some of your photos in use on CityMetric, with attribution but without properly following the CC-BY-SA licence terms. I've written to them myself as they used one of my photos, but thought you'd want to know. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:50, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re recent DR's[edit]

If you want to combine the requests feel free, I wasn't happy about filing a new mass request, given that it would involve editing a LOT of pages to combine them. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You really should have more respect for the work others have put in this project, if you cannot be bothered to do your deletion requests properly then perhaps you shouldn't do them at all. Oxyman (talk) 00:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
On the basis of your comment, I've widthdrawn a number of the DR's on procedural grounds, except where other contributors had already added comments.

As you are aware of the issue, I'll also be collapsing the notifcations you got.ShakespeareFan00 (talk)

OK thanks for this Oxyman (talk) 11:31, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As you are one of the more affected users, would you be willing to get in touch with the National Railway Musuem, and ask them about the logo status as a sort of unofficial GLAM initiative? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly I think the diplomacy and skill I would need to do that is beyond me Oxyman (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:58, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Greater Manchester Metrolink neckties.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!

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:35, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:SR Leader 05.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!

Jcb (talk) 17:11, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arthur morrison.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!

Jcb (talk) 21:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:012 at Rheine, 1975.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!

Dampfmotomon (talk) 10:05, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oxyman,

is this just Erewash Valley Line or Clay Cross Junction? (The file was imported by you)

Greetings, Casigno145 (talk) 17:46, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in my opinion cases like this are not really worth arguing about as it's just a matter of perspective. In this instance the junction is just out of sight. For categorisation purposes it is common for railway infrastructure to be grouped with a main feature of that line. For example track, signals, car parks or other railway related structures close to a station would be more usefully categorised under that station's category as it is more geographically precise than the whole line's category. So I would lean towards categorising this image as Clay Cross Junction. But there has to be a point when the subject is too far from the station to be usefully categorised under the nearest station, I'm afraid this is just a subjective judgement based upon what the categoriser feels would be most useful, as such I don't personally don't feel it's useful to get too involved in such fine points. Best Oxyman (talk) 10:06, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
File:King's Sutton`3.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!

Motacilla (talk) 08:36, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stephenson link valve gear.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!

Jcb (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Oxyman,

I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around. But since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year. If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.

Cheers,

--MB-one (talk) 19:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stingo.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!

Jcb (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies[edit]

Reminder

Retracing my steps at Heron Quay- I now know how I got lost while I was barging around ClemRutter (talk) 10:24, 2 October 2017 (UTC).[reply]

No problems just a simple mistake. Those barges do look fun Oxyman (talk) 16:36, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism in wrong Category:Buckingham Palace detail[edit]

Please stop putting the wrong images in this category. Thank you --Carolus (talk) 14:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not. I am simply reverting your vandalism as I informed you about before. please stop edit waring and your vandalism Oxyman (talk) 14:16, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes u are putting images in category that is wronly named and will be deleted. That is vandalism.--Carolus (talk) 14:18, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No I am reverting your vandalism, Vandalism which you refuse to discus. Oxyman (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are even not capable to create a correct named category, i have my doubts.--Carolus (talk) 14:20, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sonic the Hedgehog at London Marathon 2011 (5630113835).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!

Sw0 (talk) 23:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Temple Underground station 1899.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!

Jcb (talk) 22:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You undid my revert of File:Tower Bridge with the Tower Hotel, London - geograph.org.uk - 691081.jpg with the comment “Reverted to version as of 16:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC) following guidlines at COM:OVERWRITE not random personal judgements”. However, I think I was following COM:OVERWRITE, particularly this part: “If another editor thinks that a change is not an improvement (even if the editor making the change thinks it minor), the change can be reverted.” I think that scaling an image up is not an improvement, so I reverted that change. According to my reading of COM:OVERWRITE, your recourse if you don't agree (and can't persuade me to change my mind) is to upload the upscaled image under a different name. --bjh21 (talk) 11:16, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is standard practice to always obtain the highest resolution https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Why_we_need_high_resolution_media and to delete smaller versions of the same image. So standard and widespread that I thought COM:OVERWRITE would be much more specific about it rather then just considering it a Minor improvement. Larger resolution files are considered OBJECTIVELY better then a smaller file. Personal opinions are not part of the deciding factor here, Had the smaller file something you could point to that was objectively better, such as better focusing, then there may be a reason to use the smaller file. But that appears not to be the case here. The minor differences that you can disagree about and upload under a different name are things where the original image is altered such as crops or colour changes. If I was to upload the upscaled image under a different name, I (or another user) could then tag the original image with Duplicate It would in due course most likely be deleted and replaced by the larger image. Oxyman (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, the high-res version seems to have been made by simply scaling up the low-res original. I think that makes an important difference because the high-res version has none of the benefits listed in Commons:Why we need high resolution media. It also means that there is an objective benefit to the low-res version: it's been through one fewer round of JPEG encoding and decoding, so it has fewer JPEG-induced errors. This also means that CSD F8 (exact or scaled-down duplicate) doesn't apply: the smaller image is not a scaled-down duplicate because it wasn't generated by scaling down the larger one. --bjh21 (talk) 18:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I made a mistake thinking that the replacement image was from a higher res source, I actually agree with your last post so I reverted my edit to the image. I can only apologise for the misunderstanding, perhaps pointing out more clearly that the image was made by simply scaling up the low-res original in the edit summary might help others avoid a similar mistake in future. Oxyman (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I'm glad we've sorted it out. --bjh21 (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sahiwal Junction.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!

Störm (talk) 18:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pfe722.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!

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:08, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ephemera[edit]

That's a main category. Create Ephemera by country --> Ephemera from the United Kingdom --> Ephemera from London rather. -- 07:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

This category structure doesn't currently exist, create it if you wish Oxyman (talk) 08:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep disrupting the project and I'm blocking you. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:53, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
File:Festival of Britain Mug.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!

Simonxag (talk) 09:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brixtonacademymural.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!

B dash (talk) 16:16, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, DriscollAmok (talk) 02:41, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Live Poultry Car.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!

Jcb (talk) 12:39, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Various everton trade cards.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!

Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sports venue[edit]

No, no vandalism, even because it would be strange that an admin vandalizes a file. Simply "stadiums" is a too vague category, there's "Sports venue", and you can categorize it by sport (association football venue, rugby union venue, and so on). -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 21:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like vandalism, who decided this? discussion link? why does Category:Stadiums exist? Without answers this is just vandalism Oxyman (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You have a discussion still opened here, why don't you appear? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:31, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What has this to do with you? Why post it then immediately remove it? Again stop bullying. Oxyman (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
File:Various everton trade cards.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!

Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sports venue[edit]

No, no vandalism, even because it would be strange that an admin vandalizes a file. Simply "stadiums" is a too vague category, there's "Sports venue", and you can categorize it by sport (association football venue, rugby union venue, and so on). -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 21:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like vandalism, who decided this? discussion link? why does Category:Stadiums exist? Without answers this is just vandalism Oxyman (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You have a discussion still opened here, why don't you appear? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:31, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What has this to do with you? Why post it then immediately remove it? Again stop bullying. Oxyman (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
File:Tunbridge wells pantiles.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!

Charlesdrakew (talk) 19:27, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Category:1973_in_Cumbria 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!


Andy Dingley (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abbey Pumping station Flywheel.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!

Tine (talk) 09:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

BT Group telephone boxes 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!


Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:13, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Locating stuff[edit]

Thank you for adding a location to this picture of an Aston Martin Lagonda. It was an unusual car even in 1982 and I still (rather dimly) remember taking the picture: I have no reason to doubt the location that you give it. It was certainly in that general part of London, on the edge of an upmarket looking square. But, please, how do you do it? Thanks (in anticipation) for any tips. Regards Charles01 (talk) 14:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, First I saw the sign "RAYNHAM" behind the car, so I searched "Raynham, London" in google maps, it gave me the location of a nearby apartment block, from there it was a case of looking around the area on street view to see if I can recognise and any of the details visible in the image, The sign and fence to the right can still be seen in situ although now they are behind another fence, the green fence in the background in your photo can still be seen now painted black. Hope that is of some help. Oxyman (talk) 14:34, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds so easy. But only after you'd taken me through step by step! Thank you. Charles01 (talk) 15:48, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
File:Trinity Chapel Poplar.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!

Jcb (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question. Someone looking for this goes to Category:Kilburn, London and doesn't see this building listed. They don't know it's in Cambridge Avenue. How do they find it, and how frustrated are they when they can't find it, being an unsophisticated Commons user, such as a picture editor of a local newspaper? That's why I keep streets and roads separate from the areas in which they are. Different category hierarchies, but necessary for the very people we are trying to get to use our images. Hmmm? Rodhullandemu (talk) 00:12, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many areas of London accumulate a lot of material, so if everyone puts their pet content in the higher level categories,... then soon there is a flood of material in those categories. This single case is really not worth arguing about, Kilburn you may say doesn't need so many subcats in it, but that can change with a single bulk upload. I find that when users speculate about how an end user will use commons what they really mean is 'I wish to use commons like this'. Isn't the purpose of the search box to help people find stuff? Whereas categories group files with similar aspects together. I'm a bit baffled on how you are to separate streets from their local areas Oxyman (talk) 02:21, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 01:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important message for file movers[edit]

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

  • To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
  • To perform file name swaps.
  • When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, C.Suthorn (talk) 13:02, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
Hi Oxyman. This seems to be the only way to contact you (?). You posted this picture https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:London_Bus_route_91.jpg

I think there's a very good chance that I'm actually the driver of that bus. When was this taken? I'm guessing around 2003? And it looks to me like Euston Station. Please email me dj_goatee@hotmail.com Thanks Robin RobinMiller1978 (talk) 12:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tonka Bottom dump truck.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!

Arosio Stefano (talk) 07:12, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Majorette 200 series dicast car 232 Buggy Ice Cream.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!

Arosio Stefano (talk) 17:06, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:3 model Citroën Dyane.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!

Arosio Stefano (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:5305 at Whitehall Junction.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!

TedColes (talk) 12:26, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Red telephone boxes 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!


Roy17 (talk) 18:22, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

#invoke:Autotranslate Rodhullandemu (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Autotranslate Benjen (talk) 22:32, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.