User talk:Tuvalkin/Archive 9

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

Category:Animations_and_video_of_facial_expressions

Category discussion warning

Category:Animations_and_video_of_facial_expressions 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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 ∙ +/−

Estopedist1 (talk) 05:48, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

File:BondeCCFL327.1962.12.09.jpg

Why was this undone? There is never a need to categorize things into "Month in city" categories rather than in December 1962 in Lisbon (which would the sole item for the sole category in 1962 in Lisbon) and I don't see what was wrong with December 1962 in Europe. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:31, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

There is not a Category:December 1962 in Lisbon yet, nor even a Category:December 1962 in Portugal; once any of those are created, this photo should be dissiminated thereon, and removed from its direct parent cats — Category:December 1962 in Europe and, in the former case, also Category:December in Lisbon. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:04, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:Iotified_letters

Category discussion warning

Iotified letters 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 ∙ +/−

1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:45, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:EL

Category discussion warning

EL 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 ∙ +/−

Estopedist1 (talk) 13:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Logos ML

Sabes o que se passa com os logos das linhas do Metropolitano de Lisboa que do nada foram apagadas e/ou alteradas substancialmente mesmo após ter colocado como origem das imagens a própria empresa? Ligaanet (talk) 21:53, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

  • @Ligaanet: Pois, andava à espera disto. Não adianta indicar a fonte: Imagens no Commons têm de ser livres de restrições de direito de cópia e estes apagamentos foram tecnicamente corretos, ainda que feitos e defendidos com uma pesporrência quase insuportável. Estou ao corrente do que se passa e tentarei corrigir o problema o mais rápido possível. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:52, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Non-empty "empty" category speedy

Hello Tuvalkin! You have speedy'd Category:António José (given name) with the comment "no such thing: empty" while the category has 6 subcategories and lot of entries. Either make it really empty (this probably involved a frather large category reorganisation and lot of work) or explain why do you think it's a speedy delete entree. It looks like a mistake. Thank you! --grin ✎ 08:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

BondeCCFL235.1968.AvLib×RAlexH

Hi. Why reverted my edit? Land vehicles photographed in 1968 pass to Trams in 1968 or not? - - Globetrotter19 (talk) 10:08, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata

You mentioned concerns with Wikidata in earlier exchanges re IATA/ICAO codes. Below is a copy of recent exchanges I have had re Wikidata (sorry about the bulk, but wasn't sure how to link you to it): — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ardfern (talk • contribs) 2020-02-01 01:57:20‎ (UTC) (…)

Sorry about the lack of knowledge re adding link, but I try at all costs not to get involved in discussions if avoidable, hence lack of experience. Too much other work to do Ardfern (talk) 02:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
  • «knowledge re adding link»s is hardly needed only in discussions, it’s basic wikitext; besides you seem to view any discussion as a waste of time at best. I must disagree on both accounts. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:52, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Sobre A Coruña

Moi boas Tuvalkin. Sobre o tema que me comentas a miña acción só de debe para corrixir un nome que claramente estaba mal e para unificar os criterios de categorización. Certo é que cada un terá as súas preferencias e cada un na súa vida pode usar o nome que prefira, pero neste caso en concreto o topónimo oficial é A Coruña, e todas as categorías relacionadas coa cidade ou a provincia en Commons levan esa forma, polo que entendo que non tería sentido ningún categorizar co nome que a cada un lle apeteza. Non sería nin correcto nin útil. E por último creo que non creei ningunha polémica ao facer ese cambio, nin tiña intención de facela, e coido que o non deberías dicir tan á lixeira que estou aquí para crear polémica e non para traballar no proxecto porque é algo falso e de feito é a primeira vez que mo din nos máis de 10 anos que levo por aquí. Un saúdo. --Beninho (talk) 14:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Revert

Reg. [1]: Why would you call that vandalism?Jonteemil (talk) 18:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Here are all my edits to the page. I undid you tagging of {{Badjpg}} since the file already was tagged with {{SVG}} which includes {{Badjpg}} in it. So that was neither misguided, erratic nor deterimental to anything. Regarding adding 1=simple to {{PD-textlogo}} is done so to automate the adding of Category:Simple text logos. This too is neither misguided, erratic nor deterimental to anything. Can you please explain to me why you think the three adjectives are appropriate to my edits, because I don't get it. Thanks.Jonteemil (talk) 09:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
  • My apologies: I was mislead by the one mistake you made in this edit (as you know, any {{template|1=argument|another}} is necessarily misformed) and presumed it was at another case of elephant-in-a-china-shop editing I get so much of in my watchlist. It would have helped, though, if this edit had a summary explaining that {{Badjpg}} was already transcluded. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough, I've done the same mistakes myself so can't blame you.Jonteemil (talk) 07:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Olivença

Hey, why did you take Olivença out of the Portuguese pandemic map?

Olivença

Can you add it again? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodrigospascoal (talk • contribs) 03:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC) --Rodrigospascoal (talk) 03:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Olivença

Hey, why did you take Olivença out of the Portuguese pandemic map?

Olivença

Can you add it again? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodrigospascoal (talk • contribs) 03:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC) --Rodrigospascoal (talk) 03:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:OnRoute update request

Hi. Since it was over five years old and had a clear consensus, I've closed Commons:Categories for discussion/2014/03/Category:Tram routes by number. Can you please depreciate Category:Trams by route number in Template:OnRoute? Thanks, The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:12, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Category:Mosmans_Bay

Category discussion warning

Mosmans Bay 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 ∙ +/−

Calistemon (talk) 13:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this. I've been adding lots of photos to Mosmans Bay knowing it was incorrect and meaning to see if it coudl be changed. But at least I was consistent. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 06:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Actually, I don't know that it was an error, rather Mosmans Bay was the most common name at the time, but now it's undisputedly Mosman Bay. Still stunningly beautiful...more so in real life. :) --Merbabu (talk) 10:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

File:Patrick Cauderlier.jpg

Hi Tuvalkin, taking into consideration the contributions of this user, I was wondering if his photo should be deleted because of out of scope. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 11:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hello, Lotje! I’m sorry I didn’t notice your post before. While I’m likely the last person who’d favour any scope deletion, well — let’s say that I would not vote to keep if I come across a DR against this image based on COM:Scope. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Wow!

Just wow. en:Template:Helsinki commuter rail. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 17:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:HWicon

These could (should?) be merged into the BSicon-verse. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Multi-step process:
  1. Rename → RRk – ROAD RED black, → RYr – ROAD YELLOW red, &c.(and possible change the existing   (RY) and   (RR) icons to   (RYk)   (RR2) respectively).
  2. Convert the {{HW}} diagrams to {{Routemap}}.
  3. TfD the {{HW}} templates.
and done. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 04:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
See also User:AlgaeGraphix/sandbox. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 05:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Overcategorized or not?

Hello! I'd like to ask your help to decide a question. Category:Tram 2211 (Budapest) is a subcategory of Category:Urbos 3 in Budapest or not? User:Falk2 reverted my edits here based on not overcategorized if a file put in both category. Sincerely, - - Globetrotter19 (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Yes, you’re right, @Globetrotter19: User:Falk2 tried the same with Lisbon trams in 2018 and end up blocked for a few weeks — not so much for categorization vandalism but for being generally obnoxious and with a huge problem of COM:OWN.
There is merit however in his basic claim, that it is useful to have a central location to browse all files about the same model — in this case all of Budapest’s Urbos 3. This should not infringe COM:Overcat, of course, and doesn’t excuse anyone’s uncategorization vandalism, but I implemented for Lisbon a solution that addresses that concern (although not to User:Falk2’s satisfaction because he’s not one for compromise), by recategorizing/dissiminating the basic cats for Lisbon trams by perspective (facing right, facing left, head on, sideways, and from above) down to the level of each of the 20-something series.
This was easy to do (was done in about 24h) and allows, for each series, to have all its files — not in one location, but in five (of which two, left and right, are the most populated), which is manageable, productive, and fits within the established categorization scheme, without touching the categorization by vehicle that is in place and which you are right about being worth of keeping undisturbed. I suggest you implement this solution in Budapest, too, regardless of the need to, once more, sadly drag User:Falk2 back to COM:AN/U for an apparently much needed reevaluation of his block.
-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! - - Globetrotter19 (talk) 10:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I have to ask another question, because Globetrotter19 cleaned up the Urbos 3 in Budapest category and I don't understand it. If we look the COM:Overcat it is maybe necessary to do so, but now all the pictures of a tram model split up to 30 subcategories, meanwhile there are other subcategories under the main category with no problem. I am not sure it is a transparent system. So can we restore the category of Urbos 3 as a tram type, or is the current system absolutely fine? Kemenymate (talk) 21:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I will 'cleaning up' the other main categories Category:TW 6000 in Budapest and Category:Tatra T5C5 in Budapest‎ as well, if it is okay. - - Globetrotter19 (talk) 22:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

This is supererogation, I suggest you to clean the Category:Tram lines in Budapest as well. Now I'm really curious about Tuvalkin's opinion. Kemenymate (talk) 22:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, can we get some feedback? Thank you. Kemenymate (talk) 09:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

OK, after two weeks it seems you don't care this problem, but a simple answer would have been more polite. Have a nice day. Kemenymate (talk) 16:45, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

  • @Kemenymate: I didn’t notice the continued dialog in this thread. Anyway, I don’t have anything substantial to add. My opinion about categorization of tram photos is well known, not only through the countless discussions I have had about the subject, but especially through the way I have implemented my views, especially under Category:Lisbon trams. (In case you might be misinformed, I am not an admin.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter anymore. Globetrotter asked you, therefore I also had to ask you. (Anyway he said you are an admin, I've just didn't check it.) Lisbon tram isn't a good example in this case, because that has many more categories than Budapest tram. But we will solve it and we won't disturb you. Kemenymate (talk) 20:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Guy, there’s 20 times more trams in Budapest than in Lisbon, and the historical value is comparable. The main difference is that Lisbon trams in Commons has been categorized by people with a common goal and who aren’t afraid of hard work, while Budapest trams in Commons has been mainly subject to fruitless discussion, bad tempered users unable to collaborate, shortsighted admins, and overall laziness: Start creating (sensible) categories now and soonner rather than later it all will be properly categorized. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

File:World Tram Systems.png

Thank you for alerting me about this information for File:World Tram Systems.png. I will very soon add Colombia, Ecuador and Qatar, which are also missing in this map. However, the railways in the Isle of Man are proper railways operated by steam locomotives that cross the island, rather than a real tram network. Maphobbyist (talk) 14:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I am very sorry for the very late reply and late update (the latter due to internet problems). I have added Colombia, Ecuador and Qatar to the tram map. (The Isle of Man does not qualify, I am afraid.) Please check the map and alert me if anything else is missing. And also, please don't hesitate to make changes in the maps, when you see that they are not updated and/or have mistakes. I may have uploaded the maps, but everybody is free to update and correct them. I have not visited Wikimedia Commons for months until this month and I am not a very frequent visitor. The internet is extremely slow and it often gets cut off, which is another problem, which we face under virtual housearrest since March, since the Covid-19 pandemic started. Maphobbyist (talk) 20:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Query about DR

Hello @Tuvalkin: I got your message on my talk page and it's remove too. You asked me Why are deletion discussions being held in COM:IRC instead of in a normal DR?. So I wanted to ask / know from you, is it wrong to have a discussion on the IRC. Actually, I did a lot of mistakes, so I really don't know at which I'm right or wrong. Please show me some path. I know that this is not your task. But at least share your views with me. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 10:10, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Latin_script_ligatures

Category discussion warning

Latin script ligatures 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 ∙ +/−

1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Tmp 4367-160101 112117 chat bg1517722611.jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:Tmp 4367-160101 112117 chat bg1517722611.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

IagoQnsi (talk) 04:00, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Tmp 4367-160101 112117 chat bg1517722611.jpg

File:Tmp 4367-160101 112117 chat bg1517722611.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 ∙ +/−

 — billinghurst sDrewth 11:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Thanks for fixing those. I have no idea why I remembered two for "in" and make two for "at" lol. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:34, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Your revert on Category:Pavilhão Tailandês (Jardim Vasco da Gama)

Hi, Tuvalkin. The reason I removed Category:Things named after royalty from this category was that the name of this place/structure, Pavilhão Tailandês, appears to mean "Thai pavilion". That doesn't refer to any royalty, so I didn't see how it could be named after royalty. Am I missing something? --Auntof6 (talk) 09:29, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • What two names? It looks like Pavilhão Tailandês is in Jardim Vasco da Gama (Vasco da Gama Garden?). Jardim Vasco da Gama doesn't appear to be a different name for the same thing. And in any case, I don't think Vasco da Gama was royalty. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Why two names? I can imagine a few reasons (maybe the official name is the long one and someone felt that shorten it to Pavilhão Tailandês would be sweet and Portuguese-Thai bilateral relations it purports to memorialize be damned?), but that would be beside de point. Also beside the point is to consider that this particular structure is in Vasco da Gama Garden (or Park?), as it is also in Belém Commune, Lisbon Municipality, Lisbon District, Lisbon Region, Portugal, Europe, Earth, Solar System and so on — it only comes to royalty if we presume Orion was a king of some sort. However, as I wrote in the edit summary and in the category page itself, the alternative name is Pavilhão Princesa Real Maha Chakri Sirindhorn (Pavillion Princess Royal Maha Chakri Sirindhorn), and she is pretty much royalty. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:56, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Sorry, @Auntof6: I misread your question: What, not why. It’s answered above, anyway. I will try to find sources for both names, although I think that the informal name translated to English is the most useful for a Commons’ cat name. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

CCFL 721

indevidamente ramificado de User_talk:Xicodaponte#CCFL 721

Boa tarde Tuvalkin, gostaria de conhecer a tua fonte, porque que eu saiba não há nenhum tram no concelho de Vila Verde, mas sim na quinta do Lago em Amares. Mesmo assim, essas fotos foram feitas em Lisboa e não podem estar associadas a Vila Verde. Saúde Xicodaponte (talk) 11:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • As fotos constantes na categoria não estão associadas a Vila Verde justamente por não retratarem Vila Verde. A categoria que se refere ao carro elétrico n.º 721 da C.C.F.L. está associada a Vila Verde por que o dito veículo, antes de estar em Amares, esteve na Viganor, em Vila Verde. A fonte para tal é: Mário Vieira: Lisboa – Listagem de Eléctricos 2014 p.29, onde se cita com. pess. de OB/PMe. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Boa tarde @Tuvalkin: . Pois, então qual é a ligação a Vila Verde? Uma pessoa de fora, ao ver essas imagens pensa que há, ou que houve, uma linha de tramway em Vila Verde! Dou-te um exemplo, uma foto de Vila Verde está na página de Vieira do Minho dos turcos, bem tento explicar que é um erro, mas não querem entender! De facto, o erro não é deles, é nosso! Nesse caso, as categorias: Vila Verde e Transport in Braga (district) por mim, estão erradas, o mesmo seria em Amares, o mapa tudo bem, as fotos são de Lisboa e na minha modesta opinião, lá ficam. Bom fim de semana Tuvalkin. Xicodaponte (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Harvested_fields

Category discussion warning

Harvested fields 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 ∙ +/−

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Mobile layout

Hello. Could you explain to me the "mobile layout"? I don't understand the meaning. Thank you. Enciclopedia1993 (talk) 08:31, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(You’ll need to access these two urls from an actual computer, not from a “smart” phone.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:52, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

whiskey tango foxtrot

Lima Oscar Lima. ;-) - Erik Baas (talk) 11:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

🌀

Hi, I don't understand this edit. The display title directive you added was ignored, as it contained disallowed title changes, and therefore the category page was added to Category:Pages with ignored display titles. I fixed this, but you reverted it; why? --bdijkstra (overleg) 10:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

  • See edit summary. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 10:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
    • I saw it. It doesn't make sense. What you added had no effect. It is not acceptable and it makes no point. --bdijkstra (overleg) 11:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
      • What I added has no effect because variant selectors are excluded from the repertoire of accetable characters for the DISPLAYTITLE. I want to (join my voice to those who want to) change that status quo and this kind of usage already in place, albeit currently ignored, will bolster the argument in favour. It happens all the time in that kind of discussions: busybodies join the naysayers arguing that this or that is even a good idea but since nobody tried it before might as well forget it. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Yeah, because what matters is totally to «keep maintenance categories »« clean», instead of actually improving Commons. Thanks for providing an example of the busybody type I mentioned above — no need to caricature what reality provides aplenty indeed. Look, go ahead and remove that DISPLAYTITLE if it bugs you that much; I said my piece and this discussion alone illustrates the whole point well enough. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Indeed keeping maintenance categories clean is not a goal in itself, but it is a way to find potential improvements on the wiki. People, particularly those using the Visual Editor, sometimes think they can change a page title by using DISPLAYTITLE. By keeping the maintenance category clean, these cases can be easily spotted, evaluated and in many cases Commons can be improved by changing a file name or a category title. --bdijkstra (overleg) 17:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I ask myself if you would be interested in contribute to a new project

He visto tus trabajos en wikipedia (mapas svg) y me gustaría saber si estarías dispuesto a colaborar en un proyecto en el que estoy trabajando. Si lo estás contáctame en franwat arroba gmail punto com.

Gracias por tu atención — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.151.123.40 (talk) 23:30, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

File:V Parliament of Portugal (1991oct).svg

File:V Parliament of Portugal (1991oct).svg 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 ∙ +/−

Leonel Небојша Sohns 16:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Não tenho

... problema nenhum com isso. É que só me surpreendo que há mais pessoas além de mim a usar essas galerias. :D --Jcornelius (talk) 16:54, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Revert in Category:Pottery

Hola Tuvalkin-- I have been putting work into sorting the category:pottery, and noticed you reverted a change I had made.

This category tree has obviously not had attention paid to it for awhile; I was looking for something specific and it was not possible to find it. I have been reaching out for advice, in the absence of positive suggestions I have been trying to move forward. This said, I would be very appreciative if you could take a holistic work I have done and make suggestions. Anywhere I have made errors, I am glad to be corrected. This said, reference to similar category trees has been less helpful than I would have hoped (I've checked out both the ceramics tree and the baskets tree, and my impression, which may be wrong, is that people uploading files don't have a good idea where to put their items).

In this specific case, why is there a pottery category Pottery for sale‎ (1 F) and a category Pottery markets‎ (2 C, 90 F)? Why have a category so high up on the tree with a single file? Does this category even need to exist, unless as a redirect?

Thank you. I'm sure this is a repetitive question, but I would very much appreciate some direction. Sicklemoon (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Unusual font

Au Marché du Livre

Hello Tuvalkin, what is the name of the font used by this store? I think that I have never seen it anywhere else - am I ignorant or is it really unusual? Greetings, --Edelseider (talk) 12:27, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I can’t ID it precisely offhand, but I can narrow it down a bit, to an Art Nouveau style (or descendant thereof, Viennese Secession perhaps). Metropolitaines has a similar feel, but isn’t quite as quirky.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Emerging from the rabbit-hole, still no exact match. With the aid of WhatTheFont I did find a few in the genre with a similar H letterform, though: Tip Top by URW, Lugano by Greater Albion, and Eckmann by Linotype (AKA Freeform 710 from Bitstream). Arnold Böcklin has a similar E.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 23:41, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Odysseus1479: , amazing! And thanks Tuvalkin for calling my attention! By the way, bookstores in France are in the most dire situation right now and I am afraid that this precious place will not survive the plague, either. :( --Edelseider (talk) 10:24, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Corrections

all corrected by me according to this:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Urnaija (talk • contribs) 2020-11-10 12:02:22 (UTC)

  • It looks wrong, as (at least) those are now uncategorized about which letter is represented. But do not misuse my talk page to discuss files, rather use the each file’s talk page, or the category’s. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Rudeness

Thanks for your comment on Village Pump. I have thought for sometime Commons and Wikipedia need a rudeness patrol. --Jim Evans (talk) 02:57, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Category:Highway_Gothic_(Oriya)

Category discussion warning

Highway Gothic (Oriya) 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 ∙ +/−

𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:30, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Latin small and capital letter dotless i.jpg

File:Latin small and capital letter dotless i.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Latin small and capital letter dotless i.jpg E4024 (talk) 21:59, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Multiple_diacritics_on_the_same_base_letter

Category discussion warning

Multiple diacritics on the same base letter 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 ∙ +/−

𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 23:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, Uzhhorod

Affected:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

laziness

What is This???

remove only from ONE letter and disregarding the rest: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ASigma_uc_lc.svg&type=revision&diff=530551833&oldid=530378193

just finished as you wanted Special:Contributions/83.26.158.156.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.158.156 (talk • contribs) 2021-02-07 09:53:16 (UTC)

You was Reverted

removal of categories is NOT permitted!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antin-Blankin (talk • contribs) 10:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Antin-Blankin: The files were already in the categories for the corresponding two-letter combinations. I reverted your edits per COM:OVERCAT. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Someone other too is guilty of notorious COM:OVERCAT breaching, make him cease and desist as well, he mislead me utterly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antin-Blankin (talk • contribs) 11:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Daqui donde olho, pareces-me bastante fácil de mislead: Deve ser impressão minha. Mas a próxima brincadeira destas leva-te ao AN/U sem direito a passar na casa de partida nem nada. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

In this edit, ImprovedWikiImprovment states that the troll above is en:Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Wikinger, a «WMF Globally Banned» user. Thanks for the heads-up. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:42, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Fake numbers

minus FAKE — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A00:F41:2896:EA95:0:4E:8066:901 (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I am Ljupco Steriev

DA TRUTH BE TOLD http://ｗｉｋｉｐｅｄｏｉａ．ｂｌｏｇｓｐｏｔ．ｃｏｍ/2020/11/wikinger-joins-forces-with-supreme.html WIKINGER destroyed MY privacy!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blankin-Antin (talk • contribs) 2021-02-07 19:11:01 (UTC)

Both trolls gone, locked and blocked. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata

Why don't you connect categories with Wikidata (Category:Iotified big yus &c.)? Is that because of the userbox? I thought that was about SDC; sitelinks are used on virtually all WMF wikis. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Commons

Hi,

Hope you are well. I have seen that you have recently active in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. This page is currently the only page where user problems (conduct issues, and other unacceptable behavior, etc.) get reported.

I am working on facilitating the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement discussion on Commons which focuses users’ conduct. That is why I am inviting to participate in the discussion to give your valuable opinion.

You can do so by participating in the public on-wiki discussion on Commons: Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation. There are a few questions regarding enforcement you can answer. Please feel free to include anything you find relevant.

I also encourage you to participate in the survey: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeK7gTSZ2PSNiekEKPcC2UvnkJaQt8iVPWRXZbk27U9E8fOIQ/viewform

The survey has a different set of questions, and you can response to them anonymously. It is not a long survey and should take around 10 minutes to complete.

I want you to know that your input is very valuable and it will help to us better shape the UCoC enforcement pathways for our beloved Commons community. I hope you participate. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! Wikitanvir (WMF) (talk) 08:34, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

c:file:Лето Банк в торговом центре «Ключевой» (2014).jpg

Hello! This photo depicts former bank (Leto Bank, lit. "Summer bank", Лето Банк) which was one bank of entire VTB Group, see atricle in Russian: ru:ВТБ (группа компаний). It's not the same as Category:VTB Bank. VTB Bank is only a part of VTB Group. So it will be in category Category:VTB or more precise, Category:VTB Group. So this is not 100% correct, too. VTB Bank is a bank, VTB Group is a group, is a company, which contain VTB Bank. --Brateevsky {talk} 10:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello. I would like to thank you for the support. Such things bring back faith in people. I'm not sure if I have a chance to succeed, but at least I still have a hope. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 10:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

  • @Kazimier Lachnovič: Good luck. However, don’t forget that filenames by themselves do not matter too much: It would be way more serious if this interference was being directed to text contents of a filepage, not merely to a filename. (Although, if that were the matter, I’m afraid that the combined weight of 2-3 very assertive Russian admins in Commons would help it pervail nonetheless…) That said, I can only offer you a counter-example you might want to argue with: If the Belorussian word "маскал" is unsuitable for use in Commons because its Russian cognate is percieved as an insult, then it’s unavoidable to argue the same about the English word "Moscow", for it shares the very same etymology and should, if intentions were pure, ellict the same disparagement. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
    Thank you again for the advise based on your experience. Unfortunately I haven't participated too much in the Wikimedia Commons community discussions, I just thought that everything is more or less normal here. Now I see that the focus on file uploads has been too careless and selfish. So if some participation is needed I would like to help the healthy part of the community. Just let me know please about such discussions. The very important part is that the text contents of a filepage has also been censored. So I'll try to focus on this part in my future argumentation. Hope, your etymological analogy with Moscow will be better for non-Belarusian speakers that my too complicated explanations of Belarusian language. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 17:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Soviet military plate (GSVG)

This is "CA". Regards. Magnum045 (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Tuvalkin/Archive 9, I hope you don't mind me butting into something I do not understand.

I noticed you tried (twice) to help another user at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Help_on_adding_template_via_CustomReplace_of_VisualFileChange but that the user you were trying to help reacted in what seemed like frustration (to me at least). Since I think I know where that user is coming from, I thought I would try to bring it to your attention. If you go to their usertalkpge you will see that they are dealing with several proposed deletion notices, which are probably keeping them quite busy, I know because this has happened to me many times. When you are bombarded with too many requests, as a volunteer with limited time, you tend to become frustrated.

I hope I did not add to your own frustration level by posting this to your usertalkpage. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

  • Ottawahitech, I tried to help this user by pointing in the right direction, but I could not help him any further due to my own lack of profficiency in the use of the mentioned tool: I just know it exists and that when used by someone with deeper knowledge than mine, it works as intended. Just that, no hassles. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:45, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Transnordestina136435.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:Transnordestina136435.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:Transnordestina136435.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!

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 06:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

How to - One DR

There are 77 invalid .svg files in [ Category:Locator_maps_of_municipalities_of_Puerto_Rico_highlighted ] that I would like to nominate for deletion.
The files are maps kick out as invalid .svg and also don't display correctly (on Chrome they only display a red splotch and no map borders.
How do I create a single DR for them?
I already marked two files for deletion 'cause I wasn't thinking ahead.

Thanks. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Naveed Aamir Jeeva affiliated with Pakistan Peoples Party- PPP.png

Sir! Can you please rename this file as clear reason is given now on file sescription page. Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 11:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

@AlgaeGraphix: Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:Danse de la fontaine émergente

Category discussion warning

Danse de la fontaine émergente 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 ∙ +/−

Bidgee (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Cantabric Sea

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_Sea

Hello, Tuvalkin. The point is that Lisbon is a city in Portugal, and not by the Cantabrian Sea.

Anyway, it's possible to see a street as an artistic work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikielwikingo (talk • contribs) 2021-05-10 14:55:09 (UTC)

  • @Wikielwikingo: It’s okay to be wrong and it’s even okay, some might say, to be rude when you’re right. But if you’re wrong, you better not be rude. That’s a reason why one should never be rude, if one can’t think of a better reason. That said, looks like you arrived at the right conclusion: A category about street named after the Cantabrian Sea needs to be itself categorized with some kind of nexus to Category:Cantabrian Sea and indeed Category:Cantabrian Sea in art e the best we have for now. Maybe Category:Things named after the Cantabrian Sea should be created? Why don’t you do it yourself, instead removing said nexus, leaving the original category without a link to its namesake? Indeed, when you removed that nexus, you worsened the quality of Wikimedia Commons (it’s not considered vandalism because your good intentions are assumed, but I see it as even worse, as it can go undetected). I hope you will chose to think twice before removing content others added and to create instead of destroying. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Revert

Please do not say that my editing is vandalism (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:2016-02-15_Briefkastenbatterie_Wohnheim_in_Essen.jpg&diff=562390546&oldid=562257436). You might not agree with removing this bunch of meaningless categories, and I won't revert, but I highly resent your comment. You could have left me a message to explain your reasoning instead of jumping to conclusion!

Pierre cb (talk) 03:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

"Vandalism" is not an insult, it is an assessment. I resent your uncategorization. Message sent. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 04:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
"Vandalism" is an insult as it imply that I my intent was destroying the file while I clearly commented that my editing was for simplification. In the future, take a breath before using such language. Pierre cb (talk) 04:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
  • While your use of "meaningless" to qualify categorization made by me is objectively insultuous (only categories themselves may be meaningless, which was not argued; otherwise, categorization can only be accurate or not), my use of "vandalism" depends on the adopted definition. If it suits you better, as some prefer, what you did was not vandalism because the goal was not a nihilistic stive for mayhem or worse, but you had good intentions — but if so your ideas about categorization and the goals of Commons are wrong, and that’s worse that simple vandalism that can be fixed by simply blocking the vandal. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Recategorization

Hi Tuvalkin. If you find content in a category that belongs to another category with a similar or interchangeable name, always move it to the correct category. Never remove the current miscategorization without pasting the file to the correct category (as this one). This applies, for example, to images of mobile phones in the Category:Mobil. Sweeping the problem under the rug so that it is not visible for a while is not a solution. (Btw., a category that repeatedly attracts large amounts of inappropriate content should probably be renamed to a clearer and less misleading name.) --ŠJů (talk) 20:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the reminding — that’s something I do often, only rarely I remove miscategorization without replacing it with something better, even so slightly. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

BSicon help

Hey, I'm a fellow file renamer who often tries to get the renaming backlogs down. Some BSicons have been sitting in Category:Media requiring renaming - rationale 4 for a while - and when checking the requester I noticed you left them a talkpage message about some of their previous rename requests. Would you mind taking a look at these? Thank you so much. Elli (talk) 00:43, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

  • @Elli: thanks for reaching out. All renamings of BSicon files should be discussed in Talk:BSicon/Renaming. BSicon filenames are the very embodiement of rationale 4. Among the frequent users of BSicon files there’s plenty of file renamers, so there’s no need to even ask for renaming from unrelated file movers, unless said request is filed by someone who doesn’t know the BSicon system or one who’s trying to subvert the discussion and consensus that form the very basis of rationale 4. In short, all BSicons in Category:Media requiring renaming - rationale 4 should have the pending requests denied, as if there is consensus for a new name one of us will do it. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 11:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Question about date categories

Dear Tuvalkin, I saw that you removed Category:Netherlands photographs taken on 1969-02-27 (category D) from Category:Overturned Mobil tank truck, Diemen 27-02-1969 (category A) and added this date category (D) to all the files of (A). Why? I think it is useful that if all photos in a category (A) were taken on the same date that the date category (D) is then a parent category of this category (A), not of all the individual files. This brings structure in a date category, especially when there are a lot of photos taken on that day. It is just the same as I do with all other parent categories involved. Or is this not allowed for date categories? JopkeB (talk) 14:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

File:PelouroCulturaCMLx(1989-1995).jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:PelouroCulturaCMLx(1989-1995).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

  • It was a crop from a bigger image, a scanned poster, one of those Welcome uploads, where they asserted a blanket copyright ownership claim and a concommitant blanket permission. Obviously wrong in such cases, but that’s how copyright law works in practice. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:52, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Änderungen

Bevor man ohne Grund meine Reverts an Kategorien meiner Zeichnungen zurücknimmt, sollte man zunächst auf meine Hinweise eingehen. Ein solches Verhalten Deinerseits ist weder seriös noch diskutabel. Wir reden hier von historischen Verkehrszeichen mit der Angabe „... Kilometer“. Das hat in einer Kategorie fehlerhafter Zeichen nichts verloren. Inwieweit bist Du mit den deutschen Verkehrszeichen und Verordnungen der 1920er Jahre vertraut? Mediatus (talk) 13:43, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

  • @Mediatus: Como se depreende da lista de línguas na minha página de discussão, não entendo alemão. Portanto a tua escolha de língua para encetar uma discussão comigo, havendo como há o recurso a tradução automática, vale o que vale. Quanto ao assunto em questão, que presumo se refere a estas duas edições, é realmente muito simples: A Conferências Internacional de Pesos e Medidas consagrou desde seu início, ainda bem no séc. XIX, que os nomes e símbolos (“abreviaturas”) das unidades, e de seus múltiplos e submúltiplos, são linguisticamente imutáveis e não se conjugam nem declinam, não tomando quaisquer plurais, acusativos, marcas de género gramatical, ou assimilações de ortografia. (Pessoalmente acho que esta determinção peca por excessiva no que toca aos nomes nas unidades, mas não sou eu quem manda — mas nem tu!). Assim, por mais oficiais que sejam ou que tenham sido, esses sinais de trânsito com "Km" em vez de "km" incluem um erro objetivo que deve ser categorizado como tal (não muito diferente deste ou deste — causados por mera ignorância individual em vez de teimosia institucional). Uma vez que este erro, aparentemente, afetou um grande número de sinais de trânsito alemães da série de 1925, e dada a justificação associada ("kilometer" é um substantivo e os substantivos em alemão levam sempre inicial maiúscula), então talvez necessitemos de uma nova Category:"km" as "Km" in German, mas esta teria de se manter como subcategoria de Category:Misspelled "Km" instead of "km". -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can my user page be Nominated for deletion? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan: yes it can. Just put the {{Db-author}} tag on it. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

TNT (television) logos move

This section has been moved to Category talk:TNT (television) logos#Overseas TNT (U.S.) television logos

BSicon über-categorization

Cmuelle8 and his IP socks have rampantly been creating a ridiculous number of new BSicon categories. Many of them are multiple layers down (often through empty categories), and don't seem to have more that a couple of files in each. (See Category:BSicon/road–rail/set f/RA/parallel lines/crossing, for example.) I assume that en:WP:OVERCAT applies to Commons as well?

Also of concern is his creation of an entirely new taxonomy of /set x/set y/ categories to supplant the /set mixed/ ones. Except for the blue+green canal icons, I suspect most of them will remain very small, as many of the bi-coloured icons tend to be for a single transit system's diagram.

Since categorization is something you have more experience with than me, would you attempt to do something about it? AlgaeGraphix (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what else to add. However, it does seem as though they mave have backed off (for now?). And thank you @AlgaeGraphix: I'm glad to see that someone is at least attempting to continue working on the RDT Manual of Style guidelines that I started. Useddenim (talk) 22:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tuvalkin/Archive_9&oldid=686168664"