User talk:Rhododendrites/2016a

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

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. café --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Hedwig in Washington: Sounds good. Thanks. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  02:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
@Hedwig in Washington: Say, since you probably had occasion to look through a bunch of my edits prior to adding this right, I wonder if you would mind taking a look at Commons:Requests_for_rights#Rhododendrites_2. I've been getting more active lately and finding that I could make good use of the filemover right. If that right requires a greater degree of scrutiny you don't have the time or inclination for at the moment, no worries :) — Rhododendrites talk |  14:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
No problem, I didn't notice your request for FM rights. All done now. Happy moving! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

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 Rhododendrites, 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.


Removing images from my tracking cats

Dear Rhododendrites,

You removed a lot of files from my tracking cat Category:Images uploaded by Natuur12 taken from the USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Lab Flickr stream. Could you please be so kind to move them back? Otherwise I can't keep track of the Flickr files I import so I can spend my time on the streams with the best rendament. Natuur12 (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Natuur12:  ? I don't think that I removed anything from Category:Images uploaded by Natuur12 taken from the USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Lab Flickr stream.
I had found Category:Photographs by USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Lab and thought the files in your tracking category had not also been categorized under the main source category, so I copied them. Then I realized the photographs cat was redundant to Category:Files by USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Laboratory, so I removed that category again. In other words, for all of the photos in your category that were already categorized appropriately, there was no change -- just a cat and uncat. Sorry for the confusion; I should've realized the "photographs.." category had too few items in it to be real. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. It seems that this edit put me off track. Natuur12 (talk) 16:17, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) @Natuur12: By the way, how did you get Flickr2Commons to work with that stream? They're all PDMark1.0, which the tool doesn't seem to consider valid (unless you do the files one by one). — Rhododendrites talk |  16:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I uploaded most before they changed their license. Now I mostly use the upload wizzard. Natuur12 (talk) 16:21, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:ArtAndFeminism 2015 at the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam

Please don't rename categories with a correct name to an incorrect name. Renaming policy is at Commons:Rename a category. Please respect it. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

@Multichill: Hmm. Sorry if I made a mistake, but I don't see why category:ArtAndFeminism 2015 at the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam is "correct" and category:ArtAndFeminism 2015/Stedlijk Museum Asterdam is "incorrect". It is now the only category in Category:ArtAndFeminism 2015 that does not use that format (a format which I did not originate). It's not a big deal, of course, but could you clarify why it is more correct? I do not see anything in the renaming policy that helps me better understand that. Does it have something to do with using a slash? Is it just that I was wrong to think it was non-controversial? — Rhododendrites talk |  14:25, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
@Multichill: Hoping to follow up on this so as to better understand what you're saying I did wrong / to consider in the future. — Rhododendrites talk |  20:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I got a bit swamped in cross wiki pings so I overlooked your reply. Generally categories should have a descriptive name. Having a "/" is not descriptive and should be avoided. The category is an intersection of two topics. The category of churches in Russia is not named Category:Churches/Russia, but Category:Churches in Russia, because that's our naming convention. Same applies here. The fact we have so many badly named categories in Category:ArtAndFeminism 2015 is just because nobody bothered to clean it up yet. Multichill (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
@Multichill: Sorry for a delay in responding. So it comes down to "/" being used instead of " in "? In general that seems like a sensible preference. Are there best practices/guidelines documented anywhere regarding that sort of thing? Using the Rename a category page you linked to in your original message, I would've classified the switch from the original category to the one using the slash as "unambiguous" as it standardizes a category name with that which nearly all of the other similar event categories use. That points to Commons:Language policy, which doesn't provide much help, as well as the page marked historical, Commons:Naming categories, which seems to largely be covered by Commons:Categories. There, too, I'm having trouble extracting best practices for this sort of thing.
My issue, to the extent I have one, is that the slash naming convention has been used now for about 70 ArtAndFeminism meetup categories -- all of them for 2015 and 2016 other than this one. I didn't start that convention (it may have been someone used to subpages on Wikipedia meetup pages assuming categories work the same way), but I did create some of them to keep the subcategories uniform. If there's a clear naming convention it's easier to explain to organizers of individual events and, at least in my opinion, easier to find from a reader's perspective. If all but one in a category is presented in a certain way, it seems that would make the one slightly more difficult to find. Ultimately, unless someone goes through to change all of them from "/" to " in ", isn't it better to have them still be uniform, even if the slash is a bit less descriptive?
I guess the crux of the matter is when, if ever, standardization of subcategories should be a priority if the standard could be more descriptive, and when it's appropriate to standardize categories to be more descriptive, possibly overriding the preferences of the uploaders/category creators? Would there be any justification for converse objections/reversions if one were to move all of the categories with slashes to say " in " instead?
Thanks — Rhododendrites talk |  14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Files_uploaded_during_ArtAndFeminism_2014

Category discussion warning

Files uploaded during ArtAndFeminism 2014 has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

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

Another Believer (talk) 19:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

File:First TV Image from Space (7544560100).jpg

File:First TV Image from Space (7544560100).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 ∙ +/−

Ras67 (talk) 12:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

File:STS-6 (15014637209).jpg

File:STS-6 (15014637209).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 ∙ +/−

Ras67 (talk) 12:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Too many categories

Please limit the categories to what is actually shown on an image. See for example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ASeafood-_FDA_Inspector_2567_%284494486774%29.jpg&type=revision&diff=193944617&oldid=193943853 - Takeaway (talk) 11:25, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@Takeaway: Those categories are the result of the auto-categorizing feature of Flickr2Commons. I uploaded several images yesterday and have gone through about half. Will be going through the other half today. Thanks for getting that one (and/or any others you came across).
Last time I used the tool the categories it came up with (based on Flickr tags, I believe) were too many, but at least contained a couple that made the feature worth using. This time, it turns out it was more hassle than it's worth, and I find myself removing almost all of them and adding several. Oh well. I think I'll disable it in the future. :/ — Rhododendrites talk |  12:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I often clean up categories here on Wikimedia and I've come to the conclusion that bot-assisted categorization hardly ever works, especially with files from Flickr where categories either seem to be used in a very personal way, or they consist of a whole slew of very broad categories, making them virtually unusable for Wikimedia. Apart from files by newbie uploaders, it's these bot-assisted files that I have to clean up most. If only more mass uploaders would actually bother to clean up after themselves such as you do.... Thanks! - Takeaway (talk) 12:49, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rhododendrites/2016a&oldid=200804350"