Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Arnaud Palastowicz

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Arnaud Palastowicz!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


File:KRAKÓW, AB. 158.JPGEdit

Może warto zmienić nazwy tych plików? Możesz wnioskować o zmianę nazwy poprzez wstawienie szablonu {{rename|nowa nazwa|numer kryterium|słowne wytłumaczenie w kilku słowach}}
Numer kryterium można znaleźć na stronie Commons:Zmiana nazw plików. Pozdrawiam, miłego dnia Wieralee (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea for the new file name. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Falu redEdit

Hi! I like your enthusiasm about red buildings! However, falu red is not a colour but a certain type of paint, containing iron ochre, silica and zinc. Vivo (talk) 12:42, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Surreal Barnstar
Vielen Dank das Du meine Unwissenheit bei den von mir gemachten Bilder mit Deinem Wissen verknüpfst und somit meine Bilder sehr aufwertest. Herzlichst Ra Boe watt?? 12:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Ich freue mich über die Anerkennung meiner Arbeit. Gruß Arnaud

Moin Arnaud, sehr sehr gerne. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 22:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Gardenology photosEdit

Hi Arnaud, thanks for the fantastic work you've been doing categorizing the photosǃ I know there are a number of photos that need to be deleted, you don't need to notify me each time. Please save your time for your great categorizing work. Thanksǃ --RaffiKojian (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Notify is automatic. Wasn't me.   --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 17:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!Edit


Hi Arnaud Palastowicz, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{speedy}}. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Deutsch | English | 한국어 | മലയാളം | Русский | Українська | 中文(臺灣) | +/− lNeverCry 04:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Rotklee und Großes ImmergrünEdit

Hallo, Du hast hier die Kategorie "Vinca major" entfernt. Warum? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 01:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Weil ich neben dem Klee nur ein Storchschnabelgewächs erkenne. Selbst wenn die durchschimmernden blauen Blüten am rechten Rand Vinca major sein sollten, halte ich es für immens übertrieben, die Vinca Kat zu setzen. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 10:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Categorising Panoramio uploadsEdit

When putting Panoramio uploads into correct categories, please also put them in (at least) the correct location (country, province, region) category per its location coordinates. So please do not place a file into the general Category:Streams but into, for instance, Category:Streams in Russia. Otherwise, we'd need to make a new Category:Uncategorized images of streams for all these uncategorised images of streams. Thank you. - Takeaway (talk) 17:21, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Bad filenamesEdit

Hello. I noticed that you have added a few files to Category:Images of plants with bad file names. I don't understand what is bad with File:Roscoea tibetica 001 GotBot 2016.jpg or File:Rittersporne (Delphinium) am Weg im Naturschutzgebiet Brand IMG 2712.jpg. Could you please clarify what's the problem? Regards Averater (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

This is no Roscoea tibetica. Roscoea tibetica looks like this.
This is Lupinus. No Delphinium and no Rittersporne on this pic.

Greetings! --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 20:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Aren't there other categories for misidentified plants? The category for bad filenames seems to be filled with autogenerated filenames. For the lupus one a request for rename would probably suffice. For the other I don't know what to do until I (or someone else) have identified the plant. That is why I have categorized it as unidentified and left it without any species category. If you feel that it need to be clarified by the filename until it is identified please request a rename. Though it is stated that it is unidentified in both the categorization and the description. --Averater (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Here is a category for misidentified plants. The Lupinus is already identified. I will likely change the file name. Files with a wrong species in the filename should absolutely be in the Category:Images of plants with bad file names, so the renaming is later not forgotten. They can of course also in the Category:Misidentified plants. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
The Roscoea is already in the misidentified category (a subcategory) and is not forgotten. I don't understand why a bad category choice would do anything other than make someone remove the improper category. If I would clean up in the bad file name category I would simply remove the ones above from the category with no further action. In the category for misidentified plants I would check the species on the other hand. --Averater (talk) 19:32, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
  1. The Roscoea is not in the Category:Misidentified plants. The Category:Unidentified Plants in Botaniska trädgården i Göteborg is not a subcat of Misidentified plants. But Roscoea should be in the Category:Misidentified plants.
  2. I see no bad category choice. I see only bad file names (Rittersporne and Roscoea).
--Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 22:20, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Ah. But that seems to be a unused and rather useless category. The category for _Un_identified plants seems like a better choice (and was the one I meant). Especially as this is unidentified and not misidentified. Bad file names do imply that there is something wrong, as in the other names (example: "553H0191 06.JPG"). These stand out and really seem (and are) out of place. --Averater (talk) 17:07, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  1. The Category:Misidentified plants is not unused and not useless. The category exists, so I use it. (I admit there is little activity.)
  2. Roscoea is misidentified which shows the filename (and until yesterday the description).
  3. The filename "553H0191 06.JPG" is bad because it's meaningless. The file name should describes what the image displays.
--Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
So fix it with {{rename}}.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:29, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Limnophila pictipennisEdit

hello. Why this edit?--Pierpao.lo (listening) 16:16, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Limnophila is a genus of plants, no insect. Limnophila pictipennis must be put in cat of insects. I don't know the upper cat to Limnophila pictipennis. Anybody must add the right upper cat. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 16:22, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Done thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 18:10, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


I'm not sure I understand this. Are you planning to add Category:Facades in the United States to every building exterior in the country? It seems to me that the category has mainly been useful to characterize a facade without a building, or a facade where the original building behind it was replaced by another building. If it's applied to every building exterior, it seems to me it becomes useless. - Jmabel ! talk 15:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I put remarkable facades in this category, with ornaments or facades where the architectural style is recognizable. Not every building. Some architects look for beautiful facades as inspiration and so can look into this category. It's definitely not useless. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 16:27, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

"Architectural sculptures"Edit

[1]: is "Architectural sculptures" really useful here? Category:Reliefs in Washington (state) is certainly useful here, but Category:Building ornaments and Category:Architectural sculptures in the United States seem largely redundant to that. The vast majority of reliefs are on buildings; if you really feel a distinction needs to be made here (I wouldn't), why not "architectural reliefs" subcats? "Sculpture" may be technically accurate for a terra cotta bas relief, but I can't imagine anyone searching for it along those lines. - Jmabel ! talk 15:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, "Architectural sculptures" is redundant. Seems to be all reliefs relate to architectural objects (also reliefs on trash bins, lamp posts, monuments, chests, and cabinets). The Category:Building ornaments is not redundant. Not all reliefs are building ornaments. Trash bin or lamppost don't be a building.
I will not create a new category "Architectural reliefs". This category would be useless. Seems to be all reliefs relate to architectural objects. So the existence of the Category:Reliefs is sufficient. - Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 21:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Today I found a relief which is no relate to architectural object: File:Centro de Memória do Corpo de Bombeiros 01.jpg --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 22:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Unidentified plants (low quality)Edit

Hello, Please stop re-creating. See the relevant consensus at the CFD. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

This cat ist not empty. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Cuckoo's NestEdit

What is the connection between File:Depoe Bay, OR - harbor 01 (19935927535).jpg and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest? - Jmabel ! talk 20:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

It's a film location. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 20:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Is the whole harbor at Depoe Bay the film location, or is it something more specific (or less specific, like the town of Depoe Bay, in general)? Or is there some sense in which it applies to those two photos, but not (for example) to File:Depoe Bay harbor P1898.jpeg? Because assuming it is the whole harbor, we should make a category for the harbor and make that Category:One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (film) a parent cat of that, not pick some arbitrary photos to attach it to. - Jmabel ! talk 01:24, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
The whole harbour (and the exit to the sea) is the film location, not the town. We could create a sub cat to the harbor, but I like to put photos in the film categories, the same as the camera settings. Example1: File:Depoe Bay (28059952581).jpg. Example2: File:Depoe Bay, OR - harbor 02 (19747863130).jpg. Also useful: This aerial photograph gives a nice overview of the harbor, the bridge and the exit. Annotation: When everything should be exact, we would also need to create a sub cat "Film locations of ...". --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 12:43, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
A subcat "Film locations of ..." would be helpful. Otherwise, putting the category on the photos is liable to look, um, insane. - Jmabel ! talk 15:05, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:Shingle siding in WuppertalEdit

Due hattest die Kategorie Category:Shingle siding in Wuppertal angelegt, ich komme nicht ganz damit zurecht. So wie ich sie verstehe, beinhaltet diese Dachschindeln und Holzverkleidungen. Aber keine Schiefer-Fasaden ...

Ist Category:Slate facades in Wuppertal nicht besser geeignet? Category:Slate ornaments in Wuppertal existiert schon seit 2009. --Atamari (talk) 12:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Einige Tage nach dem Anlegen der Category:Shingle siding in Wuppertal hatte ich die Category:Slate facades in Wuppertal (die natürlich viel besser passt) entdeckt und das Anlegen der Category:Shingle siding in Wuppertal bereut. Ich nahm an, Schindeln können auch aus Schiefer bestehen. Wenn Du möchtest, kannst du die entsprechenden Dateien aus der Category:Shingle siding in Wuppertal nach Category:Slate facades in Wuppertal verschieben. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 12:55, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Ok, du geht also damit konform - wenn wir mittelfristig alles unter Category:Slate facades in Wuppertal abhandeln und Category:Shingle siding in Wuppertal erst mal leeren. Ganz selten mag es Holzschindeln in dieser Gegend (Bergisches Land) geben.
Also du damals durch die Wuppertaler Bilder gestreift bist, hat mir das gut gefallen. Es es schön wenn dies und das noch kategorisiert ist.
Was ich in der Vergangenheit auch schon mal gesucht hatte, die besondere Art von Kränen an älteren Häusern - wie hier im Bild.

--Atamari (talk) 13:19, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Gerade diesen Ast Category:Slate walls in Germany entdeckt. Slate walls ... Das sind eher Schiefermauern, aber keine Fasaden oder Wände. --Atamari (talk) 13:27, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Da sind viele Schiefer-Fassaden drin. Müsste man wahrscheinlich mit "slate facade" vereinigen. Aber die Idee muss reifen, will gut überlegt sein. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 13:32, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Zum Kran: Ich habe einiges an Architektur-Elementen (bzgl commons cats) gesammelt in den letzen Jahren, aber dieser "Kranausleger" ist nicht dabei. Sieht man in Holland oft. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 13:38, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Jetzt versteh ich, was mit Slate walls gemeint ist. Jedenfalls keine Fassaden. Habe den Unterschied per Template klar gemacht und versuche in nächster Zeit die Untercats zu bereinigen. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:15, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Habe eben auch Category:Slate in Germany angelegt. --Atamari (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Erstaunlich, dass die noch nicht existierte. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:Mühlenturm (Schloss Lüntenbeck)Edit

Der Mühlenturm ist interesant. Zwei Fasadenseiten sind klassisch verschiefert, aber zwei Seiten sehen mir nicht so klassisch aus. Sie sehen mir mehr nach Holzschindeln aus. Das muss ich mir mal bei Zeiten vor Ort anschauen. --Atamari (talk) 17:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Ja, das könnte Holz sein, am oberen Rand. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Festoons // Reliefs of garlandsEdit

Für mich zum Verständnis:

Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Category:Festoons in Wuppertal und Category:Reliefs of garlands in Wuppertal? --Atamari (talk) 18:06, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Aus dem de wiki Artikel lernte ich vor 1-2 Jahren, dass Festoons in gemalter Form und als Relief auftreten können. Daher zwei Kategorien. Für gemalte Festoons gibt es vermutlich keine cat. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Es gibt noch ein zweites Unterscheidungsmerkmal. Wie du vielleicht weißt, hängt ein Festoon bogenförmig nach unten. Alle andersgearteten Girlanden gehören in Reliefs of garlands. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 23:22, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Bartholdi FountainEdit

Why this edit? As noted in the comment that you removed along with the category, the fountain stood in the United States Botanic Garden until 1927, when the garden was relocated. (At a quick glance, at least a dozen of the images here date from before that time.) - Jmabel ! talk 20:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I did not see the comment. I used "HotCat". If this category should not be removed, then it makes sense to attach a rhombus (#) behind. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by attaching a character "behind" a category, but I'll undo what you did; can you then go to that category & do whatever it is that you mean? - Jmabel ! talk 22:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Like this. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 23:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Huh. Never seen that. What is the basis (if any) for deciding which categories should get that? - Jmabel ! talk 02:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't know the basis. I found it by accident. While pressing the enter button I accidentally touched the rhombus button. About 2 years ago. I will not insert the rhombus. Was just an idea. It is to be assumed that nobody repeats my mistake. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!Edit

Thank you very much for your help with the determination of plants. Best regards from Lower Austria: --GT1976 (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Du erhältst einen Orden!Edit

  Der Fleißorden
Guten Tag Arnaud!

Herzlichen Dank für die vielen Bestimmungen meiner fotografierten Pflanzen und anderer Objekte und beste Grüße aus Frankenfels!

Hello Arnaud!

Thank you very much for the many identifications of my photographed plants and other objects and best regards from Frankenfels! GT1976 (talk) 05:23, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Ich bedanke mich für die Anerkennung. LG --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 15:42, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


Hello Arnaud,

There is some confusion about whether or not Callistemon is a current name. When I wrote the wiki pages about Melaleuca (and created the Commons page about the genus), the principal references I used were Lindley Craven's monologue[1] and Kew Gardens "World Checklist of Selected Plant Families". WCSP includes all the callistemons as synonyms of Melaleuca, including Callistemon brachyandrus.

The Plant List page gives Melaleuca brachyandra as a synonym of C. brachyandrus but the WCSP page to which it links lists M. brachyandra as the accepted name!

I suggest it would be best to have Commons and Wikipedia agree and to have both agree with WCSP.

(Part of Craven's monologue is here but it is a large file and may be slow to download.)


  1. () Melaleucas : their botany, essential oils and uses, Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, pp. 65–394 ISBN: 9781922137517.

I allow both. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 09:48, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Arnaud Palastowicz".