User talk:Wieralee/2017

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

2013  •  2014
2015  •  2016
2017  •  2018
2019  •  2020
2021  •  2022
2023

Badge of Związek Byłych Ochotników Armii Polskiej

Cześć. Dziękuję bardzo za zmiany na lepsze w tej ilustracji. Czy mogłabyś analogicznie zedytować to zdjęcie? Jakość jest słaba, gdyż pochodzi z publikacji zasobów biblioteki cyfrowej, ale chciałbym choć, aby nie było na zdjęciu błękitnego tła, a jednocześnie pozostały kolory odznaki. Pozdrawiam. Lowdown (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:Solo Adisumarmo International Airport

Hi :-)
You have moved this category, but you have left files inside. It can't br done by bot, because their category depends on templates. Can you fix it, please? Wieralee (talk) 14:55, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I've started to do it :-) Humboldt (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Renaming guidelines

Hi Wieralee, may I ask why you declined this renaming request while accepting this one? I would be grateful, if you could review the first request again. If I made a mistake please help me to avoid it the next time. Kind regards --Zinnmann (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

No problem :-) Thanks for your help. Best wishes --Zinnmann (talk) 16:11, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Wrong date for the book

Hi, I believe you uploaded a number of files "Antiquities of Great Britain (1807)", mostly of the book and illustrations from it. This book was published in 1786, not 1807. Full details are: ANTIQUITIES OF GREAT-BRITAIN, VOL.I, ILLUSTRATED IN VIEWS OF MONASTERIES, CASTLES, AND CHURCHES, NOW EXISTING. Engraved from Drawings made by Thomas Hearne. Printed by James Phillips, in George Yard, Lombard Street, and Published by the Proprietors T. Hearne and W. Byrne. London: MDCCLXXXVI (1786). Figures engraved by J Heath. Published as the Act directs 2 Feb.1786. What can we do about it? Many files are dated 1807 in error. I'm a newbie so can only do so much... BeckenhamBear (talk) 18:48, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @BeckenhamBear: This category can be moved, of course... But I'm not sure, maybe it is a 1807 reprint?
And there is another problem: all files should be renamed... But it is better to rename them for real names, for example "Kingston Lacy, Wimborne Minster in 1786.jpg" or "Kingston Lacy (Wimborne Minster) by Thomas Hearne, 1786.jpg". Renaming for the name of the book if rather poor idea... Do you know this castles? Can you prepare the new names? Wieralee (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
for example {{rename|Greystoke Castle, Cumberland by Thomas Hearne, 1786.jpg|2|According to the description of illustrations list at https://archive.org/stream/antiquitiesofgre01hear/antiquitiesofgre01hear#page/n10/mode/1up|user=BeckenhamBear}} or something like that... Wieralee (talk) 19:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
    • This has been a lot of work (more complicated than expected); but I'm nearly there. The web is riddled with errors on this subject, at every level. Volume 2, 1806 or 1807? The story is; In 1786 the first 52 plates were bound as a book; a second volume of 32 plates was published in 1807 (say some sources). Thomas Hearne produced a total of 84 drawings for engraving in his publishing project, Antiquities of Great Britain, issued, in parts and by subscription, from 1778 to 1786 and again from 1796 to 1806? (bound volumes were issued in 1786 and 1806 or 1807?), say some other sources. Volume 2 may have been reprinted in 1807? However I have seen a frontispiece for it dated 1807. See http://quod.lib.umich.edu/s/scltinternic/x-sce00940.tif/SCE00940.TIF?lasttype=boolean;lastview=thumbnail;resnum=1;size=20;start=1;subview=detail;view=entry;rgn1=ic_all;select1=all;q1=hearne It doesn't say it's a reprint; and the authors were pretty anal about their attributions etc. All our pictures are from Vol. 1. Meanwhile I have some photos from Vol. 2. Which was issued in 1807. There's a lot of confusion on the net about the date, but evidence is pointing at 1807; I'll have it clarified in a few days. Then I can use a page called "Antiquities of Great Britain (1807)" for the other stuff. The two volumes were combined (by the authors and or by some buyers?) at some stage/s but I've not got dates for that yet. And it may be impossible? Two questions for you. In your template example: what does |2| mean? What significance has it got? Then another! Shall I file the new pictures in "Antiquities of Great Britain Vol.2 (1807)"? Or leave out the Vol number. Do you want to rename Antiquities of Great Britain (1786) to Antiquities of Great Britain Vol.1 (1786)? Or leave as is? Grateful for your thoughts? Thanks.BeckenhamBear (talk) 15:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @BeckenhamBear: maybe the best solution is to not mention the year in the Category name. It can be one Category:Antiquities of Great Britain by Thomas Hearne or something like that, isn't it? Wieralee (talk) 16:15, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Renaming declined of File:16th Century House in Antwerp - panoramio.jpg

Wieralee, can I ask you why exactly you declined the renaming of this file? The name I proposed was more accurate (there are lots of 16th-century houses in Antwerp) so complies to reason #2. Regards, Henxter (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @Henxter: I had accepted it. When I'am declining, I always write a few words of an explanation. This is the second time with such a situation in last two days :( The first time I thought that maybe I had clicked wrong button, but today it happened again :( I'm really sorry. Wieralee (talk) 18:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Henxter (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Gedenksteine Liberec

sorry, this is wrong! the stones in liberes are not stolpersteine, this word ist safed by demnig for his stolpersteine. liberec has no stolpersteine. can you do the changes back please? thanks!--Gedenksteine (talk) 16:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

all stones i renamed and moved to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Gedenksteine_in_Liberec are now in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Stolpersteine_in_Liberec again. this back please and deleation of stolpersteine in liberec. thank You!!--Gedenksteine (talk) 19:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
P.S. And the category names should be in English, not in German. Wieralee (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:SVG political maps of the provinces of Colombia

Hi

You moved the files from Category:SVG political maps of departments of Colombia to Category:SVG political maps of the provinces of Colombia, but that was a mistake. In Colombia there are no provinces, but departments. That category was moved by the wrong name. Can you reverse these changes?

Thank you. --Shadowxfox (talk) 01:52, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi :-) @Shadowxfox: it is better to move them in proper place... What the valid category is? Category:SVG political maps of the departaments of Colombia? Wieralee (talk) 08:41, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, yes, the correct category is Category:SVG political maps of departments of Colombia.--Shadowxfox (talk) 23:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Clapham Junction railway station MMB 14 Class 377.jpg File:Clapham Junction railway station MMB 13 Class 377.jpg

Please revert your rename of this image. It was done on "vagueness" grounds, but "Class 377" is no less vague than "377XXX" (the six digits being the standard UK train numbering system, the first three of which are the class number), and furthermore the new name omits that there are two class 377s. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @Mattbuck: thanks for the explanation. I've renamed "File:Clapham Junction railway station MMB 13 377XXX 377XXX 377XXX 377XXX.jpg" not to change "377XXX" into "Class 377", but to reduce repeating section "377XXX". Our browser will not find this file better if the same words will be repeated four times. We have a description field to write there more descriptive user formats...
Instead of that: the rename can't be reverted by a filemover. You are an admin here, so you can revert it, but I can't, I'm sorry. I hope you'll do it for me. Thanks in advance. Wieralee (talk) 15:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I think its solved now, Panasonic category. Problem is Pana naming, with flash. G80 and G85 are same model for different market, and there is one more which isnt inside - G81 is for German market, but Pana naming is officialy Panasonic G85/G80. --Mile (talk) 08:21, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Czechia

Are we sure that that was the best thing to do instead of uniforming the whole tree to the Czech Republic, which is actually the current country? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 15:54, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @Blackcat: I agree that the mass rename is a bit controversial (as well as the previous "republican" name was controversial and deviating from other countries). However, Czechia is the official geographical name of the country (and the official short name of the state subject) and Czech Republic is the full oficial name of the state as the political subject. Especially for historical categories (before 1969), the current full political name of the Czech Republic is quite unusable and the rename was urgent. While categories used mainly for new photos can use the "Czechrepublican" name still, in case of historical items (1842 in the Czech Republic, Comenius or Jan Hus or Gregor Mendel "from the Czech Republic" etc.), the recent political name of an subject created first in 1969 (and highlighted since 1993) is quite absurd and anachronic. I think, the set of categories of people by occupation/activity contains also a big share of pre-1969 persons. While Czechia existed for centuries, Czech Republic is a very young subject (created and located in Czechia which existed continuously through various regimes and unions). If you want an analogue, the geographical term Italy can apply for the area also retrospectively (even for the times before Italian unification), while "Italian Republic" is unusable for any pre-1946 context. --ŠJů (talk) 14:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • ŠJů, with an implication: from 1861 onward we refer to the country as "Italy" no matter it were the Kingdom of Italy or the Italian Republic; before 1861 we refer to Italy only as geographical place since there was not a country formally known as "Italy" before 1861. In the case of the Czech Republic, "Czechia" might be a upper, ethnics or "cultural" category where to locate, amongst the others, also the post-1992 Czech Republic.-- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:57, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
    PS To put it short: is correct to say that Antonín Dvořák was a composer from Czechia but Pavel Nedvěd is a footballer from the Czech Republic.
    • @Blackcat: The essential distinction is that the geographical names can be used retrospectively because the country (as the area) existed even before the current inhabitants came there and created their states, while the state organizations have their definite beginning on the timeline. We should categorize by country, not by the state regime. Czechia is a country and existed continuously before dissolution of the federative Czechoslovakia as well as before its federalization. Btw. Antonín Dvořák and Pavel Nedvěd were not officials of any republic or kingdom or monarchy, they represents rather the country than the republic or the kingdom. They both are from Czechia, independently on the fact whether Czechia had its own separate republic or kingdom in some part of their lifetime. Czechia is a permanent name of the country while Czech Republic is a temporary (and very young) political organization at the area of the country. --ŠJů (talk) 02:17, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
      • ŠJů, you'd better say a nation, not a country (intended as "sovereign country"). Giacomo Leopardi was Italian by nation but his country was not Italy because Italy esisted as nation, not yet as country, as well as most probably Dvořák was an Austro-Hungarian national (I have not checked but it's likely to be so) but culturally was Czech (I suppose Dvořák's native language was Czech?). Niccolò Tommaseo is one of the most prominent Italian linguists but he was born in Sibenik, Croatia, then Austro-Hungarian Empire, and studied in Padua which was part of the Empire. But nobody doubts he's Italian in spite of having been an Austro-Hungarian national for great part of his life. Even Mucha worked for the Austro-Hungarians but was ethnically Czech and advocate of Czechoslovakia for which designed the first banknotes.... So it's perfectly admissible to say that Dvořák is culturally Czech. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
        • @Blackcat: Italy is not a nation, Italy is a country (and the country has its own republic nowadays). Italians is the nation, living in Italy, as well as Czechs is the nation, living in Czechia. An Italian living in France or in USA or in Czechia is just an Italian, a member of the Italian nation, even when he has not a citizenship of the Italian Republic. Yes, we can categorize people by both, citizenship and nationality, because the two attributes mostly blend together or have a close relation. However, places should be categorized primarily by country, rather than by changeable state organizations as republics etc. Rome was not moved from Italian Kingdom to Italian Republic, it is simply in Italy, as well as Prague was not moved from the Bohemian Kindgom to the Czechoslovak Republic, to the Protectorate of B&M, back to the Czechoslovak Republic and from the Czechoslovak Republic to the Czech Republic. Kingdoms and republics change but Prague was ever in Bohemia, and Bohemia was ever in Czechia. Austria-Hungary was never a "nation", it was ever a multinational empire containing many countries (as well as EU factually is such a quasi-state union). Czechoslovakia (even before its federalization) was a multinational country with two dominant nations, and Belgium is a two-national country. A state is not a country and a country is not a nation. Some nations have not their state, some countries have also not their separate state, and some states contains more countries. even though nations and countries have also their evolution. Slovakia is ever Slovakia, Kosovo is ever Kosovo and Croatia is ever Croatia and Abkhazia is ever Abkhazia, no matter whether they are at the moment a part of any broader state or have their own separate state. And strictly said, Germany was one country divided to two states, not to two countries, as Korea is today. However categorization should reflect also such an administrative (political) divison. As countries are a bit informal subjects (and multi-levelly structured), it is often useful to define them by state borders, but they are not identic with states but a country belongs to its state, as well as it belonged to the previous state at its area. However, not every country and not at every time is definable by state borders. The name Czechia allows to name and define the area of the current Czech Republic also retrospectivelly, it can label Czechia now as well as during all previous regimes and states, as well as geographical names of other countries (Italy, Poland, France, Austria etc.) are their permanent names, independent on current political and constitutional form. --ŠJů (talk) 23:08, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
      • That's why I said that Italy until 1861 was a nation but not a country yet. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 23:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

small problem

Alluring Albany - there 4 editions - and they are all different - I checked in the library today So edition 1912 has certain images, the 1910 (the one that is online), 1911, 1913 all have variations - JarrahTree (talk) 15:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

  • @JarrahTree: oh, I see. Maybe it will be better to stay with the Category:Alluring Albany without the year mark...? Wieralee (talk) 15:30, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • My apologies - I intend to expand the wp en article at some stage, and separate out the centenary 1927 book into another article, depends on how I do it - if I were ever to find other publications fom the publisher of the albany advertiser I would complicate things further by making alluring albany a subcategory in the albany advertiser category - but I am uncertain as to how many images from each edition I will make. It isall delightfully confused in library catalogues by Albany New York in the states as well, so the Western Australian qualifier has to be close by. The images to date have been from my damaged copy of 1912 edition - I will be adding images from other later - in the end it does not really matter at all. sorry a bit chatty here - the answer is do not bother, things will be changing with further editing on wp en anyways JarrahTree (talk) 15:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Why???

I would like to understand why there should be a single category in the Spanish language since in Italy we have a lot 'of artistic works that represent the "Madonna della cintura" or "Madonna della cintola" (or "Santa Maria..."), which refers to en:Girdle of Thomas. You, who are a Polish user, should well know that if a term is present in different languages ​​with the same meaning is use to have an English-language category so that it can be understood by all. I had to be bold and make the journey without many explanations, perhaps you would not have even tried to do a rollback, I am wrong?--Threecharlie (talk) 09:16, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

See also Category:Our Lady of the Girdle churches.--Threecharlie (talk) 09:24, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Is only this the reason? Ok, now I create all related categories and once I finished act accordingly.--Threecharlie (talk) 11:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

System

So what is the system. You push pictures back to category:Łubowice, so where we place pictures for w:pl:Łubowice (województwo wielkopolskie) than? Could we respect some naming system here?--Juandev (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

  • @Juandev: the category was moved by another user [1]. I'm only cleaning redirecteg categories, because they should be empty.
@Jonny84: , can you tell us more about this movement?
Instead of that, the rule is: we make a disambiguination (in brackets, or after comma) when there are two different categories on Commons with the same name. Untill we do not have files from another "Łubniki", we should have one category without any disambiguination. Wieralee (talk) 09:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
He duplicated the category Łubowice (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3A%C5%81ubowice%2C_pam%C3%A1tn%C3%ADk.jpg&type=revision&diff=232529361&oldid=228855770), so I've made a redirection to the older one... If he want change the name, so he can move a category.. But he still ignores that. Right now there are no pictures for Łubowice (województwo wielkopolskie), so a category is not realy needed.. We only make categories for existing files and not for future files.. --Jonny84 (talk) 11:16, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
By the way, he put many files twice into a category. These files were all categorized in subcategories of Strzelce Opolskie (I had a lot of work to sort it) and he put it another time into the Category Strzelce Opolskie ([2]).. What can i say more about that mess? --Jonny84 (talk) 11:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Exactly here, when I uploaded files, I placed them into the category (but not created it), than the annonymous IP created another category and add these files there. I havent noticed that, but these files where in two categories for same wp article. So I propose to delete one of those categories.--Juandev (talk) 12:08, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Editional edit: the fact that distiguishers are created on Commons differently is a mess. If there were unique system, the problem may not occure. What I propose is to talk about it. I left a message on the polish village pump. Now I know, how to create a distinguiser on Polish Wikipedia, but I am not so sure we should have the same way here, because it differs from other systems of the same project and because I dont know, how to do such distinguishers - i.e. how to figure out weather there are villages of the same name on the national or Voivodship level.--Juandev (talk) 12:08, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Sometimes it would be easier, to take a look into Commons before creating categories.. And look if there isn't already a category for place. Commons has a Hierarchic principle. And Łubowice was already a subcategory of Gmina Rudnik. --Jonny84 (talk) 12:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Where is the sense in this? So chaotic.. First he erases Category:Villages in Opole Voivodeship ([3]), than he put it back ([4]).. And he erases subcategories from the correct Gmina categories ([5]) and bringing chaos into a good systematic. --Jonny84 (talk) 13:09, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Could you stop make here a drama? Its starts to bother me. Try to assume a good faight, please. The problem of this statment is, that your links are not right time order. If you will put them to the timeline, you wont see so chaos.--Juandev (talk) 15:17, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Warning

Hi, Please do not do edit warring over Category:Atlantic Forest, but rather discuss on the talk or the village pump. I blocked the category for a week. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:38, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Zbigniew Uniłowski - Żyto w dżungli.djvu

Hi there. Did Zbigniew Uniłowski also paint the cover image? I don't think so. Cover artwork of book is usually copyrighted independently of the writer's text. So we need to know the name and lifetime of the painter to be sure that the cover is out of copyright. Can you please have a look inside the book if the cover artist is credited? De728631 (talk) 17:18, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Otley, West Yorkshire and Category:Otley

Not sure why you're doing this. The "West Yorkshire" is there to distinguish it from Category:Otley, Suffolk. Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:54, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Agree, there's usually a good reason for disambiguating place names, i.e. there's more than one! As regards Category:Bury and Category:Bury, Greater Manchester, there are places called Bury in Sussex, Cambridgeshire and Somerset. we may not have images of them yet, but I don't think we want to mislead our users (assuming we have any). Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
My moves of these were reverts of undiscussed moves by Crouch, Swale. I agree that these are all ambiguous, but in each case the existing subject is demonstrably the "primary topic". To focus on Otley as an example, it is much more likely that media uploaded of an Otley is the one in West Yorkshire, it is much more likely the people after content of an Otley are after the Yorkshire one etc. Otley, West Yorks vs Otley, Suffolk is comparable to London, England vs London, Ontario.
There are a couple open CFDs that touch on these issues, and I have no objection to any (or all) of these being discussed at CFD or any other venue.
In none of these cases was the article stably at the disambiguated title.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I will also add (with regards to Bury and Bolton in particular), the target of the move does not adequately distinguish the town from the district, and I'm not immediately sure on ideal solution. "Bury, Greater Manchester" could equally be about the town or the district, its an unfortunate construct that WP has somehow decided to use for town-districts. How is an average person meant to know that "Salford, Greater Manchester" and "City of Salford" are different things, and what precisely we mean by both terms?--Nilfanion (talk) 16:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

category:Tramonti

Hello. We discussed about it at Italian Village pump. In Italian the word tramonti means sunsets. Moreover Tramonti is a small and generally unknown place. In summary there were in the category three pics of Tramonti and 50 pics of sunsets. A nonsense. Thanks for the advice anyway. Regards--Pierpao.lo (listening) 22:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:De-durchsetzt.oga, File:De-umfasst.oga

"File:De-durchsetzt-untrennbar.ogg" is not an obvious error in a file name, including misspelled. German verbs can be separable (trennbar) and inseparable (untrennbar) and they can have different pronunciations even if they are spelled the same way like durchsetzen (separable) and durchsetzen (inseparable). -80.133.124.158 09:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wieralee, according to "naming standards" (there is no written text!) the normal naming follows "De-" & content & ".ogg". So it's possible to link these pronunciation examples automatically via bots (e.g. derbethbot, there are more), so that every wiktionary can benefit from these examples. IMHO grammatical description (like "untrennbar") have no place in the naming of a file. See the mass of German pronunciation files in Category:German pronunciation. If there are two or more different pronunciations, I add a figure at the end of content: De-durchsetzt2.ogg (see also De-Band.oga, De-Band2.ogg), no naming standard as well, just often used practice. Regards --Jeuwre (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Bilder BF Oldenburg

Danke für gleich mitdenken und passend machen :) --Vielen Dank und Grüße Woelle ffm (talk) 20:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Delete redirections

Good morning. In this edit you reverted my deletion of a wrong redirect, stating "we do not delete redirections if they are not totally misleading".

Unfortunately, this one is totally misleading: If you categorize a file with "Boeing 737-800 (Gol Transportes Aéreos)" by HotCat, which is the style that has only very recently being changed (and is still current in thousands of files), you get "Category:Boeing 737-800 to Gol Transportes Aéreos" - this is definitely the wrong category.

There are more of this type of wrong redirects, having obviously resulted by a bot which had been programmed carelessly.

Please be so kind and re-instate the deletion. Thank you. Regards --Uli Elch (talk) 11:01, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Uli Elch: it is good to understand the mechanism of renaming files/categories. Each file/category can be linked not only from wiki projects, but from other internet sites, too. When you will delete redirection you break these links. And you make Commons unbelievable for not-wiki users. An user who was linking this category on his blog, for example -- will see a red link one day. After such action he will not link to Commons any more :( External links are very important: if other users do not link to our domain, it goes down at browsers (Google, etc.). Therefore it is good to leave maybe a bit confusing redirection than remove them at all. Deleting redirects is the long-term activity to the detriment of the project.
But if you still would like to break links: no problem, go on. It's nothing personal. You can always rollback my edition -- I'll not oppose :-)
Thanks for your message. Have a nice day :-) Wieralee (talk) 13:16, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikisource

Uff, no. It's kind of a pity the softeare is not ready for this kind of mass renaming, ideally we should be able to move the books and all the following pages... Please stand by and thanks for the heads up. Aubrey (talk) 18:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

File:20170217 (IMG 0629) New compound of AIT Taipei Office with construction sign of Taipei City Government 美國在台協會台北辦事處新館及台北市政府施工告示牌.jpg

{{Autotranslate|1=File:20170217 (IMG 0629) New compound of AIT Taipei Office with construction sign of Taipei City Government 美國在台協會台北辦事處新館及台北市政府施工告示牌.jpg|2=|3=|base=Idw}} [[User:Howard61313|Howard61313]] ([[User talk:Howard61313|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:11, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Da ich das gerade sehe

Bitte sei vorsichtig bei der Anpassung an gerade gültige Rechtschreibungen. Die Verkehrszeichen sind von mir so benannt, wie sie in der jeweiligen StVO erscheinen. Das gerade von Dir verschobene Zeichen mag ein Grenzfall sein, da die StVO 1992 erschien und eine erste Rechtschreibreform 1996 in Kraft trat. Aber bitte belasse historischen Zeichen ihren damaligen Namen. Ich habe schon erlebt daß Leute noch weiter gingen und aus "Tafeln", Bildern und "Schildern" das heutige "Zeichen" machen wollten. Aber das steht den historischen Vorgaben entgegen. Mediatus (talk) 20:20, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

junior

Tutaj piszą, że junior był wnukiem Michała seniora. Ankry (talk) 01:13, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Please stop renaming my files fGWR to GWR

When I upload a file with "fGWR" in the title it is there for a reason - to identify trains in first Great Western Railway livery as opposed to the new Great Western Railway livery. Please stop renaming them. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:21, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Geof Sheppard: No problem. That is why "private shortcuts" are not welcome on Commons. Nobody knows what they mean. When you upload files on Commons -- you do it for all users, not for yourself. It is good to give them names for all users, not only for yourself... Consider it in the future, please.
Have a nice day :-) Wieralee (talk) 09:13, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Wieralee I think you're being a bit unfair here. fGWR is a fairly obvious acronym within the rail community. I accept that a non-rail person wouldn't know what it means, but by the same chalk I have no idea what all sorts of medical acronyms would mean, but that doesn't mean they're wrong to use in file names. And of course people will put (as an example) MRI in a file name rather than Magnetic Resonance Imaging - filenames are meant to be comparatively short, we have the description field to explain things. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Macaristan Prensliği bayrağı.png

Hi Wieralee,

the category is wrong, but I get blocked from removing it. Why are new users not enabled to revise this?--Patrioholic (talk) 10:47, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Category:Wallstadt

Hi Wieralee, you changed categories and moved pictures, e.g. Category:Mannheim-Wallstadt to Category:Wallstadt. I think, that's not useful. Almost any category related to districts of Mannheim was named in the pattern Mannheim-XXX. That's the way how districts in German towns are named officially. You can see that on the road signs at the entrances of the districts. If you change the district names in the categories, several of them do not work though without Mannheim- (Mannheim, dash) because other places have identical names and are already named in that way. So your concept will not work throughout. The categories were correct so far. There is no reason to make confusion. I recommend you not to continue such kind of changes. It makes also sense to undo the changes you made so far - I think it's Category:Wallstadt and Category:Vogelstang. If you think, you have important reasons to remove "Mannheim", then we may discuss that. However I think there were clear category names, understandable for anyone, including connection to Mannheim. Your changes to not seem to be improvements. Regards -HubiB (talk) 17:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

File move

Thanks! Also, since I forgot, will you please move File:Kona Lanes 1960s-2002.jpg to File:Kona Lanes 1960–2002.jpg? Corrects both the file name and the n-dash. TIA. —ATS 🖖 talk 22:47, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Question

Hi Wieralee, Thanks for moving the images to the correct place,
Just out of curiosity how did you know I moved the images to a redirect target instead of the actual category as I obviously had no idea myself,
Thanks :), –Davey2010Talk 14:43, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

San Marino

Thanks.Done. I had forgotten to modify the autotranslate base--Pierpao.lo (listening) 05:15, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for renaming the file Wieralee ! Sorry for the trouble, but here I'm not as easy as on Wikipedia. --Cangadoba (talk) 18:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

More thanks

Hi. Thank you very much for all your help with cats. Could you also help me to clean up the people who are in Category:Members of Parliament of the Ottoman Empire? Many of them are also present in the "former" mother cat. Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 13:22, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

@Wieralee: Thanks for the help in moving the images in the commons, it was very good! I am available. Thank you! Lucas.Belo (talk) 19:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Francisco de Goya y Lucientes 046.jpg

You shouldn't have renamed this file. We have about 10.000 files named like this for over 12 years. Criterion #2 at Commons:File renaming really don't apply to these files. Multichill (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@Multichill: on Commons:File_renaming page we have rules. I see, for example, that file named "File:Louvre 12.jpg" should be renamed for a new name: "File:Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci.jpg". I don't see a rule: "If the file had a bad name for 12 years it must have bad name to the end". Can you explain me the difference, please? Is it your private opinion or an official admin statement? Wieralee (talk) 17:01, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
You're improving file names. This is a painting by "Francisco de Goya y Lucientes", that's correct name. The rule "Files should NOT be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better." "File:Louvre 12.jpg" doesn't contain any reference to indicate the creator or the name, "File:Francisco de Goya y Lucientes 046.jpg" does. The file name isn't bad so shouldn't be changed. Multichill (talk) 17:10, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@Multichill: in examples for Criterion "Files should NOT be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better." we have punctuation changes only. I don't see any word about half-information names (it contain the author, but not the title). Can you change it on the Commons:File_renaming page to make it clear for all of 900+ renamers? We will have a ground for refusals. Wieralee (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@Multichill: look at this revisions: [8] [9] [10] [11]. Four other users, including two admins, have considered such name changes as legitimate... We need more clear rules. Wieralee (talk) 17:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

UNESCO World Heritage Site..Historic Center of Quito...thanks....Monasterio Augustinas de la Encarnacion San Juan, Quito...great job

David Adam Kess ....Wieralee has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,UNESCO World Heritage Site..Historic Center of Quito...thanks


thanks David Adam Kess (talk) 9. April 2017 (UTC)


Capitalization in German

Hi Wieralee: Please move Category:Der baum (1860) → Category:Der Baum (1860).--Cabanis et Heine (talk) 15:46, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Holy Masses by country

Hi Wieralee, could you explain why you have moved categories from a neutral term to a non-neutral term? Possibly massess are holy for Catholics, but this is not the Catholicpedia. Thanks --Discasto talk 16:07, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

You haven't answered my question. The procedure to move a category when it can be controversial is to have it explicitly listed for discussion: see Commons:Rename a category. It wasn't done and therefore it should be reverted. Feel free to nominate it for discussion. Thanks --Discasto talk 17:14, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Mass_(liturgy)_by_country

{{autotranslate|1=Category:Mass_(liturgy)_by_country|2=Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/04/Category:Mass_(liturgy)_by_country|base=Cdw}} Discasto talk 21:17, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Orchid moves - thank you

Hello Wieralee,

Thanks for moving the orchid files I had mislabelled and for doing it so quickly. Gderrin (talk) 23:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Renaming videos

When renaming videos, please purge the file page after doing so, and then reset all the transcodes (at the bottom of the file page). Unfortunately (and it's a bug that has been complained about) when you do so the transcodes are not automatically recreated. Thanks. - Reventtalk 00:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello Wieralee, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks

Hello, many thanks for helping me with the category renames of the pictures I uploaded. --Veinticuatro de Jahén (talk) 08:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Türkvizyon 2017 map.svg

Hi Wieralee, I'm afraid, but I don't get it. Can this request be treated as done in the meantime? Both of the maps seem to be assigned correctly to en:Turkvision Song Contest 2016 and en:Turkvision Song Contest 2017 or am I wrong? Or have the maps to be swapped? Dziękuję, best, --Achim (talk) 08:24, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wieralee: Both maps are required, unfortunately. The 2016 contest was cancelled, and not all of the countries/regions who had planned to participate in the 2016 edition are doing so in the 2017 edition. Therefore the 2016 map needs to retain data so that it can be used on an article for the 2016 contest which details the historical information. Whilst a 2017 map is also required to show new details for the new contest. File talk:Türkvizyon 2016 map.svg#File move error, does explain all of this. Wes Wolf Talk 08:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Wieralee, Wesley: Fine, so the pending renaming request can be cancelled as far as I can see, because both of the map files exist and are assigned correctly. Thus new versions of the map can be uploaded if needed for to replace the existing ones. Cheers, --Achim (talk) 09:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Headquarters in English language

Please note, that "headquarters" in English language is only in plural form. "Headquarter" is not proper English. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

US PD licensing

I notice that your edits to the Frederick Douglass files (e.g. [12]) added a warning icon to all of the images. These are all originally from the United States, and so should not have a warning icon. You also removed the information that it is not under copyright in its country of origin. Please restore that information to all of the files you altered. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:49, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

  • @EncycloPetey: : template {{PD-old-1923}} does not exist: we have template {{PD-1923}} instead. But it is the same. If you don't like it, choose another one instead. Wieralee (talk) 16:58, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
    {{PD-old-1923}} does exist. It is a redirect. In this case it is preferable to its companion templates because a firm date of 70 / 85 / etc, cannot be used. Template {{PD-1923}} is not the same because it is insufficient to state that the wrok is in PD in its country of origin. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @EncycloPetey: look what you have done here: Category:PD-Art (PD-old-1923). Your editions are listed on page with errors. I have repaired it, but you have rolled back them again :( Wieralee (talk) 19:46, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
    Then the category redirect should be fixed. The target category and target of the redirect do not match. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
    Your "repairs" changed the licensing information on all the images. That should not happen. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @EncycloPetey: Template {{PD-old-70}} is not quite suitable for anonymous work. In such cases it is better to use templates {{Anonymous-EU}} and {{PD-1923}}. Wieralee (talk) 20:07, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
    How is {{Anonymous-EU}} relevant? That is an EU copyright This work was published in the United States, not the EU. And the problem with using {{PD-1923}} is that it does not identify the country of origin, which is the United States, but instead displays a warning requesting another template for US works. So that pair of templates is inappropriate for these images. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:11, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @EncycloPetey: yes, I'm living in Europe, so it is different. But it doesn't matter. If you don't know the author, you can't be sure he has died more than 70 years ago. This photo was published (?) in 1892. If the author was 20, he could have been alive till 1967, for example. If it was unpublished, the {{PD-US-unpublished}} template seems to be best. Wieralee (talk) 20:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
    All of the images were published, so {{PD-US-unpublished}} is unhelpful. All the images come from the same 1892 book, and many of the etchings were previously published in the 1881 edition. Only a few etchings and some of the photographs were new for the 1892 edition.
    It is true that I do not know the date of death for the photographers and artists, but the images are PD in the US because they were published before 1923, and the US is also the country of origin. The date the person died is irrelevant for US copyright law. Commons requires that the images be PD for the US and the country of origin, but in this case those are the same country.
    Some of the photographs have also been released through American government archives. I have tried to research the etchings artists through their signatures, but have found no information through any database. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:29, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Category

Hi Wieralee, Could you undo your cat move and move everything from Category:RATP Protest June 2, 2016 back to Category:RATP Protest 2016 - The image dates all range and this appeared to spread roughly over a month so at present the current category is incorrect, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

12 June, 14 June, 17 June..... –Davey2010Talk 21:11, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Moved cats

Good old Höşmerim (cheese dessert) for you.

Hi. When cats are moved, a bot takes care of re-categorizing whatever is in there. I see that I'm creating trouble to you. Sorry. --E4024 (talk) 09:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Question: Do I have a confusion? There are bots only for certain cat names (like Actress/Actresses)? I thought there were bots that made all the job in these cases... No? --E4024 (talk) 08:50, 9 August 2017 (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 ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Fæ (talk) 17:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Stefan Napierski - Poeta i świat.djvu

Rozetniesz podwójne? Ankry (talk) 11:08, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Conradi_Gesneri_medici_Tigurini_Historiae_animalium_liber_IV

Category discussion warning

Category:Conradi_Gesneri_medici_Tigurini_Historiae_animalium_liber_IV 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 ∙ +/−

Jochen Burghardt (talk) 05:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Quinti_Horatii_Flacci_emblemata_(1912)

Category discussion warning

Category:Quinti_Horatii_Flacci_emblemata_(1912) 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 ∙ +/−

Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Commons Conference project

Hello Wieralee,

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

Cheers,

--MB-one (talk) 18:50, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Coats of arms of Walter de Stapledon

You moved Category:Stapledon arms to Category:Coats of arms of Walter de Stapledon, for reason unknown. Most of the arms here are for descendants of the Stapledon family of which Bishop Walter de Stapledon was a member. As he was a pre-Reformation English bishop, he was not married, thus had no descendants. This therefore renders the new cat impossible for most of its member images. It should be restored to Category:Stapledon arms.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 23:22, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have referred you to File:BourchierImpalingManners TawstockChurchDevon.JPG, etc, in this category, which I think was your move. The Bourchier family was clearly not a descendant of the Bishop himself.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 22:04, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for fixing my mistake. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) (Sockpuppets 🎭) (Articles 📚) 15:30, 25 September 2017 (UTC)


File:Halola 2015-07-26 2330Z.jpg

{{autotranslate|base=Speedynote|1=File:Halola 2015-07-26 2330Z.jpg|2=[[COM:CSD#G2|CSD G2]] (unused and implausible, or broken redirect)}} B dash (talk) 04:28, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Curtis's_botanical_magazine_(1804)

{{autotranslate|1=Category:Curtis's_botanical_magazine_(1804)|2=Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/10/Category:Curtis's_botanical_magazine_(1804)|base=Cdw}} Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wieralee/2017&oldid=803713298"