Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
...(I figure とある白い猫 knows) ..(I'll ask)
Hi, I don't know if anyone can hear me. I'm lost in between two walls. Hello!
.(I hear p-u-r-r-i-n-g)
Who's there?
I am wandering around Meta, trying to stay out of Babylon and not look at the tower of Babel, and now here. Strange, lots of light here between these walls.
I was wondering what the practice is on Meta for naming pages in various languages and how that works with English as an international common language, er, common language among users on Meta. I used the Search box and found m:Multilingualism, which is a great name because I can type it from memory, but it seems to be out of date. I also found m:Meta:Interlanguage links... Gadzooks! I'm not even on Meta! This is Commons! Runnnn!
There also is a country (Grenada) with SD ranking. I am unsure if it is worth the trouble or what SD supposed to mean. :/. Could you also create a version for Europe? Also your coloring seemingly missed Greece which does have a ranking (B-). Perhaps you can recolor maybe worthwhile to denote the +'s -s. After all an B+, B and B- is drastically different. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 07:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
SD stands for "selectively defaulted". I'm not sure if it's worth including for just one country - might confuse things a bit. When I have time today, I'll go through all the countries - the issue is it wasn't updated for almost a year, so a few countries were never adjusted. Also, you want a close up of Europe with these ratings? Sure, I'll make one, but where were you planning on putting it? Just curious. Boweruk (talk) 10:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
I was thinking of slapping it under Europe economy related articles such as w:Economy of Europe also on the actual article w:List of countries by credit rating where Europe smudges. I cannot see countries such as Belgium or Luxembourg on the thumbnail. It would be nice if the Europe credit map outlined the EU if possible.
Looking back at the map, I think different colors may help the reader more. Consider a rainbow of 7 colors. Each color could denote one of the 7 ratings. Lightness or darkness of the colors can determine +/0/- nature.
Good idea. I'll try it on Europe first to save some time and then we can see if it works - if so, I'll add it to the world map. Boweruk (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Alright, :) Yellow/Orange/Red may not necessarily work well with having 3 tones so you may need to substitute some other color. Also CCC only has one tone (no + or -). -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 12:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
It is certainly informative but a few problems I think needs to be tackled. It has to do with colors used. Perhaps actual rainbow colors are too similar to each other and it may be better to use substitute colors in their place. I am not sure.
For instance, one problem I observe is how red can be confusing. Especially in the thumbnail, at a glance Cyprus looks like it is rated with the same rating as Czech Republic which of course is not the case. I realize the two colors are different but they may be mistaken.
AAA and CCC ranks do not seem to have a +/0/- value so perhaps they could be given colors that are more difficult to give lighter/darker variants. For instance, I'd imagine light orange and yellow would become confused with each other. Red/Green/Blue can have more light/dark values given their primary nature while more transitive colors may have that more difficult.
Also, perhaps the "key" could include the +/0/- values so the reader can immediately see the pattern.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Selam とある白い猫たん. Zazaca Vikipedide köyleri oluşturma projemiz ne aşamada ? Türkçe Vikipedide eksik köy maddeleri var, ama Vietnamca Vikipedi daha kapsamlıdır. Vikiveri uygulamaya sokulduğundan bu proje, tamamlayıcı niteliği (özellikle en, tr, ku, diq, vi arası) de taşdığı için hem Zazaca Vikipedi için hem de diğer vikipediler için (hele Türkçe Vikipedide bu tür bot-çalışmalarına izin verilmeyeceğine göre...) hayli faydalı olacağını düşünüyorum. Takabeg (talk) 06:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've made some comments to try to conclude your bot request. I hope the speed compromise is acceptable to you. --99of9 (talk) 12:50, 22 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.
Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.
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!
The files will be reviewed by User:Rustavia once upload is completed. I am merely uploading files for him. I will mass remove irrelevant categories such as that once the upload is complete. Its tens of thousands of files the bot is going through so I am working on this in steps. Feel free to suggest/list categories you want for me to mass remove which I will go through on my second run. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 14:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Added to my list of categories to remove once the task is complete. I can remove them in the meanwhile but more would be added later as bot makes mistakes. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 01:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
August
hey
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I didn't look at who changed it from left to right before putting it back as I had it, there has been so many people messing with my remarks there, or just destroying them in general as an attack on me, like this lot 1234567 followed by an outright attack page mentioned at the bottom of my talkpage, so I was just ignoring it as more of the same.
When I had a look and saw it was you I thought, whoops, still in the anti-nasty mode. Feel free to change it back to the other side, I do not mind as it's a genuine editorial thing you're up to. I think I started getting away from the 'everything on the righthand side' thing back in the days of featured articles on en.wikipedia, someone mentioned 'why are all the images on the right hand side, you can alternate them a bit' and I thought about it, and thought, hey, why are they all on the right hand side, it's just a default, not a rule or style. After that yeah, I put a little more thought into not following the default. Meh, but if it annoys you by all means change it back, there are plenty more pictures for me to talk with. I'm not so much a text-only person, I'm video pictures and sounds when I talk. Penyulap☏02:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)Reply
I merely moved/realigned it so that comments do not stack up (so that three structure is maintained). :)
It is a heated discussion. IMHO people are getting too worked up either way. Things should be discussed in length but instead they are being rushed.
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
It might be good for You to know that a photo You inserted into finnish Ahaltekhevonen is not presenting Akhal-Tekes.
Also, if You had asked the permission from the photographer, You would have known it.
Even more, it might be worthwhile to always contact the photographer, if not otherwise, but for the sake of courtesy, about such public usage of photos.
In finnish pages I was told that there are rights to use this photo, and so on.
It is not so simple, I have been talking with the photographer privately, and (in breed's international association's discussion) here is what You also might need to know:
Kerri-Jo Stewart: no, photos appearing anywhere need permission of the image taker who owns the copyright. But there are lots of great photos of Akhal-Tekes racing in Russia that would be more appropriate for a description of the breed. These guys should go under the Turkmen horses really.
Ulrike Ruppelt: The moment you upload a picture to Wikipedia Commons you agree to the following: Must be freely licensed or public domain[edit] Wikimedia Commons accepts only free content, in other words files that are either freely licensed or which are in the public domain. A file is considered public domain if either all copyright has expired or if the copyright owner(s) has voluntarily placed the content of the file into the public domain by irrevocably renouncing all copyright. A file which is ineligible for copyright protection is also considered public domain. Any file hosted here must normally be freely licensed or public domain according to both the law of the United States and according to the law of the source country, if different: see Commons:Licensing.
Kerri-Jo Stewart: that won't stand up in court. The image owner owns the copyright and it doesn't expire. They have never asked me for permission to use any of my photos so I'm sure that there are lots of photos on there that are not knowingly permitted by the image owner.
Kerri-Jo Stewart: that may have been put up last year as the US did not automatically grant copyright to the image owner previously, but it does now. And it's stood up in court as you can see from Facebooks retraction of its previous policies.
And in private discussion the photographer confirmed those court cases.
My point
1) it is always not to press the free usage of photos too far when it is not necessary, as then also it will be more likely that these issues have to be dealt otherwise some day = in court, or by strickening the copyrights in public services as now is happening = also old photos are under copyright, no matter what the internet service provider claims. (It is just if the photographer is willing to go to the court. If the internet service provider was only providing an option which was not legal, it is not so much photographer's problem, as it is end-user's and internet service provider's. And if the end users start claiming the internet service provider, I am pretty certain they will change their politics asap there to make certain it is the end-user who will get charges.)
2) if You had been polite, the photographer could have explained You why these horses are NOT akhal-tekes, and I would not have used Your photo as one example of the false information that is being spread of the breed. Thank You, it is one good example. Actually, I am so used to this sort of action, that first I just corrected the explanation for the photo, and only in the end realized that I also have got a suitable photo for that one subsection i was writing.
88.114.201.13710:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply
No impoliteness was intended, I apologize if that was the case. Could you link me to the photo in question? It is very possible the upload was through the use of automatic tools on behalf of someone else as a technical assistance. I can perhaps reach that person for you to sort out the problem. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 18:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank You for the quick reply!! I just noticed there is a huge error as all the Ahal Velayat Hippodrome - Flickr - Kerri-Jo photos are inserted as photos of Akhal-Tekes!! As Kerri-Jo replied correctly, these are photos of turkmen horses, horses bred by turkmen people. Akhal-Tekes are a closed studbook, that is, only horses which are bred from horses of that studbook are accepted. It accepts no crossings to other breeds.
Are You familiar with the Akhal-Teke breed?
Not even all "Akhal-Teke people" are following the Turkmenistan's situation that close as the breed is distributed all around the globe, all app. 3 500 horses, so You may understand the resources are not too big, and there are many other things to consider but the "overall situation" of the breed. Like for example the changing standards for recognition of individual horses, equine organizations, and breeds (like horse passports, UELN, FEI recognition to establish a position in equestrian sport etc). Or even creating an association like here in Finland with our app. 10 Akhal-Teke horses...
So, even though almost half of the breed is being left outside the breed (app. 3 000 horses in Turkmenistan), it is merely becoming a fact, unless they change their politics concerning dna- and blood testing the origin of horses for registering them into the studbook.
It does not look very good tough. This current decade Turkmenistan has been trying to convince the AT (Akhal-Teke) people of the world of the necessity of them being in charge of the studbook. (For example by offering representatives of AT organizations free travel to celebrate AT horses in Turmenistan.) At the same time there are very controversial views within Turkmenistan about cross-breeding Akhal-Tekes to other breeds, especially to english thoroughbred as racing tradition is very strong and appreciated in Turkmenistan. The "quickest way" to enhance the speed of ATs (Akhal-Tekes) is to cross-breed ATs to english thoroughbreds (= XX, an acronym). BUT then the resulting descendents may be the winners of the (short distance) race, but NOT Akhal-Tekes! (As it is a closed studbook.)
So, I suppose You see the problem, which has resulted since Turkmenistan has been outside studbook since the end of 1990ies... It is no wonder many breeders do not want ANY dna/blood testing to proove what they have done. Some others might want to save the breed, but if they are not influential enough...
There certainly are still "true" Akhal-Teke horses left in Turkmenistan, as many of the oldest horses may have been registered into the studbook in early 1990ies. But if You look at those racing horses, they often are 2-4yrs old, and since the temptation to cross XX blood especially into racing horses is huge... The probability to see outside "breed show" which represents other than "old symbols of the nation" like Yanardag, ... Well, it is most probable that these horses might not be able EVER to get AT studbook registration - even if their owners were able/willing to go through the normal required procedures.
So, first of all it is a COMMON FACT that these younger horses are NOT registered into AT studbook. NOR they might be able to acccess registration. THEREFORE they DEFINATELY are NOT ATs. I am sorry to use the capitalization, but I really want to be clear that this is a present fact. A huge loss for the AT breed, too. :-( As the time goes by, it will become at some point impossible to insert horses into the studbook, as the origin needs to be proven at each generation. As generations pass... well, :-(
You do not have to take my word for this.
The AT studbook's web pages started addressing the problem in the end of 1990ies. Still 1995 Turkmenistan was part in "world organization" for ATs: <http://www.maakcenter.org/ENG/maak.html>, but then the problems begun = the TM (Turkmenistan) horses were not being registered into the studbook: <http://www.maakcenter.org/ENG/announce.html>
If You take a look at Turkmen Embassy's web pages, what they tell about their national breed, You will notice what is the point of view of at least enough many turkmens to present such claims in public official pages... <http://turkmenistanembassy.org/the-akhalteke-horse-of-turkmenistan/> Namely l'Arc de Triomple winner is a horse of another closed studbook, english thoroughbred studbook. So there is NO way it could ever be regarded as an AT. Not by neither of studbooks... (That is the "hilarious part", it is a true and very bad "double-error". :-))
Well, if You think of the breeding centuries back, it was not so "official" what is a "turkmen horse", so in a way this is a correct name for their horses. (At least more correct than AT!)
There are still "original turkmen horses" being bred in surrounding countries like Iran presently. If You are interested, You might want to get to know the work of Louisa Firouz, and travellers like Laurence Bougault - and even Kerri-Jo Stewart herself! (Whose work You already know. :-)) I mean, if You do not speak persian language (as I do not), since there is more and more in the internet at least from the Iranian breeding in persian language. (Too lazy to attach web pages, sorry...) :: It is not just Iran where there is still "original breeding left". But I am afraid for example in Afganistan they have got bigger problems than announcing their horse breeding to the world via internet, or by any other means. I am glad for example Laurence is not going there at least not yet, as it is not the safest corner...
But personally, while talking about present horse breeding in Turkmenistan, I would myself favour something more illustrating like modern turkmen horse, or modern turkmenian turkmen horse. It would be easier to specify that it is a horse with strong influence by AT breed, but most probably fairly heavily (at least in some cases) crossbred into XX. Why not TM ATs? Well, as they have pointed out in several cases, breed got it's name from Russians almost 150 yrs ago, and it was a turkmen horse before that. And Russia was the one who closed the studbook to start with. And ceased the experiments with crossing ATs to XX. Ironically, thanks to Turkmenian efforts in 1935...
But this is just my opinion, You are free to decide something else, as this needs to be discussed at some point. At least now it seems TM itself has chosen "turkmen horse", so may it be?
So - why to "burden You with all this information"?
I have got a request. As I only have been doing wiki-editing for 1 wk. And I started as a completely ignorant dummy, so my "skills" are still practically non-existing.
Do You think You could "clean out" cross-bred horses out of "Akhal-Teke" folder??? Anyway, that is the one term Akhal-Teke which is really very well defined to concern only horses which are registered to AT studbook, or their (not yet registered, but registable AT) descendents.
Or tell me how it is done, please? (I might not have time, and I might cause a "mess", but I might give it a try anyway...)
There are already enough weird claims of ATs circling around the internet, and there is no reason to confuse the situation any more with inserting non-AT-horses into AT photo folder.
I am afraid that there are also many other but turkmenian cross-bred horses in this AT folder, but I have not checked yet. At least there are also many familiar "true" AT horses. (It is such a "small world" this AT world, because of fairly small number of horses, breeders and owners involved...)
Such a long message... Anyway, I thought I better let You know!
Sample image: Ahal Velayat Hippodrome - Flickr - Kerri-Jo (136).jpg
Hi, again welcome to commons. The site may appear overwhelmingly complicated but this is something people get used to. I'd normally encourage people to be bold and make edits but I want to make sure I understand your request clearly. I am not an expert on horse breeding so I need to ask a few questions on that as well to be able to better guide you. I'll number these for your convenience.
Which images are we talking about? Can you give me a few examples? I have linked to one of the photos by Kerri-Jo at Ahal Velayat Hippodrome. Is this one of the files you see a problem with?
Commons does not have a "Akhal-Teke" folder or any folder for that matter. We sort images in Galleries and Categories. I see a Akhal-Teke gallery and a Category:Akhal-Teke and am guessing you feel some of the files under Category:Akhal-Teke are categorized incorrectly. What name would you propose they should be under? "Turkmen horses"?
Can you tell (just by looking at a photo) if a horse is an Akhal-Teke breed or not? Are the closed studbooks publicly available? If so would we be able to use it to determine if our images cover said specific breed.
Thank You for Your reply! And for the welcoming!!!
Actually practically whole folder of photos of Kerri-Jo at Ahal Velayat Hippodrome are not valid Akhal-Tekes. (I should re-check, but I think there was not a photo of Yanardag, or some older horses, whose origin is well know. As they were bred around/before that time when Turkmenistan still co-operated with VNIIK.)
I saw those racing photos (which are NOT representing Akhal-Tekes) when I searched Commons for "Akhal-Teke". But now I realize that 1) since You inserted only that one photo to a finnish wikipedia page 2) I did NOT check who had inserted all those photos into Commons => a scary thought: I might be doing a very unpolite act by blaming a completely innocent other person.. Sorry!!!!! You see I am very green with commons, if a bit less with ATs.
Thanks for asking! Unfortunately You cannot determine an Akhal-Teke by it's outlook only (unless You recognize a familiar horse, which often is a case within this breed though).
There is not "guaranteed photo archive" available - by studbook or so. There are some photos of old events, in <http://www.maakcenter.org/>, and there are also many other AT shows/happenings which have been photographed. But none in recent Turkmenistan... (I know, it is awful situation for an "outsider".)
Even though the Akhal-Teke studbook has photo-archives of most registered horses, those archives are not public. In fact, I think they are still mostly under digitalization (scanning etc) as most of the data is fairly old (real photographs).
If You know the name, and the parentage of a horse, and You know russian transliteration in some cases to be sure - this link should be fairly ok to check as it should be pretty consistent with VNIIK AT studbook information (choose: ахалтекинская for the breed - or choose language to be english): http://109.94.178.63/horses/horses.php
The trouble is - even that one is not 100% correct - if there is a "falsified Akhal-Teke"!
We for example in Finland had one mare, with a pedigree and outlooks which were an exact duplicate of another Akhal-Teke mare in Germany.
Well - there was one simple solution to this "scandal".
The horse in Finland had been sold to an owner who did not know the breed, and the mare's papers were only photocopies.
The german mare was owned by a biggish Akhal-Teke breeder who registers her horses to the studbook.
So, one does not need to be an Einstein to figure out which mare was most probably "the only true" Akhal-Teke...
Of course, it did not help that Finnish Organization for Equine Registration had registered this finnish "claimed-Akhal-Teke" as an Akhal-Teke. BUT Finnish Organization is NOT a studbook organization. So, it is NOT able to grant a studbook status to an Akhal-Teke. It was just a simple error from them, they took those "papers" for granted. (It is not the first time when they received photocopies in that era.)
They have done bigger mistakes than this related to this breed.
At least all of the parents of this one mare were "claimed to be Akhal-Tekes".
Finnish Horse registration officials are MUCH more careful these days, and I suppose they will not to repeat those mistakes any more. Hopefully!
In short, no harm done, not a biggie - _BUT_ - the story continues...
The photos of that "false AT mare" are still in the biggest public equine pedigree & photo service in Finland - under the breed name of Akhal-Teke...
At least it was a pretty horse which is not the case always... Of course it's official registration would not be changed post mortem, the mare has by deceased, and the owner does not want to "go back and search the case". But - the information reminds...
Of course it is not the ignorant owner, nor officials to blame, as it was pretty much the way things worked out in those days.
The one to blame is the person who sold the "false mare" with photocopies, in an auction, decades ago.
But why to bother any more... (Anyway - there were bigger errors, and this mare was not bad-looking.)
And, there are so many "present errors" - like this one of Ahal Velayat Hippodrome race.
Sorry for this long explanation, but You must understand that for AT people internet has been a blessing! In a way. It helps us to track down "true ATs", and to get to know how to most easily check their origin etc. Of course UELN, dna tests, microchips, equine passports etc help.
Also, we kind of know "each other" - if not each one, then at least there are not too "long chains" between people. So, if anyone of us would start to claim some horse is an AT, and it would be let's say a crossbred horse, then we would probably (even very soon) notice it, and it would be pointed out.
But - there is so much false information circling about the breed _outside the breed_ that, I suppose we pretty much have "lifted our hands up", and surrended. And only now, people have started to edit more for example wikipedia pages...
But, again I am burdening You with too much information.
I should have written more briefly: the best way to recognize, if a horse is an AT, is it is bred by a well-known AT breeder who co-operates with other ones, and breeds VNIIK registered horses - or a horse is a VNIIK registered Akhal-Teke.
Other than that - it may be, or may not...
So, pretty much any "single photo" should be checked, unless it is a "group gathering of VNIIK registered horses". (Which sometimes has got classes for cross-bred, or even show program with also other breed horses. So we are back to square one... :-) )
Thanks for the patience! And great thanks to You in advance if You "look a bit" whether AT photos really seem to be what they are claimed to be...
It is quite alright, I am here to help. This is a community driven community and you often have multiple people working towards a specific task. Different people are passionate about different aspects.
The story you mentioned is exactly why we should be just as interested in fake Akhal-Tekes horses. For example someone writing an article on the scandal probably wants the photo. We can categorize unofficial horses so that someone else can verify their authenticity. The closed studbook for Akhal-Tekes would be a sub-category documenting the official Akhal-Tekes horses.
So what I propose is replacing Category:Akhal-Teke with Category:Turkmen horses and then apply Category:Akhal-Teke to those that are confirmed to be officially from the special breed. I can do that for you with a bot. A bot is an automated script that makes repetitive edits. I also think we should mark fake Akhal-Teke breed horses with a category such has "half breed Akhal-Tekes" or some other more fitting name.
Afterwards we should try to populate Category:Akhal-Teke which as you said is not an easy task but this is exactly why commons exists. :) One step at a time though.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi! You tagged this file for speedy deletion. Could you please use the {{duplicate|other file.xxx}} template in the future? It would make life so much easier! Thanks a bunch! --Hedwig in Washington(mail?)05:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply
Notification about possible deletion
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I see you got dragged into a spat about images of Akhal-Teke horses (above). I suggest that the upset person cool down for a bit and I recommend against any changes. As one of the most active members over at WikiProject Equine on en.wiki, where we have dealt with this sort of thing frequently, I think you should know that the Akhal-Teke article over there is "blowing up" too, but not as bad as here. Basically, this is what we like to call "breed politics." One "registry" gets into a fight with another "registry", claiming that "their" horses are the "real" ones and the other ones are "impure" or whatever. There are also nationalistic spats too (my favorite was when Slovenia threatened to sue Austria in the EU over whether any country other than Slovenia could call their Lipizzan horses "Lipizzans" Talk about lame!) As a rule, neither side has a real corner on the truth and it is wise for us wikimedian sorts to not take sides. There is no need to create a new category, if people want to create a category called "Akhal-Tekes registered by registry X" that's fine, but to take out all the others is to just get ourselves involved in a fight that we don't want to be in (next thing you know, the other side will come roaring in and what their horses "in" and the other ones "out") Also, the "Turkoman horse" is considered an extinct breed, with many claiming the modern Akhal-Teke to be its modern descendant. A category like "horses of Turkmenistan" would be OK, but it would still need to cross-link if the horses are also considered Akhal-Tekes. Just a heads up. Montanabw (talk) 21:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)Reply
As always, we can only work with what is sourced in situations like these. Mind that each image can be tagged with multiple categories. We can even have creative options such as Category:Akhal-Teke being the parent category with various "Akhal-Tekes registered by registry X" as subcats (a horse can be registered in two or more registries I presume). I know very little about horses and based on what I can read it is not possible to determine a breed by just looking at the photo. So, "horses of Turkmenistan" could indeed be a category for the horses which do not have a clear breed defined (until a source establishes that). Would this make sense to you? -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 00:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
There is nothing to fight about studbook standards. It is a closed studbook. The first written records of nationalized Zakaspiiski stud (bythe order of Emperor of Russia Nicholas II) are over 100 yrs old. The creation of the USSR since 1917 was "interesting times", but the official closed studbook is now over 80 yrs old. Since 40 yrs all the registration has been based on scientific proof of the parentage.
"Mother studbook", and it's "satellite studbooks" of Akhal-Teke breed are part of a formal global horse identification system, UELN. (http://www.ueln.net/no-cache/ueln-code-database/find-organizations-for-one-breed/ => choose the catagory of the breed: "saddle horse and pony" AND breed: "achal-tekkiner" Mother studbook is the only Russian one.)
So what is the problem? I think とある白い猫 is absolutely correct. (Did I get Your name correctly, I hope! Sorry, I have been in Japan for aikido for 3months, but all the japanese learned by then is now gone...)
I am stupefied why categories of Commons should not be both consistent and trustworthy?
What is wrong with having several categories to separate studbook horses from horses whose parentage is not verified.
VNIIK Akhal-Teke studbook has worked hard to accomplish unification for last 20 years. There also have been/and are supporters for a joined studbook in Turkmenistan, but it has not led anywhere. It is a "common secret" that breeders in Turkmenistan are cross-breeding turkmen horses to english thoroughbred for race track success. For the present politics of Turkmenistan (about studbook registration) is "all or nothing", they have refused from testing their horses.
Very sad, as in 1930s it was Turkmenistan which managed to put a halt to cross-breeding projects to spare bloodhorses of Akhal-Teke studbook...
As the existing Akhal-Teke studbook has worked for almost a century, and it is working along with global identification methods like UELN/equine passport/microchipping, and has a scientifically proven pedigree registry - should that be ignored?
If for Commons it does not matter which horses do present any breed, then it is of course another issue.
Then one can freely attach a photo of a fjord horse, or of an english thoroughbred into the category of Akhal-Tekes.
Of course Dancing Brave can NEVER be registered into VNIIK Akhal-Teke studbook.
But if it is the general approach of Commons to ignore such petty rules based on some blood typing and ignorant dna testing by ISAG certified laboratories, and unnecessary global equine identification systems like UELN - who am I to resist?
I am sorry to write this a bit sharply, but seriously, what is so horrible about a rare breed having strick studbook registration policy?
I am not even aware of any complete written studbook registry in modern Turkmenistan, so it is kind of strange why it is so important that these two very separate groups should be joined to start with?
This is exactly why it is a good idea to use multiple categories to match the multiple sources. We also should categorize unofficial claims (claims that aren't backed by a studbook) separately which would be later compared to the studbooks to see if they are on it. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 06:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
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!
If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.
Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.
If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.
Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.
If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.
Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, you keep tagging these and notifying me but it would be better if you let me know though a less formal list. The bot sometimes glitches and fails to create the image description page properly. The bot only uploads files with a free license and only from a single stream (currently). This stream has tens of thousands of files so this will take some time. Just a mere suggestion. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 21:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about the formal warnings. You have a bot uploading files and I am using VisualFileChanges batch tool to tag new uploads without license with {{No license}}. So my bot is talking to your bot. The good news is that Category:Media without a license: needs history check which holds all the files that do not have a license or a problem tag does not have any more flickr files, so you should not hear from me for a while. --Jarekt (talk) 02:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
Ah, OK! I was worried it was manual labor on your part and that would be a waste of your time. If that isn't the case no worries. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 13:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.
Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.
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!
I am interested but I have been overwhelmed by real world affairs unfortunately. I have not forgotten about it. -- とある白い猫ちぃ？ 11:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:Dervis.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!
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!
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato(talk)07:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)Reply
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
