User talk:De728631

TUSC token 211033b1711e51385fa1da3b5f03b199Edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Thank youEdit

CristianChirita (talk) for your kind support

Mal eine Frage am RandeEdit

Noch mal guten Abend. Im Nachgang zu unserem gestrigen Kategorie-Mammutbaum "Aircraft in flight" hätte ich noch mal eine Frage. Wie ich nun gesehen habe, bist Du auch Admin hier in Commons. Wie wird man das eigentlich? Viele Grüße --Uli Elch (talk) 18:20, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

@Uli Elch: Hallo Uli. Als Administrator kann man sich selbst bewerben, oder, was noch besser ist, man wird von einem befreundeten Admin als Kandidat vorgeschlagen. Danach gibt es ein öffentliches Auswahlverfahren bei dem der Kandidat Fragen zu seiner Erfahrung auf Commons, seiner Herangehensweise bei Problemen und sonstige relevante Fragen beantworten sollte. Letztendlich stimmen dann die anderen Benutzer über den Antrag ab, und bei mindestens 75% positiven Stimmen hat man den Job. Eine Zusammenfassung dazu gibt es hier (leider ist die deutsche Version noch nicht übersetzt). Wenn Du also Admin werden möchtest, solltest Du am besten einen anderen Admin deiner Wahl fragen, mit dem Du bereits erfolgreich zusammen gearbeitet hast. De728631 (talk) 18:33, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Vielen Dank für die guten Informationen! Bin mir aber noch gar nicht sicher, ob ich das wirklich anstreben soll. Viele Grüße --Uli Elch (talk) 18:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Lerwick HarbourEdit

I think most people would expect to find this category under Category:Lerwick rather than where you've moved it. After all, it is a structure built on land for the purpose of sheltering boats, whereas "water transport" implies that it is part of a watercourse or watercraft on a watercourse. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I'd like to disagree. A harbour is a piece of infrastructure serving water transport so the latter should be the top category. See also Category:Water transport in Rotterdam which has subcategory for ports and harbours, or Category:Water transport in New Orleans which contains Category:Port of New Orleans‎. So this type of categorizing is not uncommon. De728631 (talk) 19:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Up to a point. But there are two (at least) purposes to categories- location, and function. In this case its parent location is Lerwick, and its parent function is water transport in Shetland. Those expecting to find it by location might be surprised to not find it under Category:Lerwick. But since my kitchen ceiling has just collapsed, you know, I think I have better things to do right now. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
While not directly in category:Lerwick, it's still in subcategory of Lerwick that I think will easily be associated with a harbour. Anyhow, good luck with repairing your kitchen! De728631 (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:IMO 8739619Edit

Two names here. Is it the same ship? Otherwise mentioning Category:Agdlek-class (Denmark) in the IMO category is not correct. The yard is mostly mentioned in de IMO category, therefore in de category by name the country of building of the ship is mentioned. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:19, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

@Stunteltje: Yes, it is the same ship, which is why I combined the categories with IMO 8739619 as the top category. According to Shipspotting and Maritime Connector, Juvel II is ex-Agdlek. The design is typically Agdlek-class too, so it is obvious that the former patrol cutter that was sold by the Danish Navy in 2008 and became Juvel II. De728631 (talk) 14:12, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
O.K. no problem. Ithought that this class concerns naval ships and after being sold I thought the class is not valid any more. But I can be wrong.--Stunteltje (talk) 20:51, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
The ship class is like a design template, so I would suppose that it always remains valid. De728631 (talk) 20:58, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


You said here that Massachusetts is one of four states that do not claim copyright in their works. I'm a Massachusetts resident and, as you know, active on Commons, and I am unaware of this.

Do you have a cite for it? I note that the Secretary of State's Office has a clear copyright notice at as does the AG's office at

Certainly, if you are right, we need a new template to match the others in Category:PD-USGov license tags (non-federal). .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Until recently I wasn't aware of this either but then I found {{PD-MAGov}} in that very category. De728631 (talk) 14:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Hmm, right you are, thank you. I note that it is the only template on that page full of PD templates that is not categorized there under the correct letter for the state to which it applies. I used to be pretty good at writing templates, but I can't figure out how to sort it right -- Arkansas, California, and Florida all sort correctly, but I don;t see how they do it.
I think we need to be careful -- this applies only to public records and not to works of the government, hence the copyright notices I cited above. I don't think a photo taken by a state employee would be covered by this. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:55, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I took a look at the template code and finally I found the categorisation not in the template proper but in the /doc subpage. So I added a sortkey there which lists the template under "MA" in Category:PD-USGov license tags (non-federal). As to the licensing issue, you're of course right. It's not a general waiver of copyright for MA government works, so when this tag is applied we need to check the file content extra carefully. De728631 (talk) 15:09, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


Hi Are you able to create a variant of DNR flag ? Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:07, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't have this type of Cyrillic script needed for the flag, and without it the flag wouldn't just be complete. De728631 (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
[1], [2], [3] et [4]. It is only for the eagle. Another other could add the cyrillic script. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:19, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Before I create another flag you should wait for Jameslwoodward's final decision. If he doesn't restore File:New Donetsk Peoples Republic flag.svg you can still list it at Commons:Undeletion requests so the case can be discussed by a broader audience. De728631 (talk) 15:24, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Done. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:19, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
The file has been restaured. --Panam2014 (talk) 10:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Compare original flag[5] with png-version[6] and svg-version[7]. Font size, eagle size and location. Could you create a new svg version based on the png version ? Also, could you create an svg version of the coat of arms ? --Panam2014 (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
No, I cannot recreate the "original" flag because that version is in fact copyrighted. Like coats of arms, only the description would be in the public domain, but the individual depiction is left to the artist who draws the image. And I'm sorry but I don't know how to create an SVG version out of an existing PNG, but we already have File:Coat of Arms of the Donetsk People's Republic.svg. It's a little bit different with a motto and a crown in crest but I think it will do. De728631 (talk) 19:01, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "De728631".