User talk:DarwIn/Archive 8

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Edifício Comendador Yerchanik Kissajikian (facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, useful and best in scope. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:35, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Edifício Parque Avenida (facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:06, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Torre Paulista (facade, NW view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:46, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:06, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Edifício Queen Elizabeth exterior, north view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful, good photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:50, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Parque Cultural Paulista facade towards Avenida Paulista.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Capela de Santa Catarina (São Paulo) facade, night.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Seems useful to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 22:17, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Edifício Comendador Yerchanik Kissajikian exterior, East view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Francisco de Miranda by Carmelo Tabacco (bronze, 1978) statue, front (East angle), without the pedestal.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. Should the scope mention something like "without stone base" at the end? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:03, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: I was hoping that would be clear enough by defining it as "statue", but it's indeed clearer that way. Thanks.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 12:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Francisco de Miranda by Carmelo Tabacco (bronze, 1978) Whole monument, front.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Torre Renascer.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Livraria Cultura (Conjunto Nacional).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Used and useful -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

License on deleted image?

Can you let me know which license this image was uploaded under? Since it wasn't suitable for Commons, it was uploaded to enwiki, but I believe it was uploaded under an incorrect license. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Hi! It was uploaded under {{self|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0-migrated|Cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0}}, and deleted because of no-FOP - though I find it difficult to believe something there is actually copyrightable, all I can see is balustrades, a pond with a rather common footbridge, and kind of formal gardens. I would not have deleted it myself.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 17:43, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, it was uploaded under only 1.0 on enwiki. Now fixed. Thanks for your help! ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:46, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: You're welcome. I'm glad it could be kept at wiki-en, no-FOP really is a PITA here :p -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 17:49, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2018! ;)

			* Happy Holidays 2018, DarwIn! *
			Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cetenco Plaza North view, from Rua Frei Caneca.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support, best in scope. -- DeFacto (talk). 11:14, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2018! ;)

		* Happy Holidays 2018, DarwIn! *
		¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! --The Photographer 18:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Darwin: Muito obrigado, eu darei a Beria seus cumprimentos. A gente mora agora no Canadá é um país espetacular, no entanto, sinto muita saudade do Brasil, acho que tem coisas que vc termina trocando por outras. Eu vi que você tem contribuído ativamente, categorizando e organizando toda a informação, parabéns!!. Gostaria de ser mais ativo na Wikipedia em português, no entanto, infelizmente meu português não é bom o suficiente para fazê-lo. Abraços meu amigo! --The Photographer 18:42, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

O ano está acabando, mas o orgulho de ter uma amizade como a sua, não! Um super Natal e um Ano Novo maravilhoso para você! --The Photographer 18:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry with the portuguese (which is quite good, actually) - you're one of the best photographers I've seen around here, your stuff is generally spectacular and quite valuable to the projects. Please tell me if you need any help with the categorization - I'm currently working the Avenida Paulista, and I prefer curating architecture, but I can do any subject, actually. :) Grande abraço,-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:00, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Shopping Cidade São Paulo (food court).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Could be useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:45, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Interior of Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) Nave, towards chancel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stained glass windows at Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) (Saint Roberto Bellarmino).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 06:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:43, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stained glass windows at Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) (Belchior de Pontes).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:20, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stained glass windows at Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) (Pde. Manuel da Nóbrega - Fundação de S. Paulo).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:20, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stained glass windows at Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) (Francis Borgia).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stained glass windows at Igreja São Luís Gonzaga (São Paulo) (Ignatius of Loyola).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Banco Central do Brasil (Avenida Paulista) (facade, SW view).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Landaulet?

Hi Darwin, just to say I am unconvinced that this image is of a landaulet. Are you quite sure?

Regards, Eddaido (talk) 12:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Eddaido: I seem to recall it was classified as a laundalet in the work or site where I got the print from. Why do you say it's not a laundalet?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 04:11, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

It sits by another image that is a landaulet and that shows the difference. I am prepared to be educated by you about this, this is a discussion. I'm having a similar (but different) discussion with a German editor who may not understand what I'm trying to say and then again he may do. Anyway, can you see why I say rightly or wrongly this image is not of a landaulet? Eddaido (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: I really can't "educate" you on it... It was 6 years ago, so it's difficult to recall the exact reasoning, but I seem to recall both of them were classified on the original source as laundalets (or maybe laundalettes, which I believe are the same thing). If you found evidence it's another type of carriage, please feel free to reclassify it. I don't believe I've made that specific categorization on very solid ground, probably I merely parroted what the source said.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 04:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

What I see as missing is any kind of barrier between the passenger and driver. On a full landau this may be taken off. (we had an edit clash) Sometimes sources aren't correct. You have no resources that could decide for us firmly either way? Particularly because of the other discussion I'm really keen to get accurate. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 04:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: I understand there *is* a barrier there, but it is perpendicular to the plan of the drawing, so we actually don't see it. See here, for a proper definition. According to it, both of those drawings seem to be landaulettes, or demi-landaus, indeed.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 04:43, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for the clarification and particularly for the reference. One of the things I've learnt is just when it is the English use landaulettes - only when they are bodies on automobiles - they use landaulet for carriages. (so says the OED) May I bring more probs to you? Eddaido (talk) 04:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Eddaido! I'm glad I could help on that. Yes, you certainly can bring more problems, the worst that can happen is me being unable to help with them! :D -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 15:17, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Torre da Band (viewed from the east, night view, with the new illumination).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Institute of Cancer of São Paulo (exterior, east view, taken from Avenida Dr. Arnaldo).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Edifício Tuiuti Exterior, north view from Avenida Paulista.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Not such a tall building, but it has its own Commons category and gets a lot of results in a web search, so I guess it's important, and the scope therefore is useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Paulista (São Paulo Metro) interior, atrium.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:44, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Trash Can (2080392240).jpg

File:Trash Can (2080392240).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:59, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Palacete von Bülow , existed until the 1950s at Avenida Paulista, São Paulo, Brazil, near the corner with Alameda Campinas, where today is Edifícios Pauliceia e São Carlos do Pinhal - facade (west angle).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment We would like to know where this building is. It would be good to put in the scope and in the caption. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support An interesting image from about a century ago. I have reviewed this image and am satisfied that it meets all the requirements for a VI. (Note - I made minor changes to the "Used in" text above and to the file description). Martinvl (talk) 18:36, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
  • @Martinvl: Thank you very much for improving the description of the file. @Archaeodontosaurus: I also improved the scope here, please tell me if there is something more I can do to make it better.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 05:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Ok now, the scope is a bit long but it is not redibitory. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Licença padrão no Youtube

Olá DarwIn, a licença padrão do Youtube é a Creative Commons. Em alguns casos, levando em conta apenas os canais oficiais, tal como o canal da TV do São Paulo Futebol Clube que disponibiliza vídeos com a licença padrão, sendo assim é permitido tirar uma captura de ecrã e publicá-las no Commons? Desde jeito posso atualizar alguns artigos na pt.wiki. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 03:04, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Olá! Sim, basta colocar esta licença: {{YouTube CC-BY}}. Abraço, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 03:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Agradeço, sendo assim vou ter que eliminar a maioria dos ficheiros que carreguei na Wikipédia :D Falando nisso, poderia eliminar minha PU aqui no Commons? Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 03:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Feito Ficou óptima, a sua nova PU! Se der para carregar as imagens aqui no Commons é bem melhor que na Wikipédia, até porque aqui não há restrições ao uso e à qualidade das imagens. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 03:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Agradeço pelo elogio da PU. Sim, eu só carregava as imagens via uso restrito por só obter imagens licenciadas. Eu preferia muito utilizar as imagens do website do clube já que a qualidade é melhor, mas os videos estão na licença CC. Além disso, só por curiosidade, qual a diferença entre a CC 4.0, 3.5 e assim vai? Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 03:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Eu próprio não sei explicar direito o que muda de umas para as outras, mas pelo que vi são pequenos detalhes técnicos, mudança de palavras na formulação da licença para maior clareza, esse tipo de coisa. No geral, as licenças mais recentes são sempre menos propensas a problemas, e protegem mais quem as utiliza. Se tiver curiosidade, aqui está o que mudou na CC-by-sa-4.0, por exemplo. Regra geral deve-se usar sempre a versão mais recente.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 03:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Eliminações

Olá DarwIn, fiz uma breve lista com artigos que não cumprem com os critérios e estão violando direitos autorais:

• File:Fernando Fumagalli.png - GE
• File:Brinco de Ouro.png - muito semelhante no GE, traços de recortes.
• File:Guarani 1978.jpg e File:Guarani-placar78.jpg - duas mentiras descaradas, ambas as fotos são de 78 e foi colocado sobre a licença amparada pela lei brasileira do domínio público após 70 anos, sendo que ambas são datadas de 78. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 03:23, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Feito - Obrigado por avisar, eliminei todas menos a foto do plantão de 1978, por ser uma mera foto de grupo anterior a 1996, sem protecção na lei de direito autoral brasileira vigente à época, e fiz lá as correcções apropriadas. A outra foto de 1978 que fez a capa da revista é uma foto de momento, e não meramente documental, pelo que a sua manutenção aqui se torna inviável. De caminho bloqueei o editor, que era reincidente, por um mês. Saudações, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 04:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Carriage names

Greetings. I have stumbled on three years of The New York Coach-Makers Magazine with illustrations so I have uploaded the 37 images from it which you may view in my uploads listing for today.

• 1. Rockaways. When I search for Category:Rockaway in Wikimedia I get 97 wrong answers. Please may I amend Category:Rockaways to Category:Rockaway carriages. There may be a number of reasons this is not a good idea and I thought you might be able to put me straight on this point.
• 2. Category:Dogcarts is different from Category:Dog carts but I think not enough. May I rename Dogcarts to Horse-drawn dogcarts?
• 3. How do I classify wagons for passengers which I think is mainly US terminology. See here (the cream background pictures)

Your advice and assistance gratefully received. Eddaido (talk) 09:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

File:@alduxx (4892556335).jpg

File:@alduxx (4892556335).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Sixflashphoto (talk) 03:26, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Escalada na Gruta do Tesouro (540048070).jpg

File:Escalada na Gruta do Tesouro (540048070).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Sixflashphoto (talk) 03:37, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Gigoruzzo (540163113).jpg

File:Gigoruzzo (540163113).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Sixflashphoto (talk) 03:38, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Pachacamac (Peru) (14895564967).jpg

File:Pachacamac (Peru) (14895564967).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Sixflashphoto (talk) 05:15, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Pachacamac (Peru) (15059115446).jpg

File:Pachacamac (Peru) (15059115446).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Sixflashphoto (talk) 05:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Memórias de África e do Oriente

Olá Darwinius,
sempre te quis perguntar si tens pensado em subir outros livros digitalizados que estão disponíveis no Portal das Memórias de África e do Oriente. Estou um pouco inseguro por causa dos direitos – mas os livros das viagens presidenciais em 1939 / 1940 deveriam estar no domínio público também, não? O que achas? Saludos, --Jcornelius (talk) 14:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Olá Jcornelius! Sim, na verdade quase todos os dias penso em continuar os carregamentos de imagens da África colonial, pois esse foi um dos projectos que me deu mais prazer fazer. Deixa aqui o link desses livros, que eu verifico se está tudo OK com os direitos (em princípio deve estar). Se estiveres interessado em carregá-los, eu depois ajudo na categorização, com o maior prazer. :) Abraço! -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 14:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, que bom! Podes-me corrigir se estou a errar, mas acho que todos os Álbuns Fotográficos e Descritivos da Colónia de Moçambique poderiam-se subir, não?

Além disso, estava pensar nos albuns das viagens presidenciais de 1938/39 e 1940: Vol. 1 e Vol. 2 da viagem a S. Tomé & Angola, e Vol. 1 e Vol. 2 da viagem a Cabo Verde/S. Tomé/Mocambique/Angola. Se me dizeres que poderia seguir, vou subir as fotos nas próximas semanas. --Jcornelius (talk) 22:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jcornelius: Positivo, ambas as colecções estão já no domínio público, e os álbuns podem ser carregados integralmente usando a {{PD-Portugal-URAA}}, com a excepção dos textos introdutórios dos "Álbuns Fotográficos e Descritivos da Colónia de Moçambique" que ainda estão protegidos - mas tudo o resto, incluindo os desenhos e a publicidade em lineart, pode ser subido, pois foi publicado sem autor e com copyright de editor, no caso o José Rufino dos Santos. Podes usar um modelo semelhante a este que eu usei aqui: File:AFDCM-03-139.jpg. Os álbuns das viagens presidenciais creio terem sido todos editados pela Agência Geral das Colónias, e estão com copyright expirado também, e podem ser carregados integralmente. Quando carregares, avisa-me para eu ajudar na categorização. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 01:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@DarwIn: Bem, não tive tanta paciência e já comecei: Category:AFDCM-04. Foi mais fácil do que eu pensava, mas ainda tenho que corrigir alguns erros na numeração (acho), e também marcar as páginas que têm que ser eliminadas por conter textos. Obrigado! --Jcornelius (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jcornelius: Esses fundos coloniais são uma coisa deliciosa, eu tenho mais alguns aqui em fileira para entrar também, pode ser que me anime a isso! :D Tirando os textos que precisam ser eliminados, por ainda estarem com copyright, ficou óptimo o resto. :) Tu por acaso não estás em Moçambique, pois não? -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Obrigado. Já subí também o AFDCM-05 (Gaza e Inhambane) e o AFDCM-06 (Quelimane/Zambézia).

Não, infelizmente não estou em Moçambique, apesar de que eu gostava de ser ;) Mas vivi la por uns meses e volto de vez em quando. --Jcornelius (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Memórias de África e do Oriente

Olá Darwinius,
sempre te quis perguntar si tens pensado em subir outros livros digitalizados que estão disponíveis no Portal das Memórias de África e do Oriente. Estou um pouco inseguro por causa dos direitos – mas os livros das viagens presidenciais em 1939 / 1940 deveriam estar no domínio público também, não? O que achas? Saludos, --Jcornelius (talk) 14:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Olá Jcornelius! Sim, na verdade quase todos os dias penso em continuar os carregamentos de imagens da África colonial, pois esse foi um dos projectos que me deu mais prazer fazer. Deixa aqui o link desses livros, que eu verifico se está tudo OK com os direitos (em princípio deve estar). Se estiveres interessado em carregá-los, eu depois ajudo na categorização, com o maior prazer. :) Abraço! -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 14:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, que bom! Podes-me corrigir se estou a errar, mas acho que todos os Álbuns Fotográficos e Descritivos da Colónia de Moçambique poderiam-se subir, não?

Além disso, estava pensar nos albuns das viagens presidenciais de 1938/39 e 1940: Vol. 1 e Vol. 2 da viagem a S. Tomé & Angola, e Vol. 1 e Vol. 2 da viagem a Cabo Verde/S. Tomé/Mocambique/Angola. Se me dizeres que poderia seguir, vou subir as fotos nas próximas semanas. --Jcornelius (talk) 22:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jcornelius: Positivo, ambas as colecções estão já no domínio público, e os álbuns podem ser carregados integralmente usando a {{PD-Portugal-URAA}}, com a excepção dos textos introdutórios dos "Álbuns Fotográficos e Descritivos da Colónia de Moçambique" que ainda estão protegidos - mas tudo o resto, incluindo os desenhos e a publicidade em lineart, pode ser subido, pois foi publicado sem autor e com copyright de editor, no caso o José Rufino dos Santos. Podes usar um modelo semelhante a este que eu usei aqui: File:AFDCM-03-139.jpg. Os álbuns das viagens presidenciais creio terem sido todos editados pela Agência Geral das Colónias, e estão com copyright expirado também, e podem ser carregados integralmente. Quando carregares, avisa-me para eu ajudar na categorização. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 01:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@DarwIn: Bem, não tive tanta paciência e já comecei: Category:AFDCM-04. Foi mais fácil do que eu pensava, mas ainda tenho que corrigir alguns erros na numeração (acho), e também marcar as páginas que têm que ser eliminadas por conter textos. Obrigado! --Jcornelius (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jcornelius: Esses fundos coloniais são uma coisa deliciosa, eu tenho mais alguns aqui em fileira para entrar também, pode ser que me anime a isso! :D Tirando os textos que precisam ser eliminados, por ainda estarem com copyright, ficou óptimo o resto. :) Tu por acaso não estás em Moçambique, pois não? -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Obrigado. Já subí também o AFDCM-05 (Gaza e Inhambane) e o AFDCM-06 (Quelimane/Zambézia).

Não, infelizmente não estou em Moçambique, apesar de que eu gostava de ser ;) Mas vivi la por uns meses e volto de vez em quando. --Jcornelius (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I need Help

Hi Darwin, could you help me suggest the easiest way to solve this problem?

The most active editions of the wikipedia 'Central Bicol' (bcl) - "Ringer" [1] added dozens of images in the Commons which he no longer has the original ones. Currently they have been sent for elimination because they are improper with the tag of "no license, violation of wmf:licensing policy" (please see this example [2]) all list fo them you can see here [3]

He does not know how to do it, and I do not know either. They are pictures take by him. It is possible to send an email saying that the pictures were made by him, and if so to whom should he send it?

I would really appreciate a help, this Wikipedia has already lost another of the best editors due to this problem if it loses another .......

Thanks

DARIO SEVERI (talk) 03:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Vários assuntos

Olá DarwIn! Estou aqui para tratar de alguns assuntos contigo.

• Primeiro é pedir que a renomeação que foi feita Category:Casa de Oxumare. Ou seja, para pôr de volta . A palavra é acentuada, a página eletrônica assim grafa.
• Segundo é para que passe na Esplanada para ver Commons:Esplanada#Proposta de renomeação abrangente, sobre a possibilidade do que propus.
• Terceiro e último é para ver um chato problema descrito em Commons:Esplanada#Não consigo pesquisar a partir de uma página, só da PP.

Espero que possa ajudar. Saudações, Luan (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Venho aqui para adicionar um 4.º assunto. Um insulto de anônimo(a) (Revision #290868542; 2A01:CB00:7CF:F100:1E62:B8FF:FE94:7E06 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)). Saudações, --Luan (talk) 14:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

First structured licensing conversation on Commons

Greetings,

The first conversation about structured copyright and licensing for Structured Data on Commons has been posted, please come by and participate. The discussion will be open through the end of the month (March). Thank you. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Consertos

Olá DarwIn, poderia me dar uma ajuda neste ficheiro, carreguei novas versões ajeitando as dimensões, mas já vi várias imagens com "Outras resoluções:", acredito que seja possível fazer o mesmo neste ficheiro. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 02:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Olá, desculpe só responder agora. Ainda precisa de ajuda com isso, Dantes?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 20:35, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! Sorry for writing in English. The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

--WMF Surveys (talk) 01:32, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons Newsletter - Spring 2018

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter and contribute to the next issue. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates

• Our dedicated IRC channel: wikimedia-commons-sd ^webchat
• Several Commons community members are working on ways to integrate Wikidata in Wikimedia Commons. While this is not full-fledged structured data yet, this work helps to prepare for future conversion of data, and helps to understand how Wikidata and Commons can work better together.
  • Thanks to Jarekt and other contributors, some Commons templates can now be filled via Wikidata: {{Creator}} (Phabricator) and {{Institution}} (Phabricator). Work is ongoing on the {{Artwork}} template (Phabricator).
  • Thanks to Mike Peel and others, Wikidata-powered infoboxes can now be added to Commons categories, with the template {{Wikidata Infobox}}. (Example)
  • Multichill is working on an experimental workflow to upload images to Commons via Wikidata (and using metadata from Wikidata). See a part of it here.

Things to do / input and feedback requests

• Join the community focus group!
• Do you want to help out translating messages about Structured Data on Commons from English to your own language? Sign up on the translators page.
• Contribute to the next newsletter.

Discussions held

• Conversation about licensing and copyright modeling.
• High-level discussion on ontology for Commons.
• Review first designs for multilingual captions.
• IRC office hour, 13 February

Events

• Wikimedia Conference, Berlin, 20-22 April (+ Learning Days 18-19 April): several sessions and workshops around Structured Commons
• EuropeanaTech Conference, Rotterdam, 15-16 May: several presentations + a full workshop day on Monday 14 May about Wikidata and Structured Commons
• Wikimedia Hackathon, Barcelona, 18-20 May: Structured Commons as a focus area.

Partners and allies

• We are still welcoming (more) staff from GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) to become part of our long-term focus group (phabricator task T174134). You will be kept in the loop of the project, and receive regular small surveys and requests for feedback. Get in touch with Sandra if you're interested - your input in helping to shape this project is highly valued!

Research

• The research about GLAM contributions to Wikimedia Commons is concluded. A blog post on the Wikimedia blog provides a summary, and you can read the full results on meta.wikimedia.org.

Development

• Prototypes will be available for Multilingual Captions soon.

Stay up to date!

• Follow the Structured Data on Commons project on Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/34/
• Subscribe to this newsletter to receive it on a talk page of your own choice.
• Join the next IRC office hour and ask questions to the team! The date for next quarter will be announced soon.

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 19:48, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Subtropical Storm Melissa (14L) in the North Atlantic Ocean - November 18, 2013.jpg

File:Subtropical Storm Melissa (14L) in the North Atlantic Ocean - November 18, 2013.jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Melissa Nov 18 2013 1405Z.jpg. 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.

B dash (talk) 01:57, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Multilingual captions testing is available

Greetings,

The early prototype for multilingual caption support is available for testing. More information on how to sign up to test is on Commons. Thanks, happy editing to you. - Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

OTRS permission

Dear DarwIn, Please let me know if you need more information to update permission on the File:Coqueline courrèges.jpg. Ticket number : https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2018041410006525 Many thanks for your help. --QuentinDeValence (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, DarwIn. You have new messages at DarwIn's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

@QuentinDeValence: Thanks for the reminder, I believe it's OK now. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 17:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Pedido

Salve!!! Fiz um pedido lá no requests mas não me deram muita bola. Fiz alguma bobagem ou é porque meu histórico é pequeno? Carreguei agora à pouco umas coisas do Flicker com o flickr2commons e não tive maiores problemas, além das categorizações que corrigi no braço. Pelo que entendi, com aquela flag dá pra subir as imagens direto das revistas que estão em licença livre e facilita bastante. Boas!!! Ixocactus (talk) 07:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ixocactus:  Done É só a demora burocrática da praxe, não parece haver qualquer problema. Mas tenha um cuidado extra com os licenciamentos, sobretudo com o material que carregar dessa forma. Abraço, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 12:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Salve Darwin!!! Obrigado! "Na dúvida, não ultrapasse." Pode deixar, terei cuidado. Qualquer coisa lhe peço socorro. Boas!!! Ixocactus (talk) 15:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Pedido 2

Opa! Tudo bem? Preciso da sua ajuda para separar o histórico de duas imagens. Um editor fez um upload de uma imagem dele em cima de uma outra "minha". Você pode por favor separar as duas? É essa aqui. Valeu! José Luiz ^disc 22:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jbribeiro1:  Done.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 08:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Obrigado! José Luiz ^disc 19:15, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Museu Paulista

[4] -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 18:23, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton: "O edifício histórico localizado no Parque da Independência, conhecido pelo nome de Museu do Ipiranga, tem como nome oficial Museu Paulista da Universidade de São Paulo.". Mas noutro lado, "Sua sede, o Edifício-Monumento do Museu do Ipiranga". O que me parece é que se o edifício é sem dúvida Museu Paulista, o inverso já não é verdadeiro, o Museu Paulista é mais que o edifício (por exemplo, tem a tal extensão em Itu). Creio que também a Casa do Grito, e a Casa do Bandeirante, por exemplo, também são parte do Museu Paulista? Nesse sentido, penso que seria preferível usar Museu do Ipiranga, pois cria menos ambiguidade ali. O que acha? Já agora, Rodrigo, você tem ideia se aquelas luminárias com ás águias que estão na fachada norte fazem parte do museu, ou se estão fora da alçada, como os jardins? Abraço, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 20:00, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Eu deixaria as águias como parte do Parque da Independência, eu sei que, por exemplo, a fonte é responsabilidade da prefeitura, que como pode perceber, já muda até de esfera passando para municipal (Museu é estadual), já não pertencem ao Museu Paulista.

Agora pensa comigo, Statues in the Museu do Ipiranga, se por acaso for retirado do prédio, por exemplo por empréstimo, ou mesmo para ser fotografado, já estaria errado, e como pode ver:

File:Anforas - águas dos rios brasileiros.jpg às vezes as peças são emprestadas e ai elas já não estão mais no "Edifício-Monumento", mas ainda são do Museu Paulista. Por isso prefiro Statues of the Museu Paulista, até pq a coleção é do Museu Paulista, não do prédio.

Quando a gente fala do Salão Nobre do Museu Paulista, não há erro, as obras e a narrativa do Museu, da instituição, não somente do prédio, estão ali, elas culminam ali. A história contada é obra do Museu, não do prédio.

-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 20:29, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton: E algo como "Facades of Museu Paulista" não fica confuso, uma vez que o Museu parece ter vários prédios? "Statues in the Museu do Ipiranga" realmente não me parece a melhor opção, isso deve mudar para Museu Paulista, mas nas coisas que são parte do edifício parece que seria melhor deixar mesmo "Museu do Ipiranga", não?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 20:35, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Humm, a meu ver não, pois o prédio do interior vão chamar de Museu Republicano de Itu e o restante chamam pelos nomes, a biblioteca do Museu que está hoje instalada fora é só uma casa, sem nada de mais, por exemplo.

O que me preocupa no nome Museu do Ipiranga, é que parece para mim que o museu conta a história do Ipiranga, acho que essa ambiguidade mais preocupante do que se as pessoas vão confundir os prédios, sabe?

Só uma obs, não sei bem quem controla a casa do grito e a casa dos bandeirantes, vou perguntar e lhe falo.

Abraços. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 17:55, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton: Entendo bem o seu ponto de vista. Mas penso que deveríamos colocar tudo de uma forma só, ficaria então "Museu Paulista" para tudo (Edifício-Monumento e conjunto de colecções do museu)?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 18:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Tá estranha minhas notificações, às vezes recebo, às vezes não ...

Sim sim, acho melhor tudo sobre o mesmo nome, não posso fazer todas as modificações necessárias para tal, por não ter ferramentas administrativas, abraços. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 16:00, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Remoção

Cuidado que se remover a template "IGESPAR-SIPA" de categorias, como fez na Category:Mosteiro da Madre de Deus, remove também as categorias ocultas Category:Monumentos Nacionais in Portugal by name Category:IGESPAR with known IDs e Category:SIPA with known IDs, criadas automaticamente por esta template. Não haverá hipótese de serem acrescentadas automaticamente pela template "Wikidata Infobox", em particular a Category:Monumentos Nacionais in Portugal by name? Tm (talk) 01:32, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tm: Olá, obrigado pelo reparo. Tenho quase a certeza que pode ser concertado, acrescentando pelo template, como diz. @Mike Peel: , would it be possible to add the categories automatically by the Wikidata Infobox template?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 01:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@DarwIn: I´am replying in english, as if this discussion is going to be open to someone that doesnt speak portuguese. I think that this categories are fundamental to the proper categorization of the portuguese cultural heritage. Let´s wait to see what others have to say, but if there is not to possible to add the above categories by way of Wikidata, i think that is better to readd the "IGESPAR_SIPA" template to the categories than leaving the categorization "by name" by half.

• As a side note and about our last discussion in my talkpage, about the use of classified or listed monuments, i see that the DGPC uses the english term listed and not classified, so probably is better to move from classified to listed. The only doubt that have if there is not a chance of someone portuguese would mix it up with the "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal", other than us regular editors. But, either way, better to move the "Classified monuments in Portugal" and subcategories to "Listed monuments in Portugal" and leave "Cultural heritage monuments in Portugal" alone, as since 2011, there have been already to much changes and the categories need some stability.

• Also good luck with the categorization of the portuguese nunneries, convents and monasteries, as the terms nunnery, convent and monastery, in popular use have been mixed up many times and many times the same religious building has the designation of Convento and Mosteiro in popular and official use, and it is a real bag of cats to proper categorize, by proper order. Tm (talk) 02:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tm: Agreed with all. About classified vs. listed, I also have the perception that "listed" is more stable (and in my mind "classified" keeps mixing with category curadory (as in category classification). About the nunneries, those are the "feminine convents" and "feminine monasteries" we use in Portugal - as you certainly are aware of, there is no known distinction in Portugal between convents and monasteries, both names are usually used to mean exactly the same thing, a religious community either of men and of women. Apparently in English "convent" is usually for women, but this is not a British project, and with that word being used also in Portugal with a different meaning, I find it unacceptable to have that word imposed on us, especially when there is the unambiguous word "nunnery" for it - which is what should have been used for all feminine monasteries since the beginning. @Mike Peel: pinging Mike again for the category thing. Cheers, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 11:32, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tm: Auto-adding the tracking categories using the infobox is possible, but it looks like it's going to be quite messy code-wise, at least to start with. I'm currently adding IDs to the infobox by only specifying their Wikidata property number, and then the code fetches the ID and the URL from Wikidata to display the link. It doesn't look like the tracking categories are linked to the properties on Wikidata yet, so I can't auto-add them that way, but I can add separate code check to see if a given ID is present and add the tracking category in that case (in essentially the same way it's currently done in the ID template). However, I then need to specify how the entries are sorted within the tracking category - whether it should follow the ID number or the category name. Ideally that should be standardised, but the tracking categories here seem to use the category name, while Category:Listed buildings in England with known IDs (for example) uses the ID. If you can help by untangle things here and say "Wikidata Property ID X has tracking category Y ordered by <ID/name>", that would help, otherwise I'll try to work through the logic and put something together in the next week or so. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 01:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tm: I forgot to follow up here, sorry. The infobox now auto-adds those categories, please let me know if it's missing any and I'll add those in. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Frank Sinatra, Roberto Carlos and Myrian Rios, Maksoud Plaza, 1981.jpg

File:Frank Sinatra, Roberto Carlos and Myrian Rios, Maksoud Plaza, 1981.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

2804:7F2:280:DC77:F110:5E22:68C3:FE03 03:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons IRC Office Hour, Tuesday 26 June

Greetings,

There will be an IRC office hour for Structured Data on Tuesday, 26 June from 18:00-19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. You can find more details, as well as date and time conversion, at the IRC Office Hours page on Meta.

Thanks, I look forward to seeing you there if you can make it. -- Keegan (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

What properties does Commons need?

Greetings,

Structured Commons will need properties to make statements about files. The development team is working on making the software ready to support properties; the question is, what properties does Commons need?

You can find more information and examples to help find properties in a workshop on Commons. Please participate and help fill in the list, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Peixoto Correia

Olá. Será possível veres se está tudo bem com isto ? Abraço --João Carvalho (talk) 21:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

@João Carvalho: Parece-me que sim, apenas a data estava com o dia de hoje, alterei para 1950s / 1960s, que me parece sre a data aproximada. Abraço, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 21:58, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

your moves of categories

@DarwIn: Please would you discuss these moves of yours. Eddaido (talk) 01:48, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: I don't believe there is much to discuss there. Carriages may be drawn by a number of different animals, such as mules, donkeys and oxen - even zebras. They can also be drawn by men- and the vehicle is exactly the same. You should never have moved those categories as if carriages were exclusive to horses, which is absurd. Now they will have to be moved back, all of them.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 01:51, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

It is very nice of you to deign to respond! There is everything to discuss. Eddaido (talk) 01:54, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: Then tell me what is there to discuss. The vehicle is independent of the animal that makes it move. Today it can be horses, tomorrow zebras, the next day mules. What was your idea? It's absurd to think that only horses draw carriages.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 01:56, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

There are your incorrect identifications, there is fitting in of your chosen categories with the general scheme of Commons. Your actions in the last few minutes have startled me. Mules have for the moment been lumped with horses because so many photographers cannot tell the difference or do not know there is a difference - similar with donkeys(!). They can all be sorted out from within the horses category at a later stage. If you just followed a little further along my couple of months of work you would see the 1000's of other recategorisatons to human-drawn etc I have made. Please do not disrupt like this when you have been asked so many times to at least participate in a discussion. If this is your way to begin one I'd be grateful if you would consider there are some others editors who may care at least as much as you do about animal transport and associated subjects. I'm going to take time off now but are you prepared to have a straightforward discussion about the categorisation of animal transport? If so can't do it right now but in any case would you please just hold fire. Thanks Eddaido (talk) 02:09, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: I'm sorry, but I understand your moves were clearly incorrect, and I contest them, and I do plan to move them gradually into the status quo. Please discuss the category changes before proceeding further, as is the proper way. In the meantime, it's unconceivable that vehicles drawn by a variety of different animals are all lumped together under horses because you can't tell the difference between a horse and a donkey (!!!).-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 02:16, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: I really wonder what was your idea, from every side I look at it it comes out as plainly absurd. You basically destroyed all the organization that was there and worked perfectly for ages in favor of some absurdity, which is at the same time a more complex designation, and completely out of logic. How could you think that "carriage" and "horse-drawn carriage" is the same thing?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 02:22, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

I should not be spending this time on this matter right now. Please don't repeat what I say above as if I meant the exact opposite and — please lighten up!

Back another day. Eddaido (talk) 12:19, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Eddaido: This is why your moves were plainly wrong, and will have to be all reverted.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:27, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Affected:

• File:SCIneternacional1977Crest.jpg

And also:

• File:SCIneternacional2006Crest.jpg
• File:SCIneternacional2007Crest.jpg
• File:SCInternacional1993Crest.JPG
• File:SCInternacionalFirstCrest.JPG

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 17:02, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Análises

Olá DarwIn, por-favor, poderia realizar uma análise de todos os carregamentos desta usuária, que há tempos vem fazendo cross wiki-spam. Cheguei a propor alguns ficheiros para eliminação, mas até agora não foram eliminados. Alguns ficheiros são óbvias violações, este por exemplo. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 09:07, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Acrescentando, poderia analisar os carregamentos usuário, apesar de alguns serem válidos, outros são questionáveis. Por exemplo, esta assinatura publicada como domínio público, sendo que no sítio oficial, que segundo o carregador foi a origem, está protegido com todos os direitos reservados. Além do mais, a maior parte dos ficheiros aparentam ser capturas de ecrãs, que apesar de serem permitidas no Wikipédia, não é válida quando trata-se de pessoas vivas, não sei se o Commons permite. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 09:33, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Do primeiro caso apaguei praticamente tudo. No segundo é mais complexo, a assinatura pode ser PD, e é necessário ver se os uploads não são violações de copyright carregadas aqui através de flickrwashing. Em ambos os casos deve enviar para DR.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 11:19, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Nesses casos de flickrwashing seria carregar fotos sem licenças como licenças aceitas pelo commons visando o carregamento destas aqui? Se for isso, queria levantar este caso. Recentemente constatei uma série de violações por parte deste usuário, envolvendo falsificações de referências e fontes em mais de uma Wikipédia. Por isso e o uso de vários fantoches, terminou travado globalmente. O ponto que questiono é esses carregamentos via Flickr. Por exemplo, este ficheiro é encontrado em diversos sítios pela rede e o perfil que a carregou no Flickr consta neste único carregamento. Nas demais, muitos outros ficheiros estão marcados como Flickr, mas não consigo acessá-los. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 11:34, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Sim, carregam no Flickr com uma licença falsa, e de lá importam para cá. Sempre que houver suspeita disso deve ser aberta uma DR. Quando é confirmado, a conta vai para uma lista de perfis de Flickr banidos, impossibilitando futuras importações de boa fé.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 11:37, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Outro exemplo, Pesquisa no Google, várias imagens - única imagem carregada no Flickr em perfil g. g.1 (estranhamente semelhante a Leonardo. G G)

Nesses casos, irei propor várias DRs em breves. Tem alguma dica para a criação de DRs mais facilmente. Por exemplo, na Wikipédia cria-se PE pelo Fastbuttons, teria alguma ferramenta para facilitar? Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 11:40, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Conde Edmond Dantès: Sim, "perform batch task" (deve estar nos gadgets, é um link aí na aba da esquerda). Ele faz exactamente isso que você pretende.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 15:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons Newsletter - Summer 2018

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter and contribute to the next issue. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates

• Our dedicated IRC channel: wikimedia-commons-sd ^webchat
• Since our last newsletter, the Structured Data team has moved into designing and building prototypes for various features. The use of multilingual captions in the UploadWizard and on the file page has been researched, designed, discussed, and built out for use. Behind the scenes, back-end work on search is taking place and designs are being drawn up for the front-end. There will soon be specifications published for the use of the first Wikidata property on Commons, "Depicts," and a prototype is to be released to go along with that.

Things to do / input and feedback requests

• A workshop on what Wikidata properties Commons will need. This workshop will be open for the entire month of July 2018 at minimum.

• Join the community focus group!
• Do you want to help out translating messages about Structured Data on Commons from English to your own language? Sign up on the translators page.
• Contribute to the next newsletter.

Discussions held

• In late February there was a discussion around how Commons generally sees data being modeled.

• The first discussion on copyright and licensing with Commons was held in March. This was a "high level" discussion, there will be a consultation later this summer about the deeper mapping of copyright and licensing in a structured way.
• In April there was an exercise for GLAM partners in metadata and ontology mapping.
• A discussion about the design for Multilingual Captions on the file page took place in May. You can still review the designs and leave feedback.
• There was an IRC office hour in June to discuss progress so far and future plans.

Wikimania 2018

• Three sessions about Structured Commons are officially scheduled for Wikimania 2018 - Cape Town, South Africa - July 2018.
  • Wikimedia Commons and GLAM needs around the world (Friday 20 July, 10:30 local time)
  • Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons and knowledge equity (Friday 20 July, 14:00 local time)
  • Design challenge workshop: How can multilingual structured metadata bring knowledge equity to Commons? (Friday 20 July, 14:30 local time)
• Structured Data on Commons is also a focus area during the Wikimania 2018 Hackathon. We will, among other things, do 'live' modelling of Wikidata properties for Commons - an offline spin-off of the community consultation taking place on wiki.

Partners and allies

• We are still welcoming (more) staff from GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) to become part of our long-term focus group (phabricator task T174134). You will be kept in the loop of the project, and receive regular small surveys and requests for feedback. Get in touch with Sandra if you're interested - your input in helping to shape this project is highly valued!
• Structured Data on Commons was presented to GLAM audiences during EuropeanaTech 2018 in Rotterdam (15 May 2018) and at the Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek Forum in Berlin (4 June 2018).

Research

Two research projects about Wikimedia Commons are currently ongoing, or in the process of being finished:

1. Research:Curation workflows on Wikimedia Commons—a project that seeks to understand the current workflows of Commons contributors who curate media (categorize it, delete it, link to it from other projects, etc.).
2. Research:Technical needs of external re-users of Commons media—soliciting feedback from individuals and organizations that re-use Commons content outside of Wikimedia projects, in order to understand their current painpoints and unmet needs.

Development

• Prototypes will be available for Depicts soon.

Stay up to date!

• Follow the Structured Data on Commons project on Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/34/
• Subscribe to this newsletter to receive it on a talk page of your own choice.
• Join the next IRC office hour and ask questions to the team! The date for next quarter will be announced soon.

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 21:07, 6 July 2018 (UTC)