User talk:Yarl/archive 2

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nowa Kamienna - Railway station 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 10:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stara Kamienna - Cross.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 10:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Encyklopedja staropolska ilustrowana

Ksiązki wgrywam na potrzeby polskich Wikiźródeł. Przyjąłem konwencję podobną do tej stosowanej na potrzeby angielskich Wikiźródeł. Wszystkie książki wgrywam w ten sam sposób. Zmiana na inny szablon nic nie poprawi. Sp5uhe (talk) 08:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krasnybór - Chapel 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments --Cayambe 10:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bytom - City hall 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done, QI to me now. --Cayambe 17:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krasnybór - Chapel 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice. It's just a pity about the black hose(?) across the path. --99of9 09:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nowy Lipsk - Houses.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok --Pudelek 16:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lipsk - House 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok --Pudelek 16:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Please help replace this outdated license

Hello!

Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

Thank you for your help. If you need help feel free to ask at Commons talk:Licensing or contact User:Zscout370.

The images we would like you to check are:

• File:Larissa map.gif

BotMultichillT 21:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jastrzębna Druga - House.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good now. An English description would be appreciated. -- H005 12:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wigry - Wigry Lake 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Cayambe 18:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lipsk - Hubal monument.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK I think. If used it would probably be cropped a bit top and bottom. --99of9 15:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Biebrza - Rail bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 14:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dąbrowa Białostocka - Chapel 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. --Cayambe 14:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wadowice - John Paul II Square.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice image! And seeing normal people adds historical value for the future use of this picture. --MattiPaavola 12:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bielsk Podlaski - Town hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok --Pudelek 11:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wadowice - Basilica 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 09:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dąbrowa Białostocka - Church 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. The slight perspective distortion and some CA mainly around the crosses are minor flaws IMO. --Cayambe 14:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wigry - Statue 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. Darius Baužys 07:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Miedwieżyki - Radio tower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 21:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Babia Góra 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 11:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Babia Góra - Sign 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments --Cayambe 11:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trzcianka - Chapel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think the asphalt and the leaning lamp give impression of the location. --Ikar.us 00:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Presidential's aircraft crash

Just to say that I'm deeply sorry for the crash of the Presidents plane near Smolensk. Polen is a great nation, and poles are a great people. I'll feel friendly sad with your country, today.----Jebulon (talk) 13:32, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gródek - Monument 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nicely done --Ianare 22:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bytom - Pond in park 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 17:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

About opposition to QI status for file:Belarus-Poland border 01.jpg

Hi. I just opposed the QI status on your upload File:Belarus-Poland border 01.jpg for two reasons: Most importantly, the picture is overexposed, removing most of the detail from the socles. Secondly, there is a lot of unsignificant space around the main subjects of the picture, the pillars. A square crop would significantly improve this, IMO. Best of luck in your continued uploading of pictures. /Dcastor (talk) 22:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

autopatroller rights

I have granted you autopatroller rights to reduce the backlog at Special:NewPages. -- Common Good (talk) 20:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Port of Łeba - Tall ship 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments this is imo better --Mbdortmund 18:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Łeba - Train station 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 10:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Port of Łeba - Tall ship 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Also good. --Cayambe 15:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Częstochowa - Jasna Góra Gate 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Face could show a bit more details, else OK, nice composition --Mbdortmund 17:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Częstochowa - Jasna Góra Fleche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 14:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Port of Łeba 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fine. Скампецкий 23:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Messtischblatty

Na dole mapy pisze, ze och przedruk i costam jest zabronione. Ale obejrzalem ja dokladnie i nie jest podany autor, a jedynie urzad wydajacy, zatem zgodnie z PD te do 1939 rzeczywiscie sa w dom. publ. Masur (talk) 10:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Łeba - Old cemetery 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments interesting, sharp details --Mbdortmund 18:31, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Słowiński National Park - Dune Łącka 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me, nice work --J. Lunau 19:09, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sarbsk - Stone 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sasino - House 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Kaszuby

Właśnie się tego obszaru nie da określić jednym słowem. Elbląg nie leży na Kaszubach :) a szablon pod zdjęciem z Elbląga jest wklejony. Przykuta → [edit] 16:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Można by jeszcze zmienić z "To zdjęcie z województwa pomorskiego (lub warmińsko-mazurskiego / kujawsko-pomorskiego) wykonane zostało w trakcie polskiej Wikiekspedycji 2010 " na "To zdjęcie wykonane zostało podczas Wikiekspedycji w 2010 na Żuławy i Kaszuby oraz tereny przyległe..." Nie będzie wtedy określenie skąd jest zdjęcie, a tylko dokąd udawała się ekspedycja. Przykuta → [edit] 16:06, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Beastie Boys BigDayOut.jpg

Could you please upload a higher res version of File:Beastie Boys BigDayOut.jpg? --ALE! ¿…? 12:05, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Szablon Wikiekspedycji

Właściwie to nie wiem, na ile on jest potrzebny, zważywszy, że zdjęcia są w kategorii Wikiekspedycja 2010. A datami nie da się, bo miedzy tymi z ekspedycji ładowałem i inne zdjęcia. Jeżeli możesz wyłowić moje z kategorii, to i owszem (a przy okazji wiedziałbym, ile ich wrzuciłem). Ciacho5 (talk) 10:31, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

• Dzięki. Ciacho5 (talk) 11:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Komunikat

Zaden problem, ale mozesz wytlumaczyc jak glupkowi co mam wkleic gdzie? :) Masur (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Polish catnames

There were a number of non-closed move requests which had no comment on the talk page; that's why I moved them. You may do those small name corrections directly on the delinker page; but take care to restore broken redirects from the older (first) name to the newer (third) name. I did the one you gave as exemple. Greetings, --Havang(nl) (talk) 07:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Szmyd_Sylwester.jpg

File:Szmyd_Sylwester.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!

Zureks (talk) 21:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Częstochowa - Jasna Góra Gate 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Częstochowa - Jasna Góra Gate 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

political map of Ukraine

Hi,

Thanks for the map of Ukraine, it is great. However, I want to make a similar map with more detailed territorial divisions like regions. Thus, I want to know where did you get the data to do the map and if there is more data so I can add more details into it.

RonRodex (talk) 23:03, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Pytanko

Witam, miałbym małe pytanko odnośnie commons, bo jestem tu początkujący. Dodałem wczoraj/dzisiaj kilka screenów z pl.wiki (m.in. ten pliczek) używając przy tym licencji w takiej postaci {{Wikipedia-screenshot|1=pl}}; owa licencja automatycznie dodaje kategorię "Category:Polish Wikipedia screenshots", ale bocik-kategoryzator przywalił się o brak kategorii... co zrobić jeśli nie chcę na siłę szukać innej kategorii? Pozdrawiam HaRRy[LP] (talk) 22:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Dzięki za pomoc, tylko że... powinno pomóc, ale nie pomogło ;) Jakaś inna idea? Bot powinien sobie poradzić z czymś takim, jak sądzę, więc może trzeba by to zgłosić? HaRRy[LP] (talk) 17:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Silesia

Wydawało mi się, że język będzie sztywny (w tym przypadku widziałem polski). W takim razie przepraszam i oczywiście zaraz cofnę swój rewert --Pudelek (talk) 09:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Borne Sulinowo

Witaj. Zrobiłes to [1] - jednak cmentarz ten choć sowiecki i wijskowy nie ejst związany z II wojną - jest to cmentarz nie ofiar tej wojny (te leżą na drugim cmentarzu), a członków personelu radzieckiej bazy wojskowej zmarłych od ok. 1946 do lat 90. XX. Jak spojrzysz na daty na nagrobkach to też to zweryfikujesz. Na plwiki jest artykuł o tym cmentarzu wraz ze źródłami, tam możesz sprawdzić co i jak. To powinno wystarczyć do weryfikacji, że to nie jest związane z II wojną. Pozdrawiam --Robert Niedźwiedzki (talk) 14:42, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Via Jagellonica

Hallo Yarl, ich fand gerade den Hinweis zu der Datei Via Jagellonica. Ich verfüge leider nicht über elementare Kenntnisse der polnischen Sprache um das Problem direkt mit dem Lubliner Turist Büro bzw. dem Verein www.szlakjagielloniski.pl zu überprüfen. Wir haben in Deutschland mehrere gleichartige Wege - z.B. Euregio Egrensis - da gibt es auch ein Kennzeichen. Es hat damit keine Probleme gegeben. Die Datei-Autoren benutzen:[[Category:PD ineligible]] und [[Category:With trademark]]. Würde das in diesem Fall ausreichen, wenn man diese Marker ergänzt?? Ich kenne die Polnischen Urheberrechte nicht, aber das Zeichen wird auch in Litauen und Weißrussland zu finden sein, daraus ist schon zu folgern, daß es nicht ein hohes Schutzrecht inne hat??--Metilsteiner (talk) 22:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello Yarl, I regard a message from the LublinTeam:

www.szlakjagiellonski.pl Tłumaczenie Marzena Kapłan (LSTK „Zachód – Wschód“): Sehr geehrte Herr Metinsteiner, vielen Dank für Ihr Interesse an unserem Weg „ Via Jagiellonica Cracovia-Lublin-Vilna”. Ich beantworte Ihre Frage erst jetzt, weil ich ein Paar Tage in Litauen unterwegs war. Hiermit erteile ich Ihnen die Elaubnis für die Verwendung des Markierungssymbols Via Jagiellonica Cracovia-Lublin-Vilna bei entsprechendem Stichwort in der deutschen WIKIPEDIA . Ich wünsche Ihnen viele Fortschritte in der „Via Regia” im Raum Eisenach. Mit freundlichen Grüssen Janusz Kopaczek - Biuro: 20-029 Lublin, ul. Skłodowskiej 5, pokój 104 tel. (81) 441-11-18, kom. 693 272 040 - Könntest Du die Erlaubnis nochmal überprüfen und den Button zum Urheberrecht entsprechend bearbeiten/entfernen? Thanks -- --91.43.160.3 21:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I've posted reply at your talk page (in Polish). I can also translate it to English. Yarl ✉ 18:26, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Sławek Wierzcholski.jpg

Skoro go nie skasowalem to pewnie sam zapomnialem zdjac szablonu. Juz to zrobilem. Dzieki za spostrzegawczosc. Masur (talk) 10:08, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

County

OK, zastanawiałem się nad tym jakiś czas temu. Brałem przykład z innych kategorii :) A ten "Powiat" w takim razie powinien być wielką literą? ToSter (talk) 12:44, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Swoją drogą: en:Pruszków County... ToSter (talk) 12:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

No tak... Bo ostatnio się trochę namęczyłem przy różnych kościołach, żeby były po angielsku te cholerne wezwania :) Przydałoby się to choć trochę ogarnąć i na jakiejś polskiej stronie pomocy powypisywać. W ogóle kategoryzacja na Commons to jest straszna męka niestety, ale efekty mogą być fajne. ToSter (talk) 12:55, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Problem praktyczny: nie mam zielonego pojęcia, jak nazwać kategorię dla tego kościoła, nie jestem specem od religijnej odmiany angielskiego, a szukać przez pół godziny nie mam ochoty :) ToSter (talk) 14:34, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

No tak, podstawowe słownictwo! Dzięki :) ToSter (talk) 14:40, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Milk Bars cat.

Re: [2] I don't think I was good edition. Milk bars were invented, OK, in 19'60 during Polish People's Republik, but they are still significant up to these days, among other restaurant-type houses. --Segu (talk) 23:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Category:History of Poland

Widzę ze porządkujesz trochę Category:History of Poland, :). Ta biedna kategoria czeka na to od dluzszego czasu. --Jarekt (talk) 13:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

To bardzo ambitny plan. Mi zajelo pare miesiecy uporzadkowanie Category:Warsaw Uprising i nigdy nie skonczylem Category:Poland during World War II. --Jarekt (talk) 14:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Zawsze chetnie pomoge jako admin i jako operator user:JarektBot. --Jarekt (talk) 14:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

i18n "summary"

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mondgestein_Apollo_17_02-2.png&curid=10351465&diff=45813898&oldid=43143661

Hi Yarl, could you please skip orig upload logs? Changing there is wrong since it is a citation. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:43, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I have already searched the bot contribs for "orig" and reverted all newer than 2010-11-06T16:35:06. But there are many more. Which should be reverted. You should check more carefully what the bot does. --Saibo (Δ) 23:53, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing, I'll fix it asap. Yarl ✉ 01:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. What I forgot to mention: thanks for running your bot. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:18, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Zmiany nazw kategorii

Witam.

1. Zauważyłem, że po niedawnej zmianie nazw kategorii zostało mnóstwo martwych linków (np. [3], [4]). W dyskusji z jednym z adminów wyszło, że obowiązek ich poprawienia należy do ciebie.
2. Mam zastrzeżenia co do zasadności zmiany nazwy (nie: ujednolicenia nazw), zwłaszcza w odniesieniu do aktualnego requestu, jako że ideą tej kategorii było zebranie plików wykorzystywanych w Wikiźródłach, a nie wszystkich zeskanowanych książek na commons. Pozwolę sobie wycofać to zlecenie.

Ankry (talk) 11:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Tu zainicjowałem dyskusję na ten temat. Ankry (talk) 11:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Ta kategoria jest przede wszystkim informacją dla nas, co mamy u siebie, a czego jeszcze nie, choć jest na commons. Druga sprawa, to może i nie usunie, ale jak zechce standaryzować nazwy plików bez uprzedzenia, to może się zrobić zamieszanie.

pdf-y zamiast jpg, to nie jest dobry pomysł. Są kłopoty z ekstrakcją poszczególnych stron online. Chyba, że oprócz jpg, jako drugi format. Lepszy jest djvu. Ale tu z kolei bywają problemy z rozmiarem pliku, a pogorszenie jakości też nie jest dobrym pomysłem. Ankry (talk) 09:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Replace "county" with "powiat"

Próbuje od dłuższego czasu poukładać jakoś obrazki dotyczące Polski lub tematów związanych z Polską. Ja już zgłosiłem, żeby zamienić to botem, ale nikt nie zareagował. Uważa, że jest było to świetnie. Zgadzam się że nie wygląda za dobrze, ale: 1. Na pewno "county" powinno być zamienione na "powiat". W Polsce nie ma hrabstw, a nazwa "powiat" chyba juz się przyjęła na angielskiej Wiki. 2. "Churches in Mińsk Mazowiecki powiat" nie jest idealna, ale widziałem podobne w innej kategorii, więc pomyślałem, że ta forma jest to zaakceptowania, Na pewno wygląda lepiej niż słowa angielskie. Nie mam pomysły jak to napisać po angielsku. A czy musi być po angielsku? Jest to cała mieszanina kategorii dotyczących Polski w obu językach. Czy jest jakaś zasada? 3. Ja chętnie mogę pomóc w ręcznym edytowanie, z tym że raczej interesuje mnie tematyka religijna. Nie bardzo znam zasady na Commons. 5. Zauważyłem kilka szablonów dotyczących tematyki polskiej, czy możne je jakoś zgrupować? Nie bardzo wiem jakie są i czy można je używać. Pozdrawiam i dziękuję za uwagi. Liczę na więcej.--WlaKom (talk) 19:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Próbuje dopiero coś robić na Commons. O ile się nie mylę, to, jak po polsku (powiat miński), to z małej litery, czyli "Category:Churches in powiat miński", albo bez odmiany, po angielsku "Category:Churches in powiat Mińsk" To drugie bardziej mi się podoba, łatwiej indeksować i nazwa miejscowości zrozumiała dla angielskojęzycznych.

Szablon, który dopisywałem Template:Multilingual description (podoba mi się), pozwala dać tytuł w innych językach. Z tym, że "powiat" i "gmina" występuje masowo na Commons, np. "Radom gmina", lub "Radom gminas". To samo z "powiat". Jeśli chodzi o Category:Category navigational templates for Poland, to dopisałem dziś 4 szablony do jednego jaki tam był o historii, ale to są szablony nawigacyjne. Ja bym chciał widzieć kategorie gdzie będą wszystkie szablony dotyczące Polski (Widziałem dziś coś o Instytucjach.). także każdy Polak by je znalazł i używał. Myślę również, czy nie zrobić szablonu "Powiaty", podobnego do Template:Poland Voivodeship. PS. A co ze znakami polskimi w zdaniu angielskim? Pozdrawiam. --WlaKom (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

A co zrobić z"Powiats of .." i "Powiats in .." w Category:Powiat nowodworski. --WlaKom (talk) 20:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Trochę się poprawię. W j, polskim mamy Dekanat Poznań, lub dekanat poznański, Powiat Olkusz lub powiat olkuski. Oba poprawne. Czyli poprawnie byłoby "Category:Churches in Powiat Minsk" (zamiast ń, winno być n) => Kościoły w powiecie mińskim. "Category:Churches in Gmina Minsk" => Kościoły w gminie mińskiej.

W zdaniu angielskim nie powinno być odmiany "miński, mińskiego, mińskiemu. To tak jak po polski "Stoi cara na cornerze" :)

W przykładzie "Powiat nowodworski" zwróciłem uwagę na nazwy kategorii wyższych związane z powiatami, której pisowni nie bardzo rozumiem.

Znaki polskie - kiedyś, na enWiki, administrator zwrócił mi uwagę, że w j. angielskim nie występuje ą, ś,ę,ń. Kazał mi zamienić na a, s, e, n.

Znalazłem ten Commons:Bar i napisałem moje sugestie i uwagi. Nie wiedziałem o jego istnieniu.

Szablony powiatów, Na początku myślałem, dla każdego województwa, ale przy poprawnej kategoryzacji można by wyłapać nazwę parafii ze zdania opisującego województwo. To tylko narazie luźna sugestia do przemyślenia.

Pozdrawiam. --WlaKom (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Kategorie Category:Powiats of Poland bym nie ruszał. Gorzej z tym "Powiats" jako l. mnoga :). Jak już mamy w podkategoriach po polsku, to dlaczego nazwa kategorii nie jest też po polsku, czyli Polska według powiatów. Ale to też był już zostawił jak się nie da. Co to Kościołów/Cmentarzy itd, wersja "Churches in powiat miński" jest na pewno niepoprawna. Mieszanina w zdaniu słów angielsko-polskich, czyli po angielsku źle i po polsku też.

IMHO, należy trzymać się zdania w jednym języku, a nie robić zbitka słów wielojęzycznych. Najważniejsze to nie łączyć słów obcojęzycznych z polskim odmienianymi przez przypadki. Pozdrawiam. --WlaKom (talk) 23:57, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No to mamy konsensus :) --WlaKom (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Czyli można już przebotać Kościoły w Polsce. Może zacząć od moich zmian na ".... powiat" a poźniej z "county"? Proszę mi dać znać jakby potrzebne były dodatkowe, ręczne edycje. Ja po botowniu spróbuję poprzenosić grafiki kościołów do podgrup "Church in Gmina ...". Dalszy podział na miejscowości zostawię na później. Powodzenia. --WlaKom (talk) 11:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

"Churches in Powiat Western Warsaw" lub "Churches in Powiat Western Warszawa". IMHO Właściwie, to wszędzie powinno być Warszawa a nie Warsaw.--WlaKom (talk) 13:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Poprawiłem ręcznie. Teraz wyglądają logicznie. Pozostały jeszcze moje zmiany w Category:Churches in Lesser Poland Voivodeship by powiat. Pozdrawian. --WlaKom (talk) 12:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Podkategorie dla województw

Teraz mam kolejne pytanie dotyczące struktury podkategorii, aby ułatwić szukanie grafik. Narazie mam na myśli religijne obiekty: Kościoły/Katedry/Bazyliki/Cmentarze/Kaplice/Krzyże itd.

Kategoria podstawowa: "Coś tam in ... Voivodeship", potem "Coś tam in ... by powiat". I teraz jak dzielić dalej?

1. Coś tam in Powiat ..."
2. Coś tam in Gmina ..." (jak na przykład w Category:Churches in Radom powiat), czy odrazu "Coś tam in Mińsk", lub bez podgrupy?

oraz czy można tworzyć podkategorię dla jednej grafiki. Uważam, że na Commons, powinno to być dopuszczalne, biorąc pod uwagę dziwne tytuły grafik, często jest niemożliwe określić lub znaleźć do jakiej miejscowości lub tematu należy, kiedy mamy dziesiątki rożnych grafik w grupie nie posortowane. --WlaKom (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

File tagging File:The_Automatic_pop_awards.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:The_Automatic_pop_awards.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:The_Automatic_pop_awards.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Tempel1.jpg

File:Tempel1.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!

SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)