User talk:Guitarpop
|
File:EMP_-_Roots_and_Branches_04_music_down_to_the_rabbit_hole.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. |
Jmabel ! talk 23:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
KSMModel358.jpg
[edit]I still don't see a good reason to put this picture in the "guitar bridges" cat, since it's impossible to clearly have a view of the bridge (it's too small). The pics in this category should illustrate "guitar bridges", not "guitar with a bridge" (patented or not).--Phso2 (talk) 09:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
- Categories of media on Wikimedia Commons should not be determined only by the composition of photograph, or your personal impressions. They said this guitar has patented bridge (based on their bass guitar bridge technology, KMS Foundation Bass Bridge), thus uploader added Category:Guitar bridges. You shouldn't ignore their intention without any research.
- Note: If you think the media should be categorized by parts or composition, you can follow your rule by clipping the parts from the media. But such things should be done by the user who want to mention on this parts. The only thing we can do is leaving this media on this category for future use. --Guitarpop (talk) 21:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
- "They said this guitar has patented bridge. You shouldn't ignore their intention without any research." Well if they wanna feature their "patented bridge", let them put a proper picture of this bridge. What I see here is a mere picture of an electric guitar, and one can't have a look at the bridge since the picture is too small. Clipping would be useless anyway, resolution is too bad.--Phso2 (talk) 23:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
- Resolution may be only a technical problem. If more precise picture is needed in the future, someone may resolve the problem (i.e. requesting image on Wikipedia or to KMS Guitars, or drawing more precise picture based on this photograph and U.S. patent document, etc).
- Anyway most important thing on this issue is, don't hide the (possibly useful) information only by your personal impression. --Guitarpop (talk) 23:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
- "They said this guitar has patented bridge. You shouldn't ignore their intention without any research." Well if they wanna feature their "patented bridge", let them put a proper picture of this bridge. What I see here is a mere picture of an electric guitar, and one can't have a look at the bridge since the picture is too small. Clipping would be useless anyway, resolution is too bad.--Phso2 (talk) 23:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism warning
[edit]
Eusebius (talk) 05:30, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Done Resolved by discussion --Guitarpop (talk) 05:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I added the guitarists cat as someone who can play guitar is, to me, a guitarist, and a category of vocalists with guitars would presumably make the vocalists also guitarists. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- No, vocalist is vocalist even if he/she play guitar. --Guitarpop (talk) 02:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not denying that a vocalist is a vocalist, but surely someone who plays a guitar is a guitarist, no matter what their other abilities? -mattbuck (Talk) 09:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- If some person has a role of vocalist in some music group, and he/she rarely play the guitar, he/she should be called vocalist. --Guitarpop (talk) 09:18, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'd agree that they're vocalists rather than guitarists as their job title, but I don't see the categories as being just people who are guitarists and only guitarists and never do anything more. It's about people playing guitars, not people who exclusively play guitars. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- If some person has a role of vocalist in some music group, and he/she rarely play the guitar, he/she should be called vocalist. --Guitarpop (talk) 09:18, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not denying that a vocalist is a vocalist, but surely someone who plays a guitar is a guitarist, no matter what their other abilities? -mattbuck (Talk) 09:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Done It may be wrong categorization if some Guitarists (with guitar) category contains non-guitarists media. But I don't know the case. If you found, you should move these inappropriately categorized media into more suitable category such like a Category:People with musical instruments or Category:Peoples with guitars, etc. It is your business. : ) --Guitarpop (talk) 12:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Slide guitarists
[edit]Hi, thanks for adding Category:Slide guitarists to File:Pt Vishwamohan Bhatt.jpg. However, you didn't just add it but deleted a valid category, and you added the category only to this picture instead of Category:Vishwa Mohan Bhatt, which would be useful because he always plays slide. Just a note in the hope to make your work more efficient in the future. Regards Hekerui (talk) 07:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your kindly advice. I've checked w:en:Vishwa Mohan Bhatt and I'm sure he is (dedicated) slide guitarist, but I forget about his category. I'll check it. --Guitarpop (talk) 07:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 03:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Done Corrected license to {{cc-by-2.0}} and added {{flickreview}} --Guitarpop (talk) 07:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
"You should be more cooperative on Wikimedia Commons. Here is not your private space." Are you kidding? I contributed more than 2600 images here, that are widely used on different language versions of Wikipedia and beyond. And you seriously want to tell me to "be more cooperative"?
The "other versions" box is meant for other versions of the image (e.g. File:Simphiwe Dana Wien2007a.jpg), not for galleries of the depicted artist. That's what categories (Category:Jamaaladeen Tacuma) and single pages (e.g. Christina Stürmer) are for. And what's the sense in repeating exactly the same image in the "other versions" box of an image? --Tsui (talk) 14:42, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- You seem to be too aggressive and non-cooperative. But none want to cause trouble with you. Please, behave more cooperative.
- On Wikimedia Commons, usage of other_versions field is not exactly defined. Under Category:Guitars, I always use it for various purposes: for example, to indicate visually relations between related instruments without too detailed sub-categorization; or, to provide interesting/important relations on some categories. Essentially, these practical use of other_versions field provides comfortable usability to users, without additional click actions!
- On this issue, Jamaaladeen Tacuma uses varios model of DiPinto bass guitars, and it is useful information for users who interested on his instruments or modern recreation of bizarre guitars. --Guitarpop (talk) 23:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- Please see Commons:First steps/Quality and description#Good file descriptions: Other versions of this file: If there are other version of this file within Wikimedia Commons (for example a black and white version of a color image, or a cropped or uncropped version) use this field to link to these versions with a wikilink.
- That's the purpose of this field. What you want to use it for is better solved with a gallery page or categories, e.g. Category:Gibson guitars.
- And as for the weblinks to the website of the manufacturer: In my eyes this is commercial spam. At Commons we collect media files, with some basic information that describes the content. Adding the name of the bass guitar is great, thank you for thatm but there's no need to link to a shop where one can buy it. As an admin on de.wikipedia I know very well, that too many people try to misuse Wikipedia as a vehicle for their commercial interests, e.g. by spamming links to their site. You don't seem to want to do that, but the result is the same.
- Further information - including the weblink to the manufacturer - is better included in wikipedia articles about the manufacturer. That's where weblinks to his website have their place.
- PS: Concerning "aggressiveness". Please re-read you own edit comments. They've been far away from constructive, but confronting on a quite personal level. --Tsui (talk) 07:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response.
- The example on Commons:First_steps seems to be only one of examples. Exact usages are not defined there. Also, various usages of "other_versions" are sometime discussed on Commons:Village pump. On such discussion, the word "other_versions" is interpreted as not only the derived works you said, but also the closely related various media. I think these flexible interpretations are rational, because flexible usage of the field (without infringement to the rule, of course) induces more efficient knowledge expressions on Wikimedia Commons.
- Web link you mentioned is not the link to the shop, but the link to the official page of manufacturer. On musical instruments category, detailed manufacturer/model informations are very important reference to identify each instrument models, thus links on references are rational and valid. Again, the purpose is not the link spamming.
- For the "place of links" - because Wikimedia and Wikipedia are different project, and not all media always have a corresponding article on Wikipedia, we should be able to put each references for media/categories on as possible as near by. If such a tightly binded reference are deleted, media collections on Wikimedia may become piles of unreliable informations.
- PS: The word "aggressiveness" means your first attitude on this discussion.But at now, you are cooperative, and my previous word is not suitable for you. Sorry for my previous word. --Guitarpop (talk) 10:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response.
- 1 Interesting interpretation. A rule is a rule, except where you don't like it. Everywhere I stumbled upon "other versions" since this part of the description was introduced, it were other versions of the image, not "closely related various media", whatever that means - in this case: a gallery of Mr. Tacuma, or of the bass he uses, or of him playing this or another DePinto bass - or just what is "closely related" in your eyes? An there still is no sense at all in repeating the image that is described as an "other version" in its own description.
- 2/3 The weblink is both, it is a link to the manufacturer's site about this bass and a link to his shop. I am aware that your purpose is not spamming but referenced information; only, the result is the same. I try to keep articles on de.wikipedia as free of commercial spam as possible. That kind of misuse of Wikipedia is a permanent nuisance. But opinions here on Commons may vary. I leave it to the admins here.
- After all, I don't think that too many viewers will find their way to this particular description page anyway (though it would be great if Mr. Tacuma was more widely known). So I won't waste any more time on disussing this and rather go on taking pictures and make them available here. --Tsui (talk) 12:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
(reset the indents)
I know your great contributions on Wikimedia, for example, thousands of excellent images. And I also contribute by creating, uploading and maintaining categories & media under the Category:Guitars in every weeks. Your private thought should be respected if possible, but you should also respect to the collaborative works by other peoples on Wikimedia. I wish your understandings on the requirement of maintenance under the Guitar category.
Note:
- The example is only an example. Your interpretation is not authorized by the community. According to the discussions on the Village pump, flexible usage of this field is not refused at all.
- The reason why same image appear again in it's field is, only a technical reason. Because the page layout of Wikimedia is too long to see at once (on the normal web browser), if the same image was omitted from the field, users can't compare the images at a glance. I think it is one of the obvious faults of Wikimedia's page layout design.
best regards, --Guitarpop (talk) 03:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Category:Burns London
[edit]Hi, regarding your merge at Category:Burns London and the guitars. The splitting was intended (guitars and the company in general separated). Why did you merge them? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:28, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, why do you want to separate these guitars ? As a implicit convention of the sub-categories under the Category:Guitars by brand, we create the "some_brand guitars" category only when the brand sold also the instruments/products other than guitar/bass/amps/effects.
- If you want to separate vintage burns models (manufactured in 1960-1970) from recent reproduction models, please use more explicit sub-category, for example, "Burns guitars (1960-1970)", "Burns guitars in 1965-1970" or "Burns guitars (vintage)", etc. --Guitarpop (talk) 11:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I did split them to be able to categorize the company differnt from the guitars. Guitars are no company and a company is no guitar. ;) No I did not want to split them by years. However, do as you like. Guitars are not my field. ;) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:17, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Already I did it --Guitarpop (talk) 01:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I did split them to be able to categorize the company differnt from the guitars. Guitars are no company and a company is no guitar. ;) No I did not want to split them by years. However, do as you like. Guitars are not my field. ;) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:17, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
File:Hohner_JT_60_detail.jpg and File:Hohner JT 60 logo.jpg for rename
[edit]
Hello I don't get the reason why you want to rename thoses files, moreover it looks to me this is the same picture. Regards, PierreSelim (talk) 10:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your kindly message ! It may be my mistake... (... omit a long story) I'll delete {{rename}} tag, and re-upload correct image. best regards, --Guitarpop (talk) 10:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Image
[edit]Hi, just wanted to bring to your attention that an issue has been raised here regarding an image you uploaded. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 03:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
|
Category:Gitarrluta 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! |
Neitram (talk) 19:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
|
|
Identification 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! |
Torsch (talk) 15:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
|
|
Category:Trembulo 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! |
TenPoundHammer (talk) 22:40, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
[edit]|
|
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. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:EMP-SFM exhibition room.jpg
- File:EMP-SFM signboard.jpg
- File:Science Fiction Hall of Fame.jpg
- File:SFX make-up mask @ EMP-SFM.jpg
- File:Terminator 2 T-800 @ EMP-SFM.jpg
-- Gazebo (talk) 12:38, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 |
File:Spongebob Rock'n'Roll.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.
|
1989 14:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
|
|
Wholesalers by industry 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! |
86.30.197.19 13:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
|
|
Serial numbers of guitar 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! |