User talk:Orrling/archive 02

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

Archive_02, created 2012-09-03

[edit]

Previous: Archive 01 Next: Archive 03

[edit]
באתי להודות שאתה צודק.

http://lib.cet.ac.il/pages/item.asp?item=22274

אבל המפות של גוגל אינן דוגמה טובה של כתיב נכון, למשל בתל אביב ליד נווה שאנן ניתן למצוא את רחוב Yesod HaMaala במקום Yesud ואת רחוב HaHarash במקום HeHarash.

Vcohen (talk) 15:45, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(-: Orrlingtalk 15:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletions

[edit]

Please use a speedy deletion tag to get rid of empty cats, you are currently producing lots of incomplete deletion requests. Use {{speedy|reason + signature}} instead. --Denniss (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We prefer {{bad name|new name|signature}} whenever possible (Category:Duplicate - bad name). So people know where it has been moved to as it will be clickable in the deletion summary. --Foroa (talk) 18:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I got it all. Orrlingtalk 18:29, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When I tried just now to post a deletion tag and sign within the tag, the text for the reason wouldn't show after saving :-/ Orrlingtalk 19:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I use the "speedy" tag. Links work fine within speedy tag. For example;
{{speedy|Empty category. Correct category is [[:Category:War casualties]]. --~~~~}}
That was just an example. Any category name will work of course. Signing works within the tag. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thanks, I do use the Speedy of course. (about a quarter of the category deletions on Commons follow my speedy-tagging *shocked icon here*) I'm not sure what the technical problem was at that time I tried but I remember the reason didn't show after I signd. Will try it again in next requests (BTW why do you need to sign in the tag?). Orrlingtalk 16:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't sign myself. Since my timestamp info is seen in the edit summary by admins before they delete the category. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then what is the hindrance on seeing mine too, given that I neglect to sign? :/ Orrlingtalk 18:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a problem with not signing. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judea and Samaria

[edit]

Re this edit summary - it is the official name of a District of Israel, and the category Category:Districts of Israel is incomplete without it. See en:Judea and Samaria Area. Please revert your recent edits on this topic. Thanks. Rd232 (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see now your category talk comment. Please reply there instead of here. Thanks. Rd232 (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you create Category:Judea and Samaria District? According to en:Districts of Israel, it is called "Area", not "District" (unlike the other districts - but then it is an entity unlike the other districts). Rd232 (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was said that this cat was missing under the Category:Districts of Israel and within the Israeli administrative division and discourse it's called a District, using the same Hebrew word for "District" as in the names of all the other districts in the country. Anything else I can help you with? Orrlingtalk 23:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Yes please - can you get the English Wikipedia article renamed to match (you might need to provide a source)? Rd232 (talk) 00:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmm I doubt I have this much influence in the en:wiki, am a simple editor there; what is currently the specific mistake on en:wiki? Orrlingtalk 00:07, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you provide a good source then you shouldn't need any particular influence - just raise it on the talk page and see what people say. The mistake is that the article is called en:Judea and Samaria Area, and based on what you say, it should be en:Judea and Samaria District. Also en:Districts of Israel has that naming. Rd232 (talk) 00:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have misunderstood. The definition "Judea and Samaria Area" IS a valid one, depending on the context: The en:wiki (I saw it now as you referred me) might simply have failed to make clear the distinction between the various uses of the coin "Judea and Samaria" across the field of rule in the West Bank, which may count four principal agents: The Army, The Government, The Police, and the Settlers' leadership. When it comes to the Israel Police's jurisdiction the area's name is "Samaria and Judea District" (מחוז ש"י), when it's about the Israeli Army (who has the major everyday presence on that ground) it is "Judea and Samaria Area" (acronymed איו"ש). When for statistical needs and administration of the Jewish population, the area is officially referred to as Judea and Samaria District - "Mehoz Yehuda veShomron", alike with "Mehoz Tel-Aviv" and "Mehoz Heyfa"[1]. Add to that the fact that in casual tongue among a wide circle in Israel Judea and Samaria is preferred as to describe the actual geographic region rather than the hostile-resonating "West Bank". Orrlingtalk 00:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. Well, do feel free to clarify these things on en.wp. en:WP:BOLD :) Rd232 (talk) 07:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did already Orrlingtalk 08:04, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HotCat

[edit]

Please enable and use the HotCat gadget, at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It will make things easier for you, and by providing automatic edit summaries, it makes things easier for others as well. Thanks. Rd232 (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond. You must provide appropriate edit summaries, and you're not doing so for many of your edits. HotCat would take care of this, but if you don't want to use it, you must provide edit summaries manually. Rd232 (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to activate/use the HotCat. (I can learn though.) Edit summaries are only applied by me when an edit might be little understood. Orrlingtalk 22:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's important, but it's not the only reason to provide edit summaries. Activating HotCat is easy - just go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and find the HotCat entry, tick the box and then go down the page and press the Save button. HotCat gives you a bar at the bottom of a page to add, remove or change categories. Usage is pretty obvious, but instructions are available at Help:Gadget-HotCat. Do it now - you'll thank me before long! :) Rd232 (talk) 01:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(: I thank you ahead. Orrlingtalk 01:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Judea and Samaria subregions.jpg

[edit]
العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Judea and Samaria subregions.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Judea and Samaria subregions.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Prof. Professorson (talk) 08:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orrling, you need to give precise source and license details for the map(s) you used as a basis for the image. Rd232 (talk) 08:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What are license details? And how do I specify them. The map is basically all processed and rendered by me using computer graphic elements upon a platform of a very initial contour map I simply got from the web in 2006 or 2005. |Orrlingtalk 08:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now I checked - It was 2007. But no other detail available.. Orrlingtalk 08:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It should be understood that I castrated totally that initial image and my work kept no remainders of the former design Orrlingtalk 09:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe so, but without providing the details of where you got the original map from on the web, and what license that map file was available under, the copyright status of your file is not clear enough. Rd232 (talk) 12:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Where is the Input Locales tab?.jpg

[edit]

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 16:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll work on it just now.. Cheers Orrlingtalk 16:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very confusing. At the link you gave me it says Commons will not accept {{Screenshot}}-tagging. What's there left to do? :/ Orrlingtalk 16:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh goodness, here it's saying: "Screenshots of Microsoft products would go against Commons policy". I don't wanna die. Orrlingtalk 17:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vered's image name

[edit]

File:Black cat named Vered sitting on the ladder.jpg? This is better, by far. What do you say? Is that a good rename? Also, that other file is fixed. --WhiteWriter speaks 16:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe. Thanks for the attention. You may wanna go for File:Leopardess named Vered.jpg. Will that be fair? Orrlingtalk 16:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah wait! It's cool the way it is. Leave it just this way, it's fine actually. Thank you. Orrlingtalk 16:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed Siebot move initiated by Foroa. Category:Palestinian culture

[edit]

Undiscussed Siebot move initiated by User:Foroa. Category:Palestinian culture. Foroa moved categories via the Siebot bot without discussion first. See User talk:SieBot which points to User talk:Siebrand which points to the edit history of User:CommonsDelinker/commands. That edit history shows his initiation of the bot move. See this diff from there. It lists this:

{{Move cat|Palestinian culture|Culture of Palestine}}

See: Category talk:Palestinian culture. Foroa has not yet commented there on the move. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, I'm a least-hitech user: can u please spare a brief explanation of that Bot-thing? Thanks very much. Orrlingtalk 19:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Foroa reverted all your category changes concerning the subcategories of Category:Palestinian culture by this diff which activated the bot. It is activated by admin requests. He overstepped his bounds. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How unfortunate. Should one just simply restore all damage that this person has done? Orrlingtalk 19:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The all-powerful Foroa sometimes tries to rush things too fast. I initiated possible discussion of this here: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Uschhh.. :-/ OK, Thanks, Hopefully the all-powerful will know their boundaries,,, or should we, dedicated & honest contributors, set them with them. Orrlingtalk 19:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you comment there, so I don't feel lonely. :) Arguing with Foroa can make one not want to edit on the Commons anymore, and I usually avoid any area he is working on. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to hear this. I'll pay a visit. Orrlingtalk 19:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic groups, diasporas, people by descent, etc. etc. etc.

[edit]

Hello. You and I should chat at some point when I have some time to focus. I get the impression from your edits that you and I agree on a lot more than disagree, and most of time where I revert a change it usually has to do with the broader implications rather than the specific change you made. These categories have always been a bit of a mess, and could use a fair amount of thought and rework, as you seem to be doing. Perhaps if we discuss the overall principles and objectives, we'd both then have a much easier time with implementation. Your input would be great. What do you think? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful. My one and sole principle and objective as to use your terminology is to settle and unravel incorrectnesses among our project whereas they come in most rigorous fasion to how catego-hierarchy goes across the tree plantation we've grown:). Chat me up any time - it's all about us here. Regards, Orrlingtalk 19:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will try and leave you a note on the weekend with some thoughts, and will look forward to your own reply/thoughts. I appreciate that your thoughts on "Belgian Americans", but I think it is far better to leave that alone for the moment, and work together on a broader solution so that there can be some consistency in approach. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didnot have odd intentions to keep touching that one example, I'm of the opinion that the latest edit summary there is respectful of the debate (and of its participants) and I understood the rationale stated. Orrlingtalk 21:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Sorry, I got extremely busy. I did not forget that you and I agreed that we would chat. I will try and leave a more detailed note later this week. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category moves

[edit]

Please note that important category renaming that are not part of normal housekeeping renaming must be done by {{Move}} or COM:CFD. We have to give at least 2 weeks to people to respond on {{Move}} requests. I am not prepared to hunt and undo your unilateral moves that don't respect the Commons process. --Foroa (talk) 14:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Move tasks that are obviously needed will use the designated robot (as instructed, for example, here), or manually if the extent is simple to thus handle.
  2. As always, any undo of me which is unsummarized will be reverted. Please acclimatize yourself an argumentary conduct.
Regards, Orrlingtalk 14:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the West Bank

[edit]

The West Bank is a disputed area. Both Israel and the Palestinian authority claim it to be theirs. Therefore, the west bank should be cataloged both under the palestinian authority and under Israel. יעקב (talk) 20:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't run your own rule on Wiki. We have reality facts to obey – in case you didn't know Israel itself has never claimed sovereignity over the Palestinian territories nor annexed them, apart from East JLM; the Palestinian territories are world-wide accepted as an entity separate from Israel and such is the conduct on this project. Thank you. Orrlingtalk 20:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
could you give me a link to where this decision was made on this project. The reality facts are that Israel's declared position is that the final status of these areas is to be determined in negotiations and that it has claims to substantial parts if not to the entire area. There is no Palestinian country and the Paletinian authority, while it has by an agreement with Israel certain authority over some areas of the west bank, does not have control or sovereinity over most of the West Bank. The Palestinian authority does not have a recognized teritory.
Therefore, the West Bank should be catagorized under both Israel and the Palestinian authority. יעקב (talk) 08:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to call your attention to Category:Economy of Kosovo and in general to the categorization of Kosovo. As long as there is a dispute, Kosovo is double categorized, both under Serbia and under the Kosovo country. That is the rule of the Wiki project, which is the only sensible rule and the only NPOV rule. יעקב (talk) 08:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion is going on in the Commons:Village pump. Please discuss your views there. Until you succeed in convincing the community, please refrain from performing controversial edits. יעקב (talk) 13:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Posted the how-to-do there (too), for your convenience. You're welcome to try to change it by means of discussion, yet please make sure you're not undermining the project's conventions by means of edits in the dead of night. As said to you multiple times before, your politically-motivated edits on Wiki won't be sympathised. Orrlingtalk 11:43, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tongue.JPG

[edit]

Is the publication and distribution of such an image with fully identifiable persons legal in Israel? --Túrelio (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, sorry Orrlingtalk 23:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then it might be better not to publish it. I'm not going to ask about your relation to the depicted people. But in case you know them, would they really agree to that publication? If you are in doubt, it might be better to ask for speedy deletion of the image. --Túrelio (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then you can ask for speedy deletion of it. Half of the depicted people there are the uploader of the image. Orrlingtalk 23:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. Better remove 2nd sentence of your above reply for your safety (and thereafter also this sentence). --Túrelio (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My main motivation is not legality, but thinking about the dignity of the people. In special circumstances (for example, being drunk) people sometimes do things they later may regret and surely wouldn't like to become known to others. --Túrelio (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No drunk. Only amused. Orrlingtalk 23:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Once I'm being told by the participant that they would like the picture off Wiki it will be done. Orrlingtalk 23:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
O.k., if he/she really agrees, then you can simply remove my speedy-tagging from the image — though I still think it is also out of scope. --Túrelio (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it self if you feel right either to remove your tag or delete, I'm evenly ok with both – scope-spoken, I won't even start arguing about how many tons of images of people partying,joking etc are found on Commons (properly licensed, also). Orrlingtalk 23:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Talpiyot market.jpg

[edit]
File:Talpiyot market.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

Sreejith K (talk) 10:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This was probably some mistake, most likely on my part, as I meant in fact to request the deletion of the earlier version and was not aware that it came so that I did manage in overwriting it with this version, which I surely wouldn't think deleting. So it was a bit of a confusion on the technical part, which occurs when my browser cache is slow. Orrlingtalk 11:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Categories of victims, fatalities, deaths

[edit]
Category discussion warning

Categories of victims, fatalities, deaths 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 ∙ +/−

--ŠJů (talk) 19:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paris Square

[edit]

as you can see on this photo the name of the square is "Place de France" (Square of France) and not "Square of Paris" the name of the category Category:Paris Square, Jerusalem is not appropriate, is it? Djampa (talk) 13:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the category may equally well be either Paris Square which is how the very most of Jerusalemites refer to this place (Kikar Paris) or France Square, being the official reference implemented by the cityhall (Kikar Tzarfat). Orrlingtalk 17:04, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lakes of New Zealand by alphabet

[edit]

Notify me when you create the CFD. I feel that it should possibly be renamed, but not deleted. It is a useful container category. It is sometimes incredibly difficult to find images on commons. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I was thinking not to treat each of those sub-categories as a separate case for discussion, but to bring us to agree about eliminating the general idea of "categories by alphabet" rather. Difficulty in finding things on Commons is one thing, but remember that once you keep a so-called alphabetical container parallelly and apart from its direct category, just for the declared alphabeticality, I don't see a reason why we won't then have to follow that with all existing list-cats we have. Where's the difference? Orrlingtalk 22:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

[edit]

Hello,

Could you explain what you are doing here? Specifically why these 2 edits: [2] and [3]. Thanks, Yann (talk) 02:21, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You were as it seems introducing two questions here, the answer to the first one would be "I am editing media files and am generally participating in the management of a collaborative institution known as Wiki Commons/Pedia". The answer to the second one might be "These two edits fix the wrong archiving of the discussion relating to the blocking of editors' user accounts by some function now being cleared-up". Anything further I can help you with ? Orrlingtalk 10:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions concerning Palestine and Palestinian territories

[edit]

Please see

This is very helpful thanks mate. Orrlingtalk 11:10, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Organisations of New Zealand

[edit]

Hello. I have removed your request to rename "Organisations of New Zealand" to "Organizations of New Zealand". New Zealand English derives from British English, and we therefore spell things like "Organisation" or "Civilisation" with S, not with Z. For the other changes you proposed, it's probably okay, as those countries don't have English as their native language, and the parent category uses Z. Cheers, Ingolfson (talk) 21:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The parent category uses the Z in New Zealand and Britain as well. And see discussion Orrlingtalk 21:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orrling/archive_02&oldid=157774270"