User talk:Salix/Achive1

Hi Salix, welcome to Commons. Could you please explain to me what you want to tell me here? Thank you! Gr33tz --Stefan ■ 08:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I was talking about this image classified as unidentified :

File:MG 9563.jpg

This is a silki rooster. Look on this website : exernal link : [1]--Salix 16:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Kittens

Hi Salix,

I was thinking about this categorisation, and I think it is more important to have Category:Felis silvestris catus (which is really Category:Cats) <- category:kittens, than category:cat birth <- category:kittens, because I think it is more natural to look directly from Category:Cats to Category:Kittens rather than through Category:Cat birth. If I was looking for the first time, I don't think I would know to look there, so it would be confusing. Let me know what you think. cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree totaly with you. The problem is (at least on my computer) category:Kittens (with K) are lost on second page and therefore is really not easy to find. If you could find another solution you're welcome to change it!

Here is what I suggest for still red categories:

1. Category:Cats with people (don't know)
2. Category:Anatomy of cats
   1. Category:Bodies of cats
   2. category:Heads of cats
      1. Category:Eyes of cats
   3. category:Legs of cats
      1. Category:Paws of cats
   4. Category:Insides of cats
3. Category:Care of cats
   1. Category:Medical care of cats
   2. Category:Equipments for cats

What do you think ? Then it can be extended according to number of images. Good work on cats, it's necessary ;-) --Salix 12:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I moved some of the images in the base category to more specific categories, like White cats and Black cats. That reduced the number of files to less than 200, so now they all display on the one page. Probably this will just have to be done periodically. Ideally, only cat images that don't have any further categorisation would be in the base category - like . Most cat photographs would not be there.

Your ideas above are good, except I think they are too detailed. (I think mine are too detailed too. :)) We don't have enough cat photos to need that many subcategories. was thinking of just making a gallery "Cat anatomy" or something, for the body parts. There are some nice photos of whiskers and ears and paws and the like. The gallery Felis silvestris catus needs a big cleanup, it is quite ridiculous now. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 01:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, nice stuff with Category:Cat anatomy. They are some great pictures! pfctdayelise (说什么?) 07:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Cats by colour

Hi Salix, regarding "Cats by colour" and "cats by pattern", I looked at this page and they make a distinction between colour and pattern. I agree with you that "solid cats" should be practically the same as "cats by colour". but not totally the same... pointed cats can be in "cats by colour" subcat, but not "solid cats". hm...so you think make "cats by colour" just a subcat of "Solid cats"? I think it would work. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 22:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Yes I think patterns means different colors. You can see that Tortoiseshell, in your link, is in patterns. Don't you? And it's difficult to decide what % is needed to belong to one or other color category when it's mixed (see domestic cats!). No? --Salix 23:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

But then, when you want a picture of a black cat, you have to know to look in "Cats by pattern"... that is not very obvious... --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 23:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

you're right, well, could we extract solid cats? --Salix 23:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

"Extract" "solid cats", what do you mean? We could redirect it to "Cats by colour", but still that won't help people who go to look at CAT:CAT. I think maybe the easiest thing to do is just manually write a note on the category telling people where to look. (BTW I have this on my watchlist, so I will see when you reply) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 04:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Pfctdayelise, I spent time to think of the case. Want won't I do for you? ;-) . Have a look here. You can see that color categories will soon be a problem: too many! Non spécialists will add cats in wrong ones and specialists are not allways able to juge on one picture. I think patterns, hair (long, nude) and breeds are enough, and even in this case, you're right, we should explain how to categorise (or search) and add reliable exemples on category pages if we don't want to find soon a mess! One can describe completely the cat on the picture page if possible. Like that we could eliminate "domestic cats" and have them at least in "cats by patterns" (includig solid colors) or "cats by pattern (multicoloured)" and "cats by pattern (one-coloured)" to help research. Can a Felis silvestris catus be non domestic? --Salix 09:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

For that link you gave -- that page is ridiculous!! I have never seen anyone seriously suggest there are 60 different colours of cats. Of course we don't need so many.

My understanding is that Category:Domestic cat is the breed you can use when it is not really any other purebreed. see e.g. about.com. Breed is separate to the coat colour and pattern, although most breeds would have typical colours and patterns... I think the breed categories are OK and we shouldn't change them.

Please explain some more about what you want to do with colours/patterns, I don't totally understand. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Cats by pattern

Hello, in short in this website she says Felix.s.catus = Domestic cats = mixed breed + breed. Each cat can be at the same time in 3 categories: Hair lenth category (long, medium, short... where do they categorise sphinx cat? ) + breed category + pattern category:

The easiest classification for pattern category, for non specialists, refering to her and others: ([2] (clic on DIVERS > couleurs et robes des chats) or [3] would be something like this :

You're welcome to correct this list.

1. Tabby cats
   1. Classic (=marbled)
   2. Mackerel (=striped)
   3. Spotted
   4. Agouti (=ticked)
2. One tint cats
   1. Solid cats
   2. Maltesing (Color dilution)
   3. Sepia (Apparently self-colored cat bearing gene for Colourpoint)
   4. Mink (Intermediate between sepia and pointed, darker version of main body color)
3. two tints cats
   1. Pointed
   2. bi-coloured (Any color & white)
      1. tuxedo
      2. van
      3. Harlequin
   3. Tortoiseshell (=tortie, base:black&red)
      1. Torbie (tabby-tortie)
      2. Brindled (tortie with intermingled colors)
4. three tints cats
   1. tri-coloured (ordinary with white, black, red)
   2. calico (well separated colors in white)
      1. calico+tabby
      2. calico+tortie
   3. tortie-white
   4. torbico (Torbie (tabby-tortie) & white)

About colors all my books and websites have: red, white, black + when those three are mixed and/or shaded, many others : blue, grey, havana, chocolate, cream, silver, lilac, smoke, chinchilla... I think that every possibility exists among domestic cats! If Commons chooses to replace categories with pages, what will we do? Do you really think we need to add color categories to the three others (hairs, breeds, patterns)?

Only one thing is certain: my next cat will be a plain black one! --Salix 17:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

LOL :)

Although it is possible we could have very complex divisions, I think it is mostly unnecessary. Most people would not say "oh I have a cinnamon-coloured cat" or "I have a pewter cat". It is enough to say brown or blue (grey - I changed "grey cats" to "blue cats" because I found websites that say this, but maybe it is wrong for the average person still). I think the colours we have now are enough: Black cats, Blue cats, Brown cats, Red cats, White cats. (Also Calico cats & Tortoiseshell cats, although to me these are patterns not colours. Hm.) When going through the cat categories, did you find enough pictures of cats of a distinct colour that you want to introduce a new category? If not - then don't worry about it. Other people will 99% of the time use what is already here instead of creating new stuff.

For hair length categories, I guess most cats have meidum or short length hair, so it is not interesting to distinguish these cases. Sphinx cats are perhaps "Hairless cats"?

This page [4] is quite good, especially the diagrams, but I think it is still too complicated for our needs. I would suggest like this:

1. Tabby cats (put them all together)
2. Solid cats (one tint cats)
   1. Black, red, white, blue (grey), brown
3. two tints cats
   1. Pointed
   2. bi-coloured (mostly all tuxedo? is this an officially used name?)
   3. Tortoiseshell (=tortie, base:black&red)
4. three tints cats
   1. tri-coloured (ordinary with white, black, red)
   2. calico (well separated colors in white)

Something like this... the other ones I think are just not necessary because we don't have 10,000 cat pictures. We might have 1,000, and these categories will divide them up well enough. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Pfctdayelise, ok, your list is a good start for me (I have categorised every pattern to anticipate thousands of cats comming in!). Have a look on categories cat colours:

• Torties and calico should be in patterns. Do we make the change?
• Black is ok,
• blue have tabbies not so blue
• brown is a mess with bi-coloured and tabbies quite grey,
• red is the same,
• white have an amarillo (yellow) cat.

Shall we remoove all non solid cats? --Salix 10:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC) (I'll stick all this on category Félix s.c. discussion)

Category:Cats by colour or pattern

Hello, I made this new category and got rid of the two old ones. I also put some instructions on CAT:CAT. What do you think? Is there anything we've missed? I am not sure how to describe a "tortoiseshell" pattern. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words, I think it should be easy to keep under control now. For "Brown cats", I agree a lot of them seem to be tabby cats, which are definitely not brown!! But if people think they have a brown cat, well, good for them. It seems like one of the basic colour combinations (black+red). In fact the only one we don't have is cream (white+red), but I think if they are red enough they can go in "red cats". "European" should be ok. I added a note so people don't think it is like Category:Europe. :) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Chelus fimbriatus

Image deletion warning

Category:Chelus fimbriatus 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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

  — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Ox parade

Thank you for starting a category for this tradition. I suggest moving this from "Category:Ox parade" to "Category:Boeuf Gras". We use the term "Boeuf Gras" here in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast area of the USA, which I think is the only English speaking area that retains the tradition. I've never heard it called "ox parade". Other thoughts or objections? Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Chinchilla

It shall live long!!! But I believe, sometimes it will die? Maybe, then??? ;-)--Kuerschner (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

If at that time I dry the skin to make a doll's coat or stuff him then... I will let you know ;-) --Salix (talk) 14:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear me, that you will do? I am terrified, the (furrier=pelletier=)--Kuerschner (talk) 16:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC) - ;-) -

By the way, this is one of my favorite pictures (not because of the fur!)--Kuerschner (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Would you like to skin her too? It was a joke of course! I love my chin' and chip' and I do hope they will live a lot more years ;-) (and I must clean my windows next time I take a picture!) --Salix (talk) 16:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I WILL NOT SKIN THEM! But we always blow in chinchilla skins, like on your foto, to show, this is the finest hair of all fur skins (of course not your moustache hair).--Kuerschner (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

FP nomination process

Hi, you nominated a picture on FPC. I don't see the voting period dates, so I wonder if you used the "standard" procedure (nomination form on top of the page) ? if not, could you do so next time as it helps those who close the nominations. Thanks ! Benh (talk) 19:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry it's the first time. I used this page: [[5]], isn't it the correct one? --Salix (talk) 20:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

It is the correct one. Strange then that the date didn't appear... I'll have a look at it again it this happens again. -- Benh (talk) 10:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Colorpoint animals

Hi, Colorpoint animals are always albinotic, never leucistic. In Leucism there are no color cells (melanocytes) at the white regions, in albinotic animals, the cells are there but don't do their work correctly. The story with the eye-color is not always correct, there are albinotic animals with blue eyes (partly albinotic of course) and leucistic animals with red eyes due to microphthalmy-locus.

Horses don't have this color, the ones that look like colorpoints are simply greys Gris en Francais and that is not due to an albinism-gene but to a gene which affects the multiplication of the color cells (melanocytes). The hair is white and the skin dark. At the mouth the hair is very short an you can see the dark skin, therefore a grey looks dark there.

--Kersti (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I have realised that and started to remove the non albinotic animals. Thanks for this explanation because it's not always clearely indicated in documents about colorpoint animals and it took time to me to be sure that colorpoint colors can't be leucistic. Howerver, please could you explain to me how do the darker shaded points occured in leucistic horses for exemple (doted, triped and spoted animals , ok, but shades points?). --Salix (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

On the first Photo is an albinotic child. There you can see what skin looks like, if no color is left. The skin is not white but a shade of pink, because of the red blood it can't be white. An animal whith white blood would die long befor birth within the first weeks of pregnancy. On the second photo is a spotted horse with mostly white head. That's leucism of course. The nose has the pink color of skin without melanin because of the short hair there. On the third photo is a grey Arabian, there the nose is black because of the black skin. On the fourth photo is a pony. Because of its northern origin it has long hair at his nose and looks white there. --Kersti (talk) 13:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Category:Colorpoint dogs

File deletion warning

Category:Colorpoint dogs 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

As far as I know, there is no colorpoint gene in dogs, see Sources of german dog color article. --Kersti (talk) 06:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)