User talk:Artlejandra/Archive

Sheet music

Hi! I've reverted a few of your edits changing "sheet music" to "sheet music cover" (example). Did you notice that the PDF file contains the complete sheet music, not just the cover image? Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 18:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Deprecated License

---

Hello. Thank you for uploading Image:Tone cluster.JPG, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the image correctly? If you are not able to do this, the image will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the village pump. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 22:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Me interesa la música clásica, aunque no tengo suficientes conocimientos para escribir o editar artículos sobre el tema, ¡muchas gracias! Polaris Argo (talk) 15:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Clavier-Übung-I-title-page.jpg

---

Hello!

Thank you for uploading File:Clavier-Übung-I-title-page.jpg to the Wikimedia Commons. I noticed that when you uploaded from another Wikimedia project, you left out some important information, or copied it incorrectly. In the future, please consider using CommonsHelper, a tool which automates the process of moving files over. Thank you,

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 14:30, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Dbszk02 schleder.jpg

 

Pay attention to licensing

Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. File:Dbszk02 schleder.jpg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file. If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.

Stefan4 (talk) 22:54, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Animations_of_computer_graphics

Animations of computer graphics 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 10:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Criterion 4 renaming requests

You have recently marked a large number of files for renaming under criterion 4 (harmonising the names of a set of files). You haven't given any explanation of why you think those files' names need to be harmonised, though. Please could you read the footnote for criterion 4 (COM:FR#cite note-4), which explains when criterion 4 can be used? If that footnote does cover your requests, please explain how? For example, what complex templates use these files, or what whole the files form part of. --bjh21 (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Bjh21,

I'm sorry for any inconvenience. I was trying to harmonise the names of the audio files of music by classical composers. When we edit the articles and we go to search for the audios if they are not in the right category or if we don't see clearly the name of composer and the piece we may not use these files.

I also found some errors such as a Concerto for oboe by Albinoni that was named as "concerto for saxophone (...)". There were no saxophones in Albinoni's time, it was just an arrangement. But my main purpose was to harmonise and see clearly all the names of composers and pieces in order to facilitate their use in the articles. If I'm causing any trouble, tell me and I won't continue. Artlejandra (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

So, there's no problem with your categorising things, or correcting descriptions (by editing file pages). Both of those should make things easier to find. Changing file names, though, is rather restricted on Commons. The reasons you're allowed to use are on COM:FR, and it's important to read the footnotes which significantly narrow what's allowed. Here's how I would apply them for classical music:

• Criterion 1 (original uploader request): If you uploaded the first version of a file and your request doesn't actively make the name worse, it will probably be honoured.
• Criterion 2 (ambiguous or meaningless name): The threshold for ambiguity is quite high. A name that just names the composer would probably merit renaming, as would one with a generic title like "symphony number 1". Minor ambiguities like not mentioning a catalogue number or a performer probably wouldn't merit renaming.
• Criterion 3 (obvious error): Your saxophone example above would qualify here, as would mis-named composers, incorrect catalogue numbers, etc. Note that just having incorrect casing of letters doesn't qualify, and neither would missing spaces.
• Criterion 4 (harmonising a set of files): I'd make a music theory joke here, but I don't know enough to get it right. This is quite narrow, but I think one useful case it would cover is where we have a recording of a single performance split into multiple files (say, one per movement) with names that don't match, then some of them could be renamed to match the rest. I don't think it would cover harmonising across different performances of the same work, though, or across different works.
• Criteria 5 and 6 are almost certainly not relevant.

Once a file's name is being changed for any of these reasons, it's fine to make other changes as well, so an obvious error can be an opportunity to completely overhaul a filename. COM:FR does include a recommendation not to break any naming scheme the uploader may have employed, though.

Now that you've confirmed that there isn't some hidden application of criterion 4 that I wasn't aware of, I'll take a look through some of your requests and see if I can obviously rename any of them. I won't decline any just yet unless they're really obviously not eligible for renaming, so you can improve the reasons for the requests if you want. --bjh21 (talk) 20:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your detailed explanation. I'll take your advice when I ask for renaming from now on. Artlejandra (talk) 08:12, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm meh about the tagging in general ... I've done a few of your requests for you, mostly because of this edit on my watchlist. You wrote HMV instead of HWV ... and Also, in all cases that I know about, there should be a space between the type of work and the number (e.g. HWV 427). Graham87 (talk) 14:56, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my mistakes, Graham. Artlejandra (talk) 15:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Reminder

Hi Artlejandra. I noticed that you've made malformed deletion requests. Here, {{Delete}} is not for speedy deletion, please see COM:DP. When you want to delete a page by manually using the {{Delete}} template (rather than the automatic Nominate for deletion tool in the Tools menu on the sidebar per COM:DR#Starting requests), you must follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion (or Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually policy), otherwise you will create a lot of work for other people.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 13:14, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Jeff. Artlejandra (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. Again, please ping or talk to me.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 16:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Portraits with piano vs Category:Paintings of women at the piano

Hi, You cannot categorize Category:Paintings of women at the piano in Category:Portraits with piano because not all paintings depicting women at the piano are necessarily portraits. It could be a genre painting (exemple here) or a history painting. Thank you, BeatrixBelibaste (talk) 22:27, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Beatrix. Artlejandra (talk) 22:35, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Musical Instrument Museum (Phoenix)‎‎, Category:Media not enough identified - Musical Instrument Museum (Phoenix)‎‎

Please stop editing above categories for a while. Above categories had contained the media that have some difficulties in categorization due to the lack of the official inventory data of museum. However you inadvertently remove the "Media not enough identified ..." categories from media, and mixed the not enough categorized media with already well categorized media. You seems diligent, but your work looks sloppy. Please do not disturbe the my tasks and concentrate on your own tasks. Thanks --Clusternote (talk) 08:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for any inconvenience. I was working on categorizing all these instruments and I thought they were already identified with that. I won't touch those categories again. Artlejandra (talk) 08:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Expositions

I see that without discussion you have been moving everything related to "Expositions" to "Exhibitions". Seems to me that this should have gone through CfD. I don't think it is necessarily wrong, but unilaterally changing something of decades-long standing is not usually a great idea. - Jmabel ! talk 01:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello! "Expositions" categories seem to be just a duplicate of "Exhibitions" there were very few items and countries in them. I didn't delete the categories only redirect them. Even in some cases the word "Exhibitions" appeared in some of the names included. I don't know what "CfD" is nor how to start a discussion here about these changes. Artlejandra (talk) 01:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

"Categories for discussion". On every category page, there should be (in the left toolbar on most skins) "Nominate category for discussion". This is how potentially controversial decisions about categories are supposed to be made, not (for example) by one individual unilaterally emptying out existing categories. - Jmabel ! talk 03:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Ah ok, it's the discussion part of each page. What do you think if I explain this topic in the discussion of the category "Expositions"? Artlejandra (talk) 07:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

No, no, it's not the talk/discussion page of the individual category. It's a distinct thing, and somewhat automated by the "Categories for discussion" link. See Commons:Categories for discussion.

I wouldn't worry about it for this one now -- I think it's probably OK, and it's really a bit too late to discuss anyway -- but in the future if you are planning major category changes, please use this. - Jmabel ! talk 16:09, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

OK, thanks very much, Jmabel. I'll follow your advices. Artlejandra (talk) 16:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)