Z3lvs

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Z3lvs!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 02:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Davis Highlands Tundra

Category:Davis Highlands Tundra is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD C2 (unuseful empty category) If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Prototyperspective (talk) 20:59, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes I agree that this category should be deleted. I have a few more that I was working on that I intended to do the same for, but up to this point, I had not gotten around to doing so. Z3lvs (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

How to ask for speedy-delete of an empty category

When you want to ask for speedy-delete of an empty category, best practice is to mark it with {{SD|C2}} if it would be OK to re-create it in the future, given that appropriate content becomes available or {{SD|C1}} if it is an inappropriate category name that should not be reused. In particular, this is better practice than just blanking the category page, as you did at Category:Middle Arctic tundra. ("C1" and "C2" come from Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion). Jmabel ! talk 00:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

My apologies, thank you for letting me know the appropriate practice. Z3lvs (talk) 00:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Category:One Earth and its subcategories

1. What is the source of this category system? From the text on the top-level category I assume it's a recently proposed framework for categorizing bioregions but a specific source (e.g. as a link to a document) would be helpful.
2. Is this a notable categorization? Does anyone outside of the One Earth organization use it?
3. How do you intend to harmonize this category system with other existing ecoregion categories, particularly Category:WWF ecoregions?

Omphalographer (talk) 17:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

1) The source of this category system is One Earth. One Earth is the successor system to WWF ecoregions; when an individual visits any ecoregion page on the WWF website, they are informed that the pages are no longer being updated and they are recommended to visit One Earth. This One Earth Bioregion framework dates back to 2020, but was most recently updated in Bioregions 2023. The update was minor; it was a few changes in boundaries of ecoregions and the removal of 2 ecoregions.

2) I cannot provide you with a list of organizations who use One Earth's categorization. However, I was informed that there are groups who use WWF's framework. This was a factor in my decision for point 3.

3) Since One Earth ecoregions are a successor system to WWF ecoregions, there are notable differences between the two systems. Certain ecoregions that existed in WWF do not exist in One Earth. Likewise some of One Earth's ecoregions were not in WWF's ecoregion system. In addition, boundaries of ecoregions in One Earth and in WWF have a tendency to be different. It was for this reason that I refrained from simply updating WWF's pages; there are still individuals who rely on the old maps. Since WWF ecoregion pages were considered of value in their current state to their users, it seemed appropriate to keep the entities separate. One Earth is a similar but separate system in that it is a more recent iteration of the ecoregion system of categorization with its own distinct boundaries and naming conventions. Additionally, work is being put in each day to make the two systems more distinct for the sake of alleviating any confusion. One reason that groups have continued using WWF's framework is the lack of an acceptable update to the system. This page aims to be that update to an old system that is no longer being updated by the parent organization (WWF). Part of the update will consist of adding new maps to Wikimedia of the updated boundaries; such a project takes time. This page is less than 2 weeks old; it will take time to add these features.

4) I am aware that you have a history of recommending pages for deletion. I would strongly recommend that you not consider the same for this page. The One Earth ecoregion system is legitimate and backed by research of wildlife ecologists; it is absolutely distinct from WWF. It provides content and context for their respective pages on Wikipedia; several ecoregion pages on Wikipedia redirect to ecoregion media pages on Wikimedia for a way to view additional content. Media is important for the research of these regions (Bioregion, Ecoregion, etc). It provides a visual aspect of geology, flora, and fauna found in these ecoregions. There are many cases of these pages being supported by observations in these localities on iNaturalist. It is distinct from the WWF ecoregion system; it is a new iteration of the same concept by a different organization and I believe that is a legitimate reason to justify its own pages. These pages are not complete; they are less than 2 weeks old. They still require work to be made acceptable and appropriate for the standards of Wikimedia Commons; much work is being put daily into this project in order to make it of a high standard. These pages are in an early iteration and as such, mistakes should be expected. If there are any issues with these pages, I would be happy to hear recommendations for improvement. I expect these pages to be used by the community; I also expect the community to help bring these pages to a high standard. Z3lvs (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

The source of this category system is One Earth - What I was looking for was an online resource describing the system, but I think I found it myself at https://www.oneearth.org/bioregions/. Is this correct? Linking these categories back to their respective One Earth pages might be helpful. If there's a published version of those pages somewhere (akin to https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/terrestrial-ecoregions-of-the-world), that'd be even better.

I'm not necessarily moving for deletion here; I happened to notice the top-level category on Special:UncategorizedCategories and was concerned about the number of empty subcategories. If this is something you're actively working on that's fine; I just wanted to make there's ultimately a plan to use these categories to categorize media.

As an aside, something you might want to look into, if you haven't already, is bringing these categories into Wikidata. They might have some better advice about how to harmonize the two systems, possibly in ways that will allow some reuse of existing categories.

Omphalographer (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes I apologize, I did forget to add a link. That link is correct. I would like to eventually link each category to their respective page, I haven't decided the best way to do so yet. There are indeed much better write ups of information on the home page One Earth. I did plan on creating Wikidata entries for each page. One good example is on the Sierra Nevada Forests Ecoregion page, but it will take time to get each page to where I was overall hoping. There are Wikidata entries for some (not all) of the WWF ecoregions. I decided that it would be better to create new Wikidata entries under the "instance of" "One Earth Ecoregion." This is a page that already exists on Wikidata.

I just recently finished up creating all the categories which is why most are empty. But I can assure you that I am actively working on adding content. I find myself in a position of deciding how much time to allocate into an individual category. I can put a lot of time into one category to make it of high quality, or I can work on a lot all at once and sacrifice the attention to detail. My hope is that eventually the attention to detail could be taken over by members of the community. My mission is to bring this page into existence and get the engine moving so that others can keep it in motion; I hope that makes sense. I would also like to apologize if I came across as overtly defensive; though I am not affiliated with the organization, I have a passion for this project.

On another note, I decided to rename the ecoregion pages to include the term "(One Earth)." For example "Sierra Nevada Forests Ecoregion (One Earth)." I believe that this has the benefit of taking a broad term like "ecoregion" and demonstrating that it is a specific organization's use of the term. Z3lvs (talk) 21:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Omphalographer. Please stop moving files to such categories. If such "One Earth"-categories are at all in scope, not single files should be moved there, but whole categories (for national parks belonging to the system). For example, if you create Category:Sri Lanka Lowland Rainforests Ecoregion (One Earth) and move some files of the Sinharaja Forest there, why only some selected files and not the whole Category:Sinharaja Forest Reserve? This is fully unacceptable. This is not the way how our categories on Commons should work. --A.Savin 12:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I believe that you are referring to Holly's comment rather than Omphalographer. Yes, I understand what you are referring to. For protected areas, I will amend my practice; I will place the appropriate category within its designated spot. However, there are many cases of categories that do not fit within the scope of the project. The category "Nature of Uzbekistan" will not fit into any of the ecoregion categories, because it contains content from 4 different ecoregions. In such a case, is it acceptable to allocate individual photos from that category to their respective ecoregion page? Z3lvs (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes I'm only talking about natural objects or areas that have its own category. --A.Savin 03:19, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. I appreciate the comments; I will ensure that each page follows the right standards. Z3lvs (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Overcategorization

Hi there. When an image already belongs to category A, you don't need to put the image itself into category A as well. For example, File:Rock Creek Ridge and Tunp Range rise above the Bear River Valley (20664241530).jpg belongs to Category:Cokeville Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, which in turns belongs to Category:Wyoming Basin Shrub Steppe Ecoregion (One Earth), so you don't need to add the photo there as well. Thanks. —holly {chat} 17:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I understand what you mean. I can work to remove any redundant photos that are already in the page's subcategories. Eventually, I would like to add photos of Wyoming Basin Shrub Steppe that are not categorized in one of its subcategories. I will get to that step soon. Thank you for the advice, I will follow it for the future. Z3lvs (talk) 19:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Let's be careful here. Is it true that every photograph in Category:Cokeville Meadows National Wildlife Refuge should belong to Category:Wyoming Basin Shrub Steppe Ecoregion (One Earth)? Is the entire wildlife refuge in that ecoregion? If a park or protected area spans multiple ecoregions, then its corresponding category should not be a subcategory of that ecoregion. Instead, individual photographs should be categorized, not the entire protected area. — hike395 (talk) 01:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

hike395, That is a good point. In the case of Cokeville Meadows, the refuge is a riparian area within the Wyoming Basin Shrub Steppe Ecoregion. Ultimately, each ecoregion could probably be subdivided into even smaller regions; I am aware that the process of dividing up regions is inevitably a bit arbitrary. For example, today I was uploading photos of Chino Hills State Park, grassland region that is within the California Coastal Sage and Chaparral Ecoregion; not an ecosystem that one would expect to exist in that ecoregion, because of the connotations of the term "Sage and Chaparral". And I think that is certainly a valid drawback to this system.

But I would hope that with enough photos, one would be able to comprehend the ecoregion as a whole. To again use the example of California Coastal Sage and Chaparral Ecoregion: the riparian areas, the grasslands, the oak savannas, the foothill regions, and the sage scrub. Perhaps with enough photos of these various parts, a cohesive picture could be created of that ecoregion and others like it.

Going back to your original point, I have another example. Lorentz National Park in Indonesia extends from a mangrove coast ecoregion, to a freshwater swamp forest ecoregion, to a lowland rainforest ecoregion, to a montane rainforest ecoregion, and finally to a montane grassland ecoregion. This is by far the most extreme example that I have come across. A lot of protected areas are a part of just one ecoregion, but there are a few problematic cases like the one that I stated. I have to agree with you about picking out the right photos, rather than making it a subcategory of five different ecoregions.

I did/do want to address this issue in the future. I was planning at some point to add notes to ecoregion pages to address this; essentially describing protected areas that lie entirely within the area and others that are only a partial member. Not a Wikipedia article length description, but enough to serve as a brief guide.

Finally, I would ideally love for anyone to make changes where it is necessary. For example, I am not an expert in Australian ecoregions, but someone who knows better is very much welcome to modify anything that I have added to those pages.

Thank you for your comment. Z3lvs (talk) 02:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Forests?

I don't understand why you added Category:Tipperne and Category:Skjern Enge etc to Category:European Atlantic Mixed Forests Ecoregion (One Earth). Those areas are marsh and quite far from being any kind of forest. Hjart (talk) 07:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, the name of the ecoregion can sometimes be a little misleading; I will explain further below. Additionally, I have not yet added a map of the area covered by "European Atlantic Mixed Forests Ecoregion," which I apologize for. I realize that that can contribute to confusion. A map will come in the future. For now, a map of the ecoregion can be found on Bioregions 2023 on the One Earth organization website.

Now I'll go back to the explanation for adding those categories. Whereas the ecoregion name refers to the dominant aspect of the region, in this case "forests," there are occasionally other biomes within the ecoregion. This has happened in some other places that I have worked on. In this case, the marshes that I added are within the boundaries determined by the creators of this designated area (One Earth).

The European Atlantic Mixed Forests Ecoregion includes the forests, heathlands, and even the sand dunes along the English Channel and North Sea. Here is a quote from One Earth to explain: "Ecoregions are used to describe areas where ecosystems are generally similar, providing a spatial framework for the research, assessment, and monitoring of ecosystem functionality." In this case, it is important to consider the marshes and the forests as they relate to the ecosystem as a whole. That is why I included the marshes.

There are 844 ecoregions across the globe. Each one could possible be subdivided further. We could in theory subdivide this Ecoregion into two ecoregions to account for the marsh and forests as separate entities. If this was done for every ecoregion, there might be at least twice as many ecoregions. This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but here the creators (One Earth) determined that it would be done this way. My goal is to stay as true as I can to their methodology.

I hope that you may find this explanation satisfactory. But I will also wholly admit that this ecoregion in particular requires a lot more work to be finished. I hope to do that in the near future. Z3lvs (talk) 17:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

If you don't mind one more comment, I have here an example of a more complete page that I worked on: California Coastal Sage and Chaparral Ecoregion. On this page, there are examples of "Coastal Sage and Chaparral." There are also wetlands and grasslands; overall there is a bit of variation in the ecosystems contained in this area from a visual standpoint. So while it does deviate a bit from its stated name, I hope that there is still value in what it purports to present. I hope to do the same with "European Atlantic Mixed Forests."

If the topic interests you further, more pages can be found at Bioregions 2023. Thank you for reading. -Z3lvs Z3lvs (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Locations

Hi Z3lvs - when uploading files from iNaturalist (like File:Common Goldeneye imported from iNaturalist photo 2029307 on 31 December 2023.jpg), please remember that the location data accompanying the source file is an essential part of the file, and must be included in the file. I have added it for this file, please do so for any others you have uploaded. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 01:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense, thank you for letting me know. I can do this for the other ones that I have uploaded, and I also will moving forward. Z3lvs (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks! - MPF (talk) 12:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)