Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Carolus

Ik ben nie zo zot als die engelsen.Carolus 13:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Global accountEdit

Hi Carolus! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 19:46, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Hoogeerwaarde Kanunnik Vanhoutten 2009.jpgEdit

Dag Carolus, verwijzend naar uw opmerking eerder op mijn OP, graag uw advies omtrent de naamgeving van deze file uploaded door U. Gezien het aantal personen en om verwarring te vermijden, stel ik voor ofwel de beschrijving te vervolledigen, ofwel de naam van de file te wijzigen en en passant de schrijfwijze te corrigeren.   Lotje (talk) 13:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Wat stel je concreet voor? Carolus (talk) 19:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Weet U toevallig wie de derde "eminentie" is? Zo ja, zou ik zijn naam ook vermelden, dus: File.Koen Vanhoutte (L) met Robert Sarah (M) en (R).jpg Lotje (talk) 08:19, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

De man in kwestie is vicaris, maar zijn naam noch functie zijn in deze context niet relevant. En voor de duidelijkheid zijn dit geen eminenties, maar kanunniken maw Hoogeerwaarde. Ik ga niet al de foto's van kanunniken aanpassen, dat is niet zinvol, en ook niet mijn bedoeling van deze foto's. Carolus (talk) 17:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Dan laten we het best voor wat het is. Toch bedankt voor de uitleg. Lotje (talk) 17:15, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Question about a paintingEdit

(Sorry, I am bad in english) - Hello : you have download this painting File:Portrait_of_King_Louis_XIV_and_his_Brother,_Duc_D'Orleans.jpg, it is now multi-edited on web. Do you remember where you have found this painting in 2006 ? Have you some more information ? I am looking for the painter and the museum or collection and I find nothing by myself. Best Regards; - 77.151.31.155 20:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

This user can talk in France also, as far as I know :-) - --Richardkw (talk) (talk) 21:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
It might have been an auction catalogue; don't remember, but probably is in a private collection. regards.Carolus (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Russian laceEdit

Hi, I am Russian, I've seen Russian lace. This pictures should be in category "lace", 'cos their description in the museum exhibition contains Russian word "кружево" (lace). I belive the museum workers who created the description, printed it on the paper and added it under the glass near the object, knows better than you if there is lace in this object or not. Or you know better? --Shakko (talk) 14:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

MödlingEdit

Hallo Carolus, ich nehme an dass du deutsch verstehst, dann lese aber bitte auch die Beschreibung, bevor du Kategorien änderst. Niederösterreihc ist nunmal nicht in Germany ;-) --gruß K@rl (talk) 08:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:SANGUIS BRUGENSIS14 08.JPGEdit

Dag Carolus, weet u toevallig de naam van deze kanunnik? Lotje (talk) 14:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Done.Carolus (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Coton_velvetEdit

Themightyquill (talk) 06:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Permission to use the images of Mechlin and Valenciennes laceEdit

Hi Carolus I am trying to contact a photographer who has taken the photo's of Mechlin and Valenciennes lace which was uploaded to Wikipedia.

I would like to use the image in an educational textile text book and am requesting permission to do so - although the licence has said the image can be used my publisher is insisting that I have specific written permission from the owner. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Regards Bev Ashford

That is very kind. Can u tell which images you would like to use, so i can give more information. KR. Carolus (talk) 20:17, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

these are two links to the images I would like to include https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Antique_Lawn_007.JPG and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carolus_-Private_Collection_-_Valenciennes.jpg

On the text page the images are accredited with your name and the link to the page on Wikipedia. Further accreditation is in the accreditation section listed under the wiki licence.

Many thanks for your time, it is much appreciated. Bev's Book (talk) 14:11, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Bev's Book

Permission to Use ImagesEdit

Hi Carolus

I requested some time ago your permission to use two of your photo's of lace, (valencienne and mechlin) but I am unsure whether you saw my further information.

Below are the links to the two images

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Antique_Lawn_007.JPG and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carolus_-Private_Collection_-_Valenciennes.jpg

I would be grateful if you could get back to me regarding the use of the photo's for my textile text book

Many thanks Bev's Book (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)Bev's book

I don't realy understand, written permission isn't required for wikipedia. you can use the images anyway, if you put my name somewhere. right?Carolus (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate that the licences give permission but my publisher is requesting thst I have written permission from individual author's of uploaded images. if you could just clearly give me your permission to use all lace images that you own as above so I canmove forward with getting my book self-published I would truly appreciate it. huge thanks in anticipation Bev's Book (talk) 21:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Bev's Book

Order of the GarterEdit

  Order of the Garter 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 gallery, 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.
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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Lobsterthermidor (talk) 12:44, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Pulpit of St-John in the BéguinageEdit

Hallo Carolus, kan jij het verband leggen tussen the pulpit came from a Dominican church in Mechelen and is attributed to Joseph Lambert Parant based on a design of Egide-Joseph Smeyers of Mechelen, Andries Jozef Smeyers, G.J. Smeyers en Gillis Smeyers ? Lotje (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Ik begrijp je vraag niet zo goed, wat voor een verband zoek je? --Carolus (talk) 13:18, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Of er meerdere "smeyers" waren en of ze verwant waren: Egide-Joseph Smeyers van Mechelen, Andries Jozef Smeyers, G.J. Smeyers, Gillis Smeyers. Lotje (talk) 17:57, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Queen Maria Hendrika.jpgEdit

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Queen Maria Hendrika.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Queen Maria Hendrika.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 16:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Albert I and Leopold III.jpgEdit

  File:Albert I and Leopold III.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 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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Jcb (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

File:King Albert I of belgium.jpgEdit

  File:King Albert I of belgium.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 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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Jcb (talk) 21:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

File:King Albert I, and Queen Elisabeth of Belgium -Pontificale Audiëntie.jpgEdit

  File:King Albert I, and Queen Elisabeth of Belgium -Pontificale Audiëntie.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 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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Jcb (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

File:CRUYBEECK 12.JPGEdit

Hallo Carolus, vanwaar die filenaam? Kan je die aanpassen?   Lotje 09:10, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Misschien kan er een People of Kruibeke worden aangemaakt? Lotje 09:14, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Dat portret hangt in Kruibeke, simpel. Ik kies dit doelbewust.--Carolus (talk) 18
26, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

File renamingEdit

@Carolus: kan je deze file hernoemen? Spelling: Godfried Danneels. Lotje 11:49, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

@Carolus: en deze ook   Lotje 11:54, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

File:PiusVI-GustavIII.JPGEdit

Hi Carolus, I see that you are reverting my changes. There are no chivalric robes in that picture, nor of the seraphim nor any other. Why do you revert my changes. .--Mkallgren 14:30, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Altaar I.jpgEdit

Hallo Carolus, waar heb je die foto genomen? Ik zou hem graag hernoemen.   Lotje (talk) 14:21, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Authorization RequestEdit

Sir or Madame, I would ask: could you authorize me to publish for the 23th June your picture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Heart#/media/File:S_CORDIS_IESU_SEVEREN-ENTE.jpg) on my International Catholic Page (https://www.facebook.com/antiateismoantiatheism/) ? Thank you very much Yours Sincerely

N.B. Could you reply me to email address achille93@live.it if you authorize me ? —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.104.183.157 (talk) 09:38, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

No problem, please clearly mention my name and wiki. thank you.--Carolus (talk) 11:10, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Regina papa bianco.jpgEdit

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Regina papa bianco.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

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 OTRS 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 speedy 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.

Guanaco (talk) 14:06, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

SJACOBVS SACR17 .JPGEdit

Hallo Carolus, kan je de beschrijving bij de afbeelding verduidelijken en eventueel de naam van de file aanpassen (#2}}? Het komt nogal vaag over. Ik was op zoek naar een plaatje van Jan Van Cauwelaert en had gehoopt het hier te vinden.   Lotje (talk) 14:40, 9 August 2017 (UTC) Dat is toch duidelijk Sanctvs Jacobus Sacrament 2017?? Wat van Cauwelaet hier te zoeken heeft, weet ik niet.

Cauwelaert vierde zijn honderdste verjaardag met een dankviering in de Sint-Laurentiuskerk in Antwerpen, voorgegaan door Antwerps bisschop Johan Bonny. Vandaar mijn vraag. Lotje (talk) 10:28, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Sash of the Order of Leopold (Belgium)Edit

 
an ordianry sash is not made of moire and had nothing to do with this type of folklore.
Oxford Learner's Dictionnary and Wikipedia disagrees with you self-made narrow definition of "sash". BrightRaven (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I think the naming of this category is perfectly correct. In English WP article, I read: "Grand Cordon ('Grand Cordon/Grootlint'), who wears the badge on a collar (chain) or on a sash on the right shoulder, plus the star on the left side of the chest". This category is intended for images showing the sash, not for people who have the rank of Grand Cordon (who can wear the sash or not on the images). "Sash" is unambiguous: it can only mean the object. Best regards, BrightRaven (talk) 12:14, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

It is simply wrong, the sash including the Little star at its end is name "Cordon", simpel.This If you want this be correct, this should be Sash of the Grand Cordon of the Order of Leopold. Anyway, at the moment the grand Cordon of the Count of Flanders is on display, if you gonna "invent" this ridiculous categories, you can forget i will add more images of the Order of Leopold. --Carolus (talk) 12:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Any source for your statement? "Sash" is a common word in English language for this kind of object and it is in use in the corresponding English Wikipedia article. In English "Grand Cordon" means the person, not the object. The other ranks of the order do not have the right to wear a sash, so it is useless to have such a long name as "Sash of the Grand Cordon of the Order of Leopold". Please note that you cannot rename a category this way: if you want to propose a renaming, you need to use the {{Move}} template. So please stop your wrong renaming actions. BrightRaven (talk) 12:33, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
If you do not stop creating ridiculous and false categories for Belgian Articles, i will send you a formal warning.--Carolus (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
I mentioned this case here: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. BrightRaven (talk) 12:51, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Please see the only official source for this photograph of Albert I: [1]. Elizabeth J. O'Connor is said to be the photographer, and the photograph is from 1915. Please also read the Help pages of Commons, because it seems that you do not know how to make deletion request correctly (Commons:Deletion requests/Category:His Majesty, the King of Belgium (Elizabeth J. O'Connor)). BrightRaven (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

A category named Category:Albert I of Belgium in 1909 cannot be for one particular picture: it is for all the pictures of Albert I taken in 1909. The description that you added is inappropriate. A category for a particular picture can be named as I did it: title of the photograph + name of the photographer. BrightRaven (talk) 13:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Can you please stop erasing this discussion? Commons is a collaboraive project. Can you try to be collaborative? BrightRaven (talk) 13:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Cool down pleaseEdit

Hoi Carolus,

Het lijkt erop dat de discussie wat oververhit. Misschien goed om een stapje terug te doen. Er lijkt verwarring te komen uit de manier waarop zaken vertaald worden. Is het een idee om een andere Vlaamse kenner van dit onderwerp te betrekken bij de discussie, in plaats van het alleen een heen-en-weer te laten zijn? Overigens zal hetzelfde spelen bij de Nederlandse onderwerpen met een grootlint. Effeietsanders (talk) 13:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Ja, het punt is dat die dame gewoon weg een verkeerde bron gebruikt om een foute categorie te creeen? Dat kan toch niet zomaar?--Carolus (talk) 13:57, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Work on Swedish royal gravesEdit

 
This is a family grave= 1 stone with multiple people. If there are two stones it is called a double grave, not the same as a family grave.

I see you've been done a lot of work on Swedish royal grave categories, most of it good. Unfoirtunately, we lost some of the family ties now, when categories like "Gustav II Adolf Family Grave" were deleted as empty. Why didn't you leave those graves categorozed as such? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:10, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Because i did not make sense; it is nhot a family grave, it were different tombs, not one grave.--Carolus (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
It absolutely is a family grave with different caskets, all in the same family. Please be more knowledgeable before you make changes like that. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I think you do not know the difference between a family cave/chapel and a family grave. A family grave is 1 big hole in the earth with different people burried on excactly the same spot, a chapel with different caskets is not a family grave. i know very well the differance between 1 family grave and a chapel with different family- caskets.--Carolus (talk) 21:54, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I have taught English, which is my first language, for over 50 years.
You definitions are you own, but not real. A family grave is simply any gravesite where members of the same family are interred. You have gone against the very family grave names, such as Karolinska gravkoret (the Caroline Chapel - family grave for the wife, son, daughter-in-law and grandchildren of King Carl X Gustav) in the damaging changes you've made. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:47, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
You do not read my point A Family Chapel or vault, is NOT the same as a family grave. The tombs you speak of are caskets inside a family Chapel, NOT inside a family grave. The Karolinska gravkoret taht you name is a Family Chapel, not a family grave.--Carolus (talk) 07:57, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
In English, they are the same thing, i.e. a family chapel is a family grave. though a family grave may not be in a family chapel. And, as to my second point, Queen Richardice was never buried in Germany. Are you going to fix the damage you did there? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:36, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

That can be changed, of course. It has no use to take English traditions for graves elswere.--Carolus (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Carolus".