User talk:SergeWoodzing/Archive 1

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

Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2009/11#Category:Royalty_of_Sweden

Hello SergeWoodzing, you wrote your suggestion into Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2009/11#Category:Michigan_State_University_alumni. I have createdCommons:Categories_for_discussion/2009/11#Category:Royalty_of_Sweden and transferred your text to the new file. See Commons:Categories_for_discussion#Listing_a_single_category_on_this_.22Categories_for_discussion.22_page. --Diwas (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for helping! I hope there will be some input now. SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I left a note at Commons:Categories for discussion/2009/11/Category:Royalty of Sweden. Wknight94 talk 15:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you please comment on whether or not you think this discussion from 2009 is still relevant? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 03:56, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I think it is, but may need a bit of revision after 5 years. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:56, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
I prefer to get these discussions resolved by the end of next week. I plan to ask at COM:AN about how best to resolve any outstanding discussions at Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2009, as I don't think it much productive to leave these discussions open for five years. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 23:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your comment at COM:AN/U

Hi SergeWoodzing, please avoid comments like this which can be understood that you compare a user with a dog. This is inappropriate and does not help the debate in any positive way. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 20:12, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your point of view, but you missed the entry my Pjotr above mine which first referred to Dr Kuiper as a (molested) "dog", in his defence. I was only commenting on that. I would never have called anyone a "dog" inte way you are suggesting and you will find no evidence anywhere that I have ever done anything like that. I could be very offended by this misdirected reprimand of yours, but I am willing to chalk it up to human error. Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Turned over to you

This is to certify and confirm, once and for all, that I have turned over my watchlists and work on Swedish and English Wikipedia and on Wikimedia Commons to you, having retired from all three of those projects. You, if anyone, are now to represent the interests of image contributor Southerly Clubs according to the wishes of that organization's Board of Directors. That authorization will be withdrawn here, by an authorized representative of that Board, if and when that becomes timely. EmilEikS (talk) 23:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC), Deputy Chairman, Southerly Clubs.

I acknowledge this message and accept the responsibility, though I have practically retired from Swedish Wikipedia. SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Angela_Romeo.jpg

File:Angela_Romeo.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Angela_Romeo.jpg

Help! Thx. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

What has this got to do with me? Stifle (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
You solved this last time which is being used frivolously as one of the arguments in this new situation. Please see the current deletion discussion where that previous case has been dragged into it! SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
There are several other OTRS agents who have contributed to the discussion and I agree with them. To retain the image the owner of the image should send this email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Stifle (talk) 09:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! I am doing my best to initiate that as soon as possible. SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

MBz1

Hi Serge,

English is not my mother language and I often have trouble to decipher the real meaning of the comments I read. And I did not understand what you really mean, and what your targets are, when you say that good work should never excuse cruelty. Maybe I'm being naive but I do not see cruelty (a quite a strong word, by the way) in the actions of any of the persons involved in this dispute. Unless there is something I'm not aware of, all I see is lack of control and a lot of egocentrism. Will you please explain? If there is some implicit criticism to my behaviour, please expain it more clearly. Remaining sweet little an angel in these circunstances is something well beyond my capacity. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! My message has nothing whatsoever to do with you, and I'm very sorry if you took it that way. I began my comments in that section by writing about a certain person's "defense league". No one else intended. Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:36, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt reply. Yes, that is what I thought but I wanted to be sure. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Serge, I would really recommend you to reword (consider to change) your latest comment in the PK-thread. --Túrelio (talk) 18:17, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes? ... What do you recommend? Would you like to censure my honest opinion or prevent me from having it? Or do you support my attempts to stop a very cruel person from continuing to be so without constraints? Or would you like me, too, to quit Commons? Please be more specific! SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
As you are obviously not interested in communication, this is only what you get from me: compare other users here again with rats, you will see what you get. EOD here. --Túrelio (talk) 21:27, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
I don't know who you think you are to (1) twist what I wrote and (2) to use that twist of your own making to come here and threaten me. You obviously have a very high opinion of yourself. Keep that off my talk page in the future, please! We all have the right to our opinions here, and the obligation to be civil. That includes you, me and everybody else. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

"English"

HI SW, I noticed your recent post at user talk:Mattbuck - just a quick comment. We all have to keep in mind that Commons is a multilingual project. While English is the Lingua franca used for most of our commons discussions, every aspect of this project must remain open also for people who don't speak English very well. That does make communication even more challenging at times, and if another user writes something that is difficult to understand please ask politely for clarifications. Describing other users attempts at expressing themselves as "English" could be seen as an attempt to belittle them&their efforts - I'd like to believe that was not your intention. Finn Rindahl (talk) 11:07, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

It was my honest and sincere intention to try to understand bits of language that are not English or any other language that can be comprehended by me. If it was Swenglish or the like I might be able to understand it. In the context in which this was written by me, to another editor (not to you), it would not have been a good idea, nor would it have been welcome, to write to those particular other editors about their language. I see your good intentions here, but if you had studied the matter more closely I think you would agree in this case. I reserve the right to call incomprehensible attempts to write French "French" or French, German "German" or German and so forth. If anyone gets their feathers ruffled, perhaps they should try to better their language, which may be a task of sorts, rather than complaining about me, which is easy. It is important that we are able to understand what is written to us and about us without having to ask about every other sentence. Don't you think? SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, indeed - especially in somewhat heated discussions like the ones that frequently take place at admin notice boards understanding what is written to us, and that other understands what we write to them, is important. I wrote to you just to remind you that this isn't always possible at Commons, quite a lot of the people contributing here doesn't have English as first language or language skills like you have. We have to keep that in mind, both when people seem not to understand what we have written as well as when we can't really understand what other people try to say. It's probably for the best not to ruffle any more feathers than we absolutely have to. OK, this is just a piece of advice not asked for, and probably not needed anyway. And I have not studied the discussion that triggered your comment to Mattbuck closely - I try to stay away from the various COM:AN pages these days. Finn Rindahl (talk) 15:32, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! Sincerely, SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:41, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Pieter Kuiper

It is good to see that people are exploring ways of dealing with some of the disruption that Pieter has been causing. I'm not sure though that things like this really serve any useful purpose and so I'd suggest you refrain from making such comments which seem only likely to inflame the situation further. Thanks. Adambro (talk) 20:20, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

That entry reflects my honest opinion of Kuiper's opinion of himself based on a long period of persecution and a very disagreeable trail of tears, including sleepless nights, because of his intentional cruelty. I could also have added "I have never apologized to anyone about anything ever". SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Eiffel_Tower_4_20101026.JPG

File:Eiffel_Tower_4_20101026.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 00:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Angela_Romeo.jpg

File:Angela_Romeo.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Michael_Kearns.jpg

File:Michael_Kearns.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


Notification about possible deletion

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:04, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Ung Lilian.jpg

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:Ung Lilian.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:Ung Lilian.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!

Polarlys (talk) 08:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you but I am not the original uploader, as you've noticed, and I know nada about the source in this case. The photo appears to be over 80 years old, though, so I don't know who (in the real world) would make a copyright issue of it. SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Pau_3_crop_20101028.JPG

File:Pau_3_crop_20101028.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Pau_2_20101028.JPG

File:Pau_2_20101028.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:14, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Demitz_Lecture_20101012-2.JPG

File:Demitz_Lecture_20101012-2.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 ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 00:21, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Standers gård

Hejsan! En stilla undran bara angående rubricerade kategori och denna revertering. Gården har ju inte mer med sjön att göra än att den ligger bredvid sjön. På de flesta av bilderna syns sjön inte ens. Det var därför jag plockade bort gårdskategorin ur sjökategorin och istället lade till sjökategorin i ett antal anskilda bilder, där sjön faktiskt syntes. På samma sätt som det normalt inte finns några "ortskategorier" i andra sjökategorier, utan mest åar, öar och annat vattenrelaterat, även om orten ifråga skulle ligga intill sjön. Vänligen --MagnusA (talk) 08:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I think any waterfront, coastal property can be categorized under the name of the body of water in question, whether or not the water actually is visible in the photos. You and I may disagree about that, and that's OK, but that's what I think. Sort of like categorizing bars on Götgatan, and people in those bars, under Götgatan. Thank you for all your great work, by the way! SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Tack! Jag för så gott jag kan i alla fall och vill bara få en vettig struktur även här bland bilderna på Commons, förhoppningsvis till det bättre för alla. Jodå, därvidlag har vi nog olika åsikter, men inget jag tänker bråka om. Jag ville bara framföra hur jag tänkte när jag avkategoriserade gården. Ha en trevlig kväll! --MagnusA (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for a great clue!

After I read your exchange with P.K. at COM:ADM, I realized that, indeed, watchlist can cause emotional problems. Who are all these little people digging in my stuff? What do they know? What's on their minds? Paranoia blues.

So I decided to be WP:BOLD and culled my watchlist from some twenty thousands items to just twenty. Now it's cool and quiet. Ignorance is bliss. It's like living on an island.

Cheers, NVO (talk) 20:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for this considerate and cheerful message! Unfortunately, though, I accepted an assigment in 2009 to watch those 1000+ images and associated categories, after PK drove a couple of other users away, so either I have to resign from that and quit Commons or try to do my duty somehow. Cheers back! SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Adolf Johan

Hej Serge!

Hoppas att Du inte misstycker, men jag måste säga att jag är tveksam till om denna ändring verkligen blev en förbättring. I mitt tycke har den starkt uppdragna kontrasten mest lett till att bilden blivit mer grynig/rasteraktig (bl a genom att den gör själva pappersstrukturen väldigt markant). Dessutom är den nya bilden betydligt mindre än den gamla. Jag skulle nog förorda en återgång till den äldre versionen, där jag försökt att få denna så lik den skannade originalbilden som möjligt i såväl färgton som skärpa. /FredrikT (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Jag förstår inte hur bilden kunde bli mindre bara på en tonförändring, det var inte meningen. Trist. Men jag tycker nog ändå att den nya versionen utan den starka patineringen är klarare. Om du återställer den förra versionen kommer jag inte att vidta fler åtgärder. SergeWoodzing (talk) 04:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Jag skall se om jag kan få fram en kompromissversion - litet mer kontrastrik än originalet men inte så hårdragen som Din - som vi båda kan vara nöjda med. /FredrikT (talk) 14:53, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Support. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:16, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SergeWoodzing/Archive_1&oldid=659212272"