User talk:Лобачев Владимир/Archive 3

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


Category:Tryphon_Day

[edit]
Category discussion warning

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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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

Zoupan (talk) 02:15, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Russian costumes by regions of Russia

[edit]

Я завела там много категорий народных костюмов по губерниям, как они обычно в источниках даются (не по областям). И с предлогом of, а не in. Не могли бы вы глянуть и причесать соответственно ваши Russian costumes in Belgorod Oblast и Russian costumes in Voronezh Oblast? Я же правильно понимаю, что некоторые районы областей относятся не к тем, к чему бы они относились как уезды губерний? --Shakko (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

да, еще я залила все фото Category:Photographs from Shabelskys' collection - там потом оказалось, что с некоторыми вашими заливками дублируется. Имейте в виду, дальше можно не плодить. --Shakko (talk) 00:01, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Я рад, что Вы залили столько фотографий костюмов. По поводу категоризации. Действительно, если фотографии сделаны в Российской империи, то логичней и привязывать их к административным единицам того времени. Но, если фотографии сделаны в XXI веке на смотре (ярмарке, фестивале), где представлены костюмы районов или сельских поселений области, то будет ли корректным относить их к территориям губерний, не существующих уже сто лет? Известно, что сегодняшнее административное деление может не совпадать с дореволюционным, и сегодняшний район мог раньше входить в разные уезды, а то и губернии, да и современный новодел XXI века относить к территории Российской империи — это как-бы старить одежду на 100—150 лет. --Лобачев Владимир 07:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Может имеет смысл создать Category:Russian costumes by regions of Russian Empire для дореволюционных фотографий и рисунков (по аналогии с Category:Governorates of the Russian Empire)? Как думаете? --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 10:05, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
смотрите, я тут оставила 2 - Category:National costumes of Russia - для русских и не русских. Пусть все русское будет в Category:Russian national costumes, отдельные предметы гардероба - в Category:National costumes of Russia by type‎, пусть там по алфавиту болтаются отдельно. По поводу ваших категорий с Воронежской и Белгородской областями - может быть, создать параллельно еще аналогичные с губерниями? Тем более, что у вас там разложено по отдельным дистриктам. Соответственно, дистрикты можно прикрепить сразу и к областям, и к губерниям? надо же, чтобы некая связь была между областями и губерниями. --Shakko (talk) 13:13, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Создал Category:Russian costumes of the Russian Empire by region. «некая связь была между областями и губерниями» — как Вы это представляете? Например, Белгородская область создана на территории бывших Курской, Воронежской и Харьковской губерний (а ещё ранее это была территория входила в Белгородскую губернию). --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 13:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
например, через see also шаблон? а может быть так, чтобы один дистрикт лежал и в области, и в губернии? у них же границы не так сильно менялись?
Согласен: через see also шаблон — это хорошее решение. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
создала Category: People in national costumes of Russia (stylized stage props)‎ и сладострастно загнала туда гололяжных фигуристок. Еще People in national costumes of Russia (modern ethnic festivals) и People in national costumes of Russia (folklore ensembles)‎ --Shakko (talk) 13:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Отлично, всю сценическую «развесистую клюкву» далёкую от аутентичности туда, чтобы не думали, что именно так русские одевались в деревнях. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Мне кажется, что все виды русской одежды (понёва, косоворотка, зипун, русский кафтан, сарафан и т.п.) должны входить и в категорию «Русский народный костюм», по аналогии с соответствующими статьями в русской Википедии. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    они и входят category:National costumes of Russia by type‎. Просто в отдельной папке, чтобы не мешаться с остальными. By type вам не нравится? можно by alphabet. Или не National costumes of Russia, а Russian national costume by type. Но это уже финтифлюшки. Просто удобно, чтобы они были в отдельной папке, вне фотографий и картин--Shakko (talk) 13:47, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    of Russia не обозначает национальности, там могут находиться русские, чеченские, карельские, эвенкийские, украинские, немецкие костюмы. Я сторонник того, чтобы костюмы разных народов не смешивать, — только через материнские категории типа «National costumes of Russia». --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 14:03, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    может, вы в People in national costumes of Russia (modern ethnic festivals) подобавляеете вашу отличную съемку, которая сейчас только в дистриктах лежит? --Shakko (talk) 13:47, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People in national costumes of Russia (folklore ensembles)

[edit]

Мне кажется, что у Бурановских бабушки одеваются не в народную, а в сценическую одежду «а-ля-рус». Поэтому размещение их в Category:People in national costumes of Russia (folklore ensembles) мне представляется спорным. Аналогично с Category:Russian Winter Festival London 2007. Это все стилизованная одежда, как у фигуристок и большинства фолк-ансамблей типа Надежды Бабкиной. Их бы в Category:People in pseudo-national costumes of Russia (folklore ensembles). --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 13:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ну мне кажется, "фольклорный ансамбль" сам по себе подразумевает "псевдо" для людей понимающих? --Shakko (talk) 13:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Как правило, но не всегда. Например, почти все костюмы в ансамбле «Пересек» являются аутентичными, созданными в конце XIX — начале XX веков (что-то по наследству перешло, что-то куплено в деревнях, и малая толика — новодел). А про «людей понимающих» — мы же не среди работников музея, поэтому для «обычных людей» надо всё чётко и однозначно обозначать. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
За многие годы Советской власти забили головы нашим людям настолько, что они считаю вот такие наряды русскими народными. Никакого отношения это к народному имеет. Поэтому русская народная одежда с псевдо-народной (сценической) должны объединяться только через «Русская одежда» (аналогично современная русская песня с народной русской песней в руВики объединены через «Русская песня»). --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 14:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
ну давайте настоящие костюмы класть в folklore ensembles, а подделки в prop. Все равно никто кроме нас с вами заморачиваться уборкой тут не будет. )) --Shakko (talk) 16:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Их можно объединить в категорию «Костюмы русских фольклорных коллективов (ансамблей)» (я не силён в английском). Тогда можно не вычислять, где народные костюмы, а где сценические, т.к. иногда грань очень тонка и субъективна. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 20:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Région Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur (logo)2.svg

[edit]
File:Région Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur (logo)2.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 ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Superbenjamin (talk) 14:45, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Centre-Val de Loire logo 2015.png

[edit]
File:Centre-Val de Loire logo 2015.png 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 ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Loreleil (talk) 23:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Région Centre (logo).svg

[edit]
File:Région Centre (logo).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 ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Loreleil (talk) 23:11, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Christian Trinity – three faces

[edit]

I really wish you had discussed this in advance, because unfortunately the name of this category is not quite suitable for several reasons... AnonMoos (talk) 09:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please, please, please ask for help first when creating complex English-language category names

[edit]

At a minimum, Category:Depictions of the Christian Trinity with three faces on one head (orthodox) will have to have the last word capitalized ("Orthodox"). Now it will have to be fixed... AnonMoos (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you use the right name from the beginning, it won't create extra work for other people. I wasn't looking forward to fixing it myself; thankfully, Wieralee did... AnonMoos (talk) 06:36, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Région Haute-Normandie (logo)2.svg

[edit]
File:Région Haute-Normandie (logo)2.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 ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Loreleil (talk) 15:58, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Butterfly pictures

[edit]

Hi Vladimir, I have seen that you requested a renaming of this picture and this one to their old file names. The problem here is that neither of these pictures displays the species called Перламутровка большая or Argynnis paphia; they actually display a species of the Melitaea genus. So, if you don't like Melitaea as a title, please choose another relevant title, but not this one. Thanks--LamBoet (talk) 14:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Btw may I ask why you keep both pictures instead of one?--LamBoet (talk) 14:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit war

[edit]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ русский ∙ 日本語 ∙ +/−

You currently appear to be participating in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, and once it is known that there is a disagreement should discuss the issues on the relevant talk page rather than repeatedly undoing other users’ contributions. If necessary you can ask for more input at Commons:Dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to ask for temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing – even if you are right about the content issue.

★ Poké95 12:05, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dushechki

[edit]
Category discussion warning

Dushechki 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 ∙ +/−

194.228.13.159 19:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Slavic neopaganism isn't only Rodnovery

[edit]

Hey, why do you moving whole content from Slavic neopaganism to Rodnovery? They aren't same thing!!! --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 11:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop editing articles and categories related with Slavic paganism. If you can't keep your personal views away from Wikipedia, you shouldn't do that. Most of your edits in this topic making mess and other users like me have to clean after you. Just stop. --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 11:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Russian-speaking and English-speaking scientific sources believe that these are synonyms. Interviks confirm this. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Compare, for example, categories Rodnovery by country and Slavic neopaganism by country. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 12:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:Flag of the Crimean Republic.svg

[edit]

Ошибаетесь. Не придумывайте новые флаги Создание новых флагов из-за кажущейся в них необходимости — не просто осуждается, а запрещается правилами, так как это оригинальное исследование. Более того, обычно это выражение частного мнения, которое может иметь политический или другой спорный контекст. Поскольку новый флаг не будет узнаваться другими людьми, он не несёт смысловой нагрузки. Примером подобного «изобретения» служит «флаг Северной Америки».

Не создавайте самостоятельно гербы и флаги для древних государств до эпохи Нового и Новейшего времени лишь на основании изображений на монетах, печатях, неоднозначных письменных описаний и подобного (подробно см. выше). Не тиражируйте уже существующие флаговые и гербовые мистификации. ru:Википедия:ЛЖЕФЛАГ [1] [2] Чистякин (talk) 16:13, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

Reverted to version as of 16:37, 13 January 2021 (UTC) Автор вправе залить свою версию файла. Даже если он не прав.

Ваши слова.File:Flag of the Crimean Republic.svg. Теперь понимаете? Чистякин (talk) 13:11, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Очень трудно обсуждать изображение, которое постоянно меняется (возрат/откат). Поэтому, если мы обсуждаем изображение флага с жёлтой полосой, то пусть оно таким и останется до конца обсуждения. Тем более, что первоначально именно оно было залито. А перезаливать изображение вопреки впервые загрузившему участнику, я считаю не этичным. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 16:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Прошу высказаться Commons:Help desk#File:Flag of the Crimean Republic.svg Чистякин (talk) 18:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Один и тот же вопрос одновременно обсуждать в трех местах — это плохая практика. Обсуждать файл лучше на его СО. Использование файла в Википедии — обсуждать в Википедии. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 21:16, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

герб Автономной Крымской ССР

[edit]

После перевода в 1928 году крымско-татарской письменности с арабской графики на латинизированный алфавит, надписи в гербе Автономной Крымской ССР также стали делаться в латинизированной графике. [4] Не желаете придумать? Чистякин (talk) 18:16, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Флаг Автономной Крымской ССР

[edit]

Вам тяжело понять? Флаг описывается в конституции 1929 года, он же и в конституции 1937 года. Но в 1938 году письменность перевели. Поэтому и произошли изменения. Чистякин (talk) 14:47, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Вы что до сих пор не знаете правил? Файлы обсуждаются на СО этих файлов. А затевать обсуждение в нескольких местах — это здесь плохой тон. И ведите себя прилично. Для примера — ru:ВП:ЭП. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[5] Чистякин (talk) 16:36, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Rusyns.svg

[edit]
File:Flag of Rusyns.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 ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

CanadianToast (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Slavic mythology art

[edit]

Hey, I see you uploaded a lot of stuff about Slavic culture. May I ask you to add some graphics related to Slavic mythology, especially gods? Currently, the Wiki mainly contains paintings by Shishkin. There are few by Maxim Sukharev and that is all. Art by Maxim Kuleshov or Viktor Korol'kov are pretty popular. At this moment I'm working on Svarozic and there is no single image for the article. Sławobóg (talk) 15:35, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your trust. But I try not to engage in illustration of the Slavic gods. Since modern drawings reflect the representation of a particular artist. In the Slavic traditions, there are no images of them. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 18:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All images from any time reflect the representation of a particular artists and modern artists are also creating within Slavic traditions. Imagine that art didn't throw from sky and ancient pictures were also created by individuals with their own vision. --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 08:02, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Лобачев Владимир: As a Western European external observer, I think that some of the finest artworks of modern Rodnover themes or broader Slavic New Age spirituality are those of Vladimir Suvorov (mostly focused on neo-Theosophical themes), Konstantin Vasilyev (mostly focused on military Germanic themes), Boris Olshansky, Aleksandr Uglanov, Vsevolod Ivanov, and especially valuable are those of Valery Semochkin. Many of the artworks on Slavic spirituality currently available on Commons, for example this one, are rather kitsch (according to my taste, I don't want to offend the artist). I suggest to contact some of the listed artists (if alive), especially Semochkin, asking them the authorisation to upload some specimens of their art on Commons.--Æo (talk) 08:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the idea. I think this should be offered to a colleague Sławobóg. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 08:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I want to ask you for another thing. Could you upload picture of painter w:Andrey Shishkin? My friend had to do it but he is very busy. Another question is, do you think we can upload these pictures, especially pic 1 and 3? (PS having painting by Vsevolod Ivanov would be nice for Turboslavism article I'll make one day.) Sławobóg (talk) 15:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two Zoryas
I uploaded one picture. There may be copyright issues with the second image. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Now I don't have much time. Why don’t you upload these pictures yourself? --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to thank you! I didn't upload it because I didn't know copyright status. Sławobóg (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Лобачев_Владимир/Archive_3&oldid=635569213"