Financefactz

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Financefactz!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 14:49, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

File:George II by John van Nost the younger.png

File:George II by John van Nost the younger.png 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!

Ytoyoda (talk) 15:39, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Objects of County recorded in the National Inventory of Architecture of Ireland with known IDs

Hi Financefactz, you created this category as some NIAH numbers were not properly mapped to County Dublin. I've fixed this now thanks to a recently released updated NIAH dataset. I've converted this category now into a maintenance category. Please notify me whenever something should appear there. It is also well possible that unidentified NIAH IDs show up from other counties with NIAH ID groups we haven't seen before. I can update the mapping table as soon as I am aware of any additions. Thanks & kind regards, AFBorchert (talk) 18:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:The Public Records Office of Ireland.jpg

Copyright status: File:The Public Records Office of Ireland.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:The Public Records Office of Ireland.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:05, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Hanlon's Corner and North Circular Road.jpg

Copyright status: File:Hanlon's Corner and North Circular Road.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Hanlon's Corner and North Circular Road.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 16:05, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Category:Somerville House, County Meath

Category:Somerville House, County Meath is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD C2 (unuseful empty category) 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.

Prototyperspective (talk) 17:43, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:A Picturesque and Descriptive View of the City of Dublin

Hi, the Category:Royal Military Infirmary refers to a building, and there are pictures in the category that are not part of the book above. Why did you add it back in? -- Deadstar (msg) 09:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

A building can be part of numerous categories and does not just have to be part of one category. In this case, as the building is one of Malton's views of Dublin, it seems appropriate that it sits in that category rather than having the various relevant reproductions of the images sitting under that category. Financefactz (talk) 10:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Would you then not need the main categories for Dublin Castle, the Four Courts etc. also added to Malton's views? It makes no sense to me. If you have multiple scans of the same image from that collection, you can always create a category like "Royal Military Infirmary (Malton's views)" - this would make more sense to me than the way it is now. -- Deadstar (msg) 14:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you can include the other buildings under this category. I have not done this yet, Wikipedia does not insist on you having to complete everything in a single day. Dublin Castle is likely under many different categories for many different reasons. Financefactz (talk) 09:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Financefactz, Deadstar is right. File:Royal infirmary, Phoenix Park, Dublin LCCN2003671652.jpg belongs in at least two categories, i. e. Category:Royal Military Infirmary and Category:A Picturesque and Descriptive View of the City of Dublin (where it is right now missing). In contrast to this, the building Category:Royal Military Infirmary has no direct relationship to the set of prints titled A Picturesque and Descriptive View of the City of Dublin and photos like this one by Robert French have no relationship to the set of prints. Please see Commons:Categories#Types of reflected relations for accepted relationships between categories. The set of prints is neither a hypernym nor a holonym of the Royal Infirmary. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 04:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

The buildings noted are a feature of the set of prints noted as being called "A Picturesque and Descriptive View of The City of Dublin". It would be remiss not to include those specific buildings as part of that category. The buildings still exist and feature regularly in modern day reproductions which are often still referred to as "Malton's Views" which is in and of itself a cultural phenomenon. Hence, I created both the Wikipedia page and the Wikimedia page for this purpose as well as writing the majority of the pages for the individual buildings that make up the views and uploading the majority of the photographs and illustrations. If a modern photo of the building is taken to correspond precisely with the aspect taken by James Malton it would seem appropriate that this is under Malton's views as a category as well as being under other relevant categories. Both the individual photo and the category for the building itself can be under different categories - e.g. The Custom House could be noted as being part of a category for buildings by James Gandon, and Irish Government buildings etc. Financefactz (talk) 09:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Financefactz, you are now miscategorizing these categories for buildings again: [1], [2], [3], [4]. You are doing this despite being in conflict with Commons:Categories#Types of reflected relations as elaborated above. All these four buildings exist independently from the artwork by James Malton. This photo is one of Charlemont House which is definitively not an artwork by James Malton. Likewise is this photo not an artwork by James Malton but a photo of Blue Coat School, Dublin. Etc. etc. You are, however, free to create combined categories like Category:Royal Military Infirmary by James Malton or Category:Malton's View of the Royal Military Infirmary if you wish. But the building categories Category:Blue Coat School, Dublin, Category:Charlemont House, Category:Dublin Custom House, and Category:Royal Military Infirmary do not represent any works by James Malton and must not be categorized as such. Please fix this ASAP. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 17:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

This isn't the hill I'm going to die on but its your opinion versus mine (me being the person who created all of the Wikipedia and Wikimedia pages related to the topic and is the most informed) and you are the person who thought County Donegal was called Donegal County. I suggest you read up on James Malton and Malton's views as you are not informed on the topic, it is intimately related to the very existence of the buildings and the architecture of the buildings themselves and hence they should be under the category. I have also written the majority of the Wikipedia pages on the individual buildings. Financefactz (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Financefactz, please do not assume anything about what I might know and what I am possibly familiar with or not. You do not know me. And I've never used the term “Donegal County”, you are apparently mixing up here something. It is not a case of your opinion versus mine but you are being in conflict how categories work in Commons. See also the above concerns by Deadstar. We can escalate this to another board if you still think so. I understand your viewpoint but the only way to cover this is by creating sub-categories as suggested. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 10:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)