Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Dankarl

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Dankarl!


Tip: Categorizing imagesEdit

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hello, Dankarl!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Photographs of Frank H. NowellEdit

Shouldn't Category:Photographs of Frank H. Nowell be Category:Photographs by Frank H. Nowell? He is the photographer, not the subject of the photographs. - Jmabel ! talk 06:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Reasonable point. If you think renaming the category and re-categorizing the photos is worthwhile, go ahead. Maybe somebody has a bot for this.Dankarl (talk) 01:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
You can always get uncontroversial category renames done at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. I'll take care of this one. - Jmabel ! talk 03:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

'A rack with drying fish is at left.' - is that sure, maybe because you have an original description? I saw fur skins? Thank you --Kürschner (talk) 06:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrol givenEdit

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. ZooFari 00:09, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Bethel Alaska 432.jpgEdit

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the   Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot

File:The Alaska Railroad bringing a load of tourists into Whittier, Alaska.jpgEdit

I don't deny that the photo is interesting beyond the locomotive, but it's still a depiction of an Alaska Railroad diesel locomotive and needs to be categorized that way. That category is a sub-category of Alaska Railroad. Maybe we need another category along the lines of "Alaska Railroad passenger trains" (I would need to look up the exact naming convention, if any), but I don't think that dropping it into the general Alaska Railroad category makes sense. Mackensen (talk) 13:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Identifying photoEdit

Re: File:Alaska 2009 193.jpg: near as I could tell, it's somewhere in Prince William Sound near Valdez. There was nothing which really stood out inasfar as identifiers.RadioKAOS (talk) 18:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I went back and took a look through the entire photostream after actually waking up. On second thought, maybe not. Alaska 2009 098 shows a boat which appears to bear the logo of Kenai Fjords Tours, which would place the cruise somewhere near Seward. Alaska 2009 107 shows residences close to the water, which wouldn't be the case with Valdez. Just now taking a closer look at that photo, the lower right appears to be the beach camping area in Seward near where the tank farms used to be prior to the earthquake.
Some good stuff in that photostream which I believe hasn't made it's way onto here, BTW. I haven't had enough time to upload all of my own photos lately, so I can't do much for that right now.RadioKAOS (talk) 23:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Responded on my talk pageEdit

Cheers Ingolfson (talk) 09:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


My bad, I apologize....I don't know why, but whenever I jump over here from wikipedia I get all kinds of stupid on things like that. Apologies, brah...if you're ever in town I'll buy ya a beer!--Mike Searson (talk) 04:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Corrections to NARA image descriptionsEdit

Hey, thanks so much for your work on these files. I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner, but I've finally replied on my talk page. Dominic (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Freighting on Yukon Highway near Goldstream-cropped.jpgEdit

I've seen that photo before and was actually wondering about it myself. I'm totally drawing a blank as to what the "Yukon Highway" could be. The only possible thing I can think of is that 1928 was when the first efforts began within Alaska to survey a route for what eventually became the Alaska Highway. A couple of hints - perhaps consult Dictionary of Alaska Place Names to see if there was more than one Goldstream other than the creek north and west of Fairbanks; also, if this was a tour involving the governor, information may be found in the annual report of the governor, most of which appear to be found on Google Books. I've noticed detailed information on the ARC's work in those reports, also.RadioKAOS (talk) 23:36, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

It's starting to make sense to me now. I'll get back to you on details, as I'm supposed to be leaving next week and am therefore too tired to deal with it on account of everything else I need to do combined with hardly enough time. I dunno if you had this same problem, but I could only bring up the thumbnails on the Digital Archives site. Trying to bring up the photos themselves put me in some kind of loop where it was constantly attempting to load the photo over and over again, which was threatening to crash my computer in the process.RadioKAOS (talk) 16:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I'm halfway awake now. I can't recall ever having heard of the "Yukon Highway" in reference to the Steese, but they would have to be one and the same. I'm sure numerous sources are out there which indicate that the road was named for James Steese very early on, but the only one which immediately comes to mind is the ARC map of the road which the Pioneers of Alaska has in their collection. Gilmore is a ghost town located near mile 13 or 14 of the present-day Steese, named for Felix Pedro's partner Tom Gilmore and no doubt founded by him. In all likelihood, that load of pipe in the photo was used in the construction of the Davidson Ditch, which parallels the Steese for most of its length.RadioKAOS (talk) 11:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for your comments on my talk page. I assume that you are referring to File:Cessna floatplane on the Keoklevik River.jpg. The reason for removing it from Floatplanes of the United States is that it is already in category Cessna 206 floatplanes, that is a sub-category of the above. It is a principle of Commons categorization that a file or image should not normally appear in a parent category as well as a sub-category of the parent category. It should be evident if you view Category:Floatplanes of the United States.PeterWD (talk) 20:13, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I recommend that you study the category hierarchy in more depth. In this case, first see Category:Aircraft of the United States, that is defined as aircraft manufactured in the US. Below that comes Seaplanes of the US, then Floatplanes of the US. In parallel, we have Category:Aircraft, Aircraft by type, Seaplanes, Floatplanes, Floatplanes by country. It's true that some people think that "of the United States" means "registered in ...", but that is a misconception. I hope that helps.PeterWD (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Alaska miscellanyEdit

You left me a message on here about that Whittier tunnel. Sorry that I really didn't have time to deal with it. I would suggest using to search the DOTPF website for any info, being careful to structure your search so as not to bring up mentions of the other tunnel. Tony Knowles went as apeshit as he could while governor pushing for bike trails everywhere. I would guess that it's a fairly recent thing, though.

Anyway, take a look at Category:North Pole, Alaska if you would. Someone uploaded 77 photos of something called "North Pole City" which were placed in that category. I'm pretty sure it's not in North Pole, Alaska.RadioKAOS (talk) 04:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

One more thing. I can't see the logic of burying one subset of Alaskan communities one level below another simply because they aren't in an organized borough. I offer this suggestion:

I see that with other states, it appears a little more straightforward, with cities and counties as subcategories of the state category. I dunno, it's a little more convoluted here, I would think.RadioKAOS (talk) 07:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


I must admit I don't have a proper licence but if you would like to do me a favor, please contact Gardyloo to obtain it: (maybe you can get a better version at the same time, mine is copied from the homepage.) Soerfm (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Categories on Juneau picturesEdit

Thanks for your kind words, no problem with you changing category. Typo here Douglass, Alaska should be one 's' Douglas. By all means dump the Category:Rain Country. What is hidden category? (unless you can show notability as a photographer) how dos one do that I've been taking photographs since the early 1970s? Sounds like a good solution. OK the category and move are done. (Thanks) I'll leave it to you to add the rest of your photos. (In time). If you want to add another subcat for another location etc you can just copy the text from Category:Rain Country and modify as needed. (It's not the most intuitive user interface) Also please look through the Alaska category tree (and where would one look for that) and add appropriate categories to your photos. (will do)

"Brooks Range" photoEdit

Definitely "Two Street". It's also reversed, as the geographic orientation shown is incorrect (looking east, the Co-Op would be on the right, and Polaris and Lathrop Buildings on the left).RadioKAOS (talk) 01:22, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Fairbanks/Brooks RangeEdit

Hello Dankerl, I 'helped' the uploader of the photos, my friend Furcharly. Sorry, when I made mistakes because I could not ask him in the same time. If you find some more, feel free to correct it! Thank you very much --Kürschner (talk) 09:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Thule homeEdit

Good day! I apologize that I am responding so many months late but better than never! I just saw your question tonight about the Thule homes in Resolute Bay. I have been trying to add photo's and info on this site but I never seem to have enough time in a day. It is also a little too technical to figure out just how to add things the way I want them. I've been getting most of my stuff on with the help of CamBayWeather who is most patient. I had a few pictures on the Resolute area and wonder what kind of information that I should be adding? Thanks and again sorry for not responding. Tim

Thule homeEdit

Good day! I apologize that I am responding so many months late but better than never! I just saw your question tonight about the Thule homes in Resolute Bay. I have been trying to add photo's and info on this site but I never seem to have enough time in a day. It is also a little too technical to figure out just how to add things the way I want them. I've been getting most of my stuff on with the help of CamBayWeather who is most patient. I had a few pictures on the Resolute area and wonder what kind of information that I should be adding? Thanks and again sorry for not responding. Tim

Thule homeEdit

Hi again, I would like to contribute more if I could figure out how to add things. Being new it is kind of frustrating to add info or pics and generally someone helps me along which is great. To answer your question the photo was taken near the community of Resolute where about half a dozen of these "homes" are scattered. I believe that there had been some partial reconstruction but they are not in a museum, they are actual remnants of homes and they are left to the elements. I have more pictures and I did have some historical information so I guess a separate area could be included in the Resolute page. I do need lots of guidance till I get my legs working in this site. I am slowly starting a new page of a research station on Devon Island that has not been done yet so I think I'll probably get good practice starting that. I do have lots to contribute with all my travels but always short on time unfortunately. I can probably give the thule home part a shot but I need to know how to start a new section. Could I get some advice? thanks tim

Piper CubsEdit

Hi, thanks for your enquiry. The subject aircraft is a PA-18. The outward physical differences are mainly that the J3C has a tightly cowled engine with protruding cylinder heads, while the PA-18 has an all-enveloping engine cowling with front air intakes; the J3C has a rudder with straight rear edge and the PA-18 has a curved rear edge; the J3C has no wing flaps, while most PA-18s (except PA-18-95) have them as standard. There are many modifications that break these standard rules, particularly in modern Alaska. See also Piper PA-18, and the intermediate PA-11.PeterWD (talk) 12:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


I don't know about The Wolfman. He appears to me to be a Tlingit person playing up his heritage, walking around somewhere downtown where tourists can see him. There should be some folks around who are Tlingit and/or from Southeast who may know about this guy. As for the bridge, the previous photo in the series was of Talkeetna. I would have to guess this one was also taken there, perhaps the bridge crossing the Talkeetna River headed towards Chase and other more remote railside settlements?RadioKAOS (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


I just recieved an email that there were blood related hiers to the estates of Mr. and Mrs. Hopper. Most are dead at this point though. They would need to be the ones that would have had to renew any copyrights between 1969 and 1971, which the sender seriously doubts happened. The same email sender has a copy of the will and claims that no copyrights were mentioned in the estate bequeathal to the Whitney Museum which only recieved remaining works in Mrs. Hopper's possession. I did request a scan of the will and I do hope we will be provided with a copy to verify.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Midnight sun/night in Alaska categoriesEdit

Hi Dankarl. I don't recall if we've ever directly interacted before, but I have certainly seen you around Alaska-related images doing lots of good work to categorize them. However, I'm afraid I have some concerns about some of your recent category edits as they seem to add incorrect or improperly verified cats to some images.

Let's start with the "midnight sun". This phenomena is defined as the actual presence of a visible sun in the sky at midnight or later [1], not just the presence of ambient light (also known as midnight twighlight, or "white nights") at those hours as in File:My last bar in Alaska.jpg, and it generally only occurs above the Arctic Circle, so adding it to any image that shows that is light even late at night is not really accurate.

Conversly, assuming any image in which it is dark shows "night in Alaska" is similarly inaccurate. Night is a time of day, not just anytime it is dark. For example, I believe I took this at around four in the afternoon. (I never set the clock in the camera I used back then, so the metadata is not accurate)

In light (no pun intended) of this information I am hoping you will reconsider some of your recent edits. Alaskans are plagued by misinformation and misconceptions of what is what and what things are really like up here, so it would be nice if these cats were as accurate as possible. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problem...Edit

Dear Dankarl,
After uploading the Rosas file (see [2]), a copyright notice came up from Metadata EXIF. In order to avoid problems, I changed the image with another one (from an Argentine museum) which I planned to upload after the Rosas image.
I may have acted prematurely, perhaps even incorrectly. Could you please check that I did the right thing? Should I have replaced the original Rosas image, should it have best been filed for deletion, or was the EXIF copyright warning something to be ignored?
I apologize in advance for any inconvenience.
Best regards.--MarshalN20 (talk) 21:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I would like some more eyes on this question myself, so I took the liberty of copying your query and responded on VP:Copyright. Dankarl (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Dankarl. Hopefully everything clears up soon; the Rosas image in question is awesome. Regards.--MarshalN20 (talk) 15:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Float planes and fuel tank, Bethel.jpgEdit

Hi, thanks for your message. I moved the FWS category to the new registration cat N724 (aircraft) because that is the logical place for the primary subject N724. The secondary subject N278Z was indeed registered to USDoI for many years, but not necessarily used by FWS, who usually operate aircraft in the N7## series, and often reallocate registrations to later aircraft. The DoI of course supervises other agencies in Alaska including Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Indian Affairs.PeterWD (talk) 06:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Bush planes in AlaskaEdit

Hi, thanks for your message. I believe that the category offers no useful purpose unless you search out all such poorly-defined subject images as you can, and put them all under the cat - all or nothing. I have been trying to tidy up and align the FWS aircraft images with those on the FWS website, adding extra details from there. There is now a total of more than 120 FWS aircraft images, so if you are that dedicated to the cat, perhaps you should tag all of those (or the parent cat) as a starting point, otherwise your categorizing is inconsistent. PeterWD (talk) 14:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


Museum/building categories on File:Replica house.jpgEdit

The buildings category is redundant because it is a parent category of the museums category. Whether it should be a parent category is a different question, but as long as it is one, the file only needs to be in the lower-level category (museums). If you care to make a subcategory for museum buildings in Alaska (as a subcategory of both museums and buildings), then the file could be put there instead. If you're going to do that, you'll probably want to do the entire "museums" area for consistency. Right now, though, there is no museum buildings category, so it belongs only in the museums category. I'm not saying that's how it should be, but it's the best we can do with the categories we currently have.

I'm going to redo the change that you reverted. Please don't undo it again unless you create a category for museum buildings. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

You are putting the supposed coherence of the category structure ahead of the logic and the ease of finding an image, which is what the category system is for. This is a case of a museum which is not a building, having a building as an exhibit. Clearly it is the the building, not the museum which should be categorized under buildings.
I have three objections to your response:
1. the tone.
2. the demand that I fix the category system to fit your interpretation. If you think the new category level is needed you are free to add. I do not think it would be an improvement and therefore will not.
3. your proposed solution of adding a category for museum buildings would be appropriate if and when there were more extensive coverage of museums in Alaska, but presently is unneeded in practical use.
a. It would simply add another layer of categories for users to scroll through before they found real content.
b. It would not really solve the problem. If someone saw a category label Museum buildings they would presume the buildings that house museums. This is a building that is a museum exhibit. Until you get down to the level of Category:Buildings as museum exhibits in Alaska you have not solved the logic issue, but that level of detail would be cumbersome at the present level of coverage (though I can think of three Alaska members off the top of my head the intermediate levels would be sparse and a lot of state-level categories would be empty).
To summarize: Categorization should emphasize (demonstrable) local usability over (unattainable) global consistency, and in particular neither museums nor buildings are subsets of the other. Dankarl (talk) 13:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm moving your reply here to keep the conversation in one place. I'm watching this page so I'll see any replies you make.
I apologize for the tone. I know I can be pretty brusque.
I see your point that the building in the picture is not a museum building, but an exhibit in a museum. I had overlooked that. I won't take the building category off on purpose again, but I or someone else might overlook that in future attempts to remove redundant categories.
I also see your point about museums and buildings not being subsets of each other conceptually. However, in our category structure, museums are subsets of buildings. Even the top-level category, Category:Museums, is a underneath three different building categories. Of course, they also fit under other things related to the institutional side. Unless someone (not necessarily you or me) wants to separate the buildings from the non-building media, I think the museum categories need to stay under buildings. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

The feet are two or three pairs in the imageEdit

Hello. But, 2nd child rear. Because number of foot of the Eskimo family are 6 (three pairs) feet, no 4 (two pairs) feet. --Kmoksy (talk) 21:37, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Wildlife viewing at Alaska Zoo.jpgEdit

File:Wildlife viewing at Alaska Zoo.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 | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Beeblebrox (talk) 01:07, 22 April 2015 (UTC)


Had to relocate for a few minutes, so I deleted it already. Thankfully, it was easy to find again. In this photo, you can see a campaign sign for Joe Miller on the corner of Seventh Avenue and a campaign sign for Lisa Murkowski in the yard on the corner of Ninth Avenue.RadioKAOS (talk) 03:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Now that I think about it...I remember seeing later photos on her photostream which showed a campaign sign for Linda Menard at roughly the same spot where the Murkowski sign is located in that photo. I spotted that same sign when I snapped a bunch of photos of the Park Strip in August 2012. I haven't gone and looked for that photo to check whether the dates were correct in that case, too. As I pointed out in an invisible comment at File:Four story apartment building cleverly disguised as a mountain range, Anchorage, USA.jpg, nowhere in Alaska is there any semblance of daylight at 2 in the morning in January, so I would have reason to question the accuracy of the camera data for anything emanating from her photostream.RadioKAOS (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Still more. Took me a few, but I found the aforementioned photo with a camera date of August 15, 2012 and the old facade of the NANA (former Chevron/Unocal) building still mostly intact. The photo I took of that building on August 30 shows the new facade completed except for the area around the front entrance. That would be one hell of a pace to do that work in so short a span. Additionally, there is an album on her photostream in which its description and descriptions of numerous individual photos state April 2007 while the camera date on the photos states May 2006. One clue is in the street closure surrounding the Dena'ina Center construction site shown in one photo. I was in Anchorage around that time and am having a hard time remembering exactly, but I doubt that the street was closed off for the entire life of the construction project, which was approximately two-and-a-half years. Anyway, that particular album contains photos which are a refreshing break from the usual tourist drek but are not properly licensed, which is a shame. Perhaps I will get around to finishing up the work on my next upload queue and get them uploaded sometime soon, because it's too obvious that something other than tourist POV and military POV is badly needed.RadioKAOS (talk) 04:29, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Anaktuvuk sod houseEdit

In general, you can feel free to adjust what I've done on Alaska-related images as needed. I have no particular knowledge of Alaska-- am just pitching in. Ziggyfan23 (talk) 11:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Dankarl".