Last modified on 6 January 2009, at 10:13

User talk:Gryffindor/Archive4

Hello,

your picture of the imperial crown

Image:Weltliche Schatzkammer Wien (258b).JPGEdit

is very beautiful. I have only a problem with the expression "Kaiserstum Österreich". Let my try to get a better one, but I know it is also not easy for me as a native speaker of German. I remember the phrase: "Römisches Reich deutscher Nation" and this lasted ~ until Bonaparte in the early 19th Century. After that time the sovereign was "Kaiser von Österreich", but not before. I will ask my wife Ingrid ( she studied history ) and then I can give you efficient help. I will be back on this side in the next few days.

Greetings from Bavaria

--Metzner 14:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Interior images of Florence buildingsEdit

Hi Gryffindor, I am user:marsares (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Marsares) and I would like to ask you what info you got about the (new?) regulation (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jastrow#interior_images_of_Florence_buildings). Did they answer? It would be very kind if you could tell me, for in June I´ll be going to Florence for a week an dI´ll try to get some info, too. Thanks--84.169.232.5 03:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

hello there Marsares. Yes they have answered, you can see the whole discussion here Category talk:Galleria degli Uffizi. Have fun in Florence, gorgeous place. Gryffindor 07:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:PedroIVPortugal.jpgEdit

Hi, may I ask you to add the name of the painter/artist please? Thuresson 23:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Images requiring combiningEdit

Hi! This two pictures Image:Freiburg Minster 2008 (15).jpg and Image:Freiburg Minster 2008 (14).jpg are identical.--Gothika 16:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I see now. Here is the merged picture. --Gothika 19:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi again! (Please excuse my English). I'm working with Photoshop CS3. After merging the photos, I use to make lens-, perspective- and sometime color and light correction. I'm very glad you liked the panorama picture. --Gothika 18:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Here is the new panorama. It was difficult to merge, and it still not perfect, sorry. --Gothika 10:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Inclusive categoriesEdit

Hello

Are you sure it's actually usefull to have too categories here :

Category:Sanchi and Category:Buddhist monuments at Sanchi ?

All the pics are (and most likely will stay) the same... And did you think at the different wikipedias, who are linking to Category:Sanchi, which is now empty ?

Ok, there is a town, and these are monuments... but...

Sorry for my english (I'm french) --Chaoborus (talk) 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

About Image:Charles V Escutcheon.svgEdit

Hi! I'm not the author of the image, but I can do the work. The only thing I need to know is why the silver must be white. Cheers, F l a n k e r (talk) 15:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but in heraldry there is only silver (represented indifferently white or grey). In general I prefer white, but if the author thinks grey is better, I think is better. --F l a n k e r (talk) 15:26, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

:)Edit

Thank You!--Gothika (talk) 16:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Wow, some pics are amazing! I already linked in it.wiki. Thanks for linking the policy, it's exactly how "i thought" it was on commons, so it's better to have it clear now. thank you again, and if another time you have the chance to come back to tuscany please let me know, we could go for a photo raid together ;) Ciao --Sailko (talk) 17:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Great picture, it's already online ;) Ciao --Sailko (talk) 17:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Panorama tricksEdit

I was looking at stitching your images on Austria parliament (here), but some things I've noticed makes a stitch very hard. So I take the initiative to give you some advices in order to make better panorama material pictures. I am by no mean an expert, and I still have a lot to learn, but the advices I'll give you have help me to improve my pictures over the years (you can have a look here). I also suggest you take a look at the guidelines for other advices. Here we go:

  • Sweep through your scene from left to right, then move up/down one notch: It reduces the quantity of pictures needed compared to a up to down sweep, for the same reason a polar orbit satellite will see the poles more than any other places on earth.
  • Reduce the overlap: usually, when a scene is with a lot of details, a simple 20-30% overlap is enough. It increases computer processing speeds, and reduces the parallax error in handheld panoramas. Use a bigger overlap to include enough details if the scene has big empty white walls, sky, running water or something like this. For those situtions, take all your pictures following a normal spacing until you hit an empty spot. At the empty spot, simply get features in your field of view so you will be able to bridge the empty area, or take pictures all around the empty area with enough overlapping to be able to cover that area.
  • Set white balance, exposition (shutter spead, aperture, ISO) to manual settings, and use the same values for the entire panorama.
  • Use a tripod for interior images or images with low light: random blurry images can easily ruin a panorama (if you do take blurry pictures or you think you took a blurry picture, just take an identical picture again, and upload only the non-blurry ones). Also, reduces dramatically parallax errors. A tripod allows you to take very high definition panoramas by zooming at the maximum of your camera's capabilities, and take multi-row panoramas.
  • Don't hesitate to cover more field of view than what you originally want. Excess can be cropped in the end.

Hope these advices will help you. I'm looking forward to see new pictures to stitch. --S23678 (talk) 21:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Francesca StefanoEdit

Damn your deletion, I was just about to upload a full version of it :p -mattbuck (Talk) 10:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

No idea I'm afraid, I was just watching the new uploads and that image looked odd so I peeked. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

plans of Topkapi PalaceEdit

Hi Gryffindor. I added the northern direction to the maps. I will drawing Image:Plan Harem Topkapi Palace Istanbul.JPG, but it will take 2-3 day because it has to many details. --Gothika (talk) 23:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

The Graphic Designer's BarnstarEdit

thx --Marku1988 (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Rathaus Vienna June 2006 165.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rathaus Vienna June 2006 165.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

Re: congratulationsEdit

Tank you very much! --F l a n k e r (talk) 09:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Broken thumbnailsEdit

I cant fix Image:Beach Street Penang Dec 2006 014 remake.svg because is not broken. I think this cause the problem: [1]. I just uploaded Image:Qutbcomplex.svg and this thumbnail is broken too, but full-size image displays fine. Sorry. I will try to reedit the image in CorelDRAW maybe this one works fine.--Gothika (talk) 16:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Problem solved. --Gothika (talk) 16:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Its looking (almost) fine to me (please delete screenshot after view):

I try yesterday to decipher what is written on Image:Qutbcomplex.jpg, before uploading, bud I can't. --Gothika (talk) 08:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

SurpriseEdit

Barnstar-camera.png The Photographer's Barnstar
To Gryffindor this photographer's barnstar is awarded for the great images that you have added to Wikimedia Commons.--Gothika (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

DuplicatesEdit

Hello. Template:Duplicate clearly states "This is an exact duplicate or scaled-down version". That means that the template should not be used for images that differ more than in size. The deletion guidelines for duplicates are even more clear "If the file is the same file type and you're sure that it is exactly the same content (colours, quality, etc) tag it with {{duplicate|Image:example.jpg}}..." (I bolded the most important part). Image:Friedrich von Amerling 003a.jpg is not exactly the same, since the colors are different. If the colors are wrong and you think the file should be deleted, then you should follow the deletion guidelines for redundant/bad quality files. /Ö 21:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'AzurEdit

Hello,

The probleme is : Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur (and all the french région and département) have no official flag ! I really wonder where these « wrong » images come from (before the Open Clip Art Library). I’ve let a message to Patricia.fidi (but on fr.wiki). Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 09:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

You could replace an other tag but I don’t know a tag saying this image is wrong, not official, not historical, and should probably be delete. All this « flags » are bad redrawing of coat of arms but doesnt exists (Image:Blason région fr Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.svg exist but not Image:Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur flag.svg). For a moment, I hesitate to speed delete all thess images. Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 09:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
The best thing is to find sources. I’m french and know more than a bit about flags. On the french Wikipédia we are now discussing about deleting all these flags. There probably not all completely wrong but it’s sure : there are not official, most of them are adaptation of the coat (but coat are not adapted in real life). I’ll wait for sources and end of disucssion on fr.wiki and then post all this on the noticeboard. Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 09:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I don’t want to delete these image but without source it’s hard to keep them. For the moment, I won’t delete anything, just wait. Moreover, if you like the dolphin and the eagle, there are OCLA, so the deletion wont change anything. Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 10:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
OCLA is the Open Clip Art Library (see before and the « source » of some of these images). I send a mail to OCLA to know more about their « source ». Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 11:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi both ! See my last URL on my user talk. Thks--Patricia.fidi (talk) 17:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Toscana vs. ToskanaEdit

You moved Tuscany to Toskana, but in italian the name is Toscana ("K" is not part of italian alphabet)

Is it possible to move it again mantaining the original history?

Thanks

--Carlomorino (talk) 11:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Edo CastleEdit

All I have are uploaded. I will take more next time i am around, and of course upload them, too. Cheers -- Chris 73 (talk) 19:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Blason Ducs de Styrie.svgEdit

Bonjour Gryffindor,

Voici la copie du message que j'ai envoyé aujourd'hui à User:Odejea :

Bonjour Odejea, J'ai une petite question : qu'est-ce-que ta panthère a-t-elle de plus que la mienne ?

Avant de la monter, j'avais pourtant bien lu l'article fr:Liste_des_meubles_héraldiques#Panth.C3.A8re et réalisé un monstre composé d’une tête de taureau (Là il est vrai que je me suis égaré en boucherie et j'ai dû me servir en boucherie chevaline, peut être par peur de l'fr:Encéphalopathie spongiforme bovine ! Toujours est-il que je lui ai ajouté des cornes de bovidé), un corps de lion, les pattes avant d’aigle, les pattes arrières de lion, et la queue d’un léopard. Hormis sa tête, techniquement, elle n'est pas plus fautive que la tienne. Là où je veux en venir : c'est qu'un bandeau Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Blason Ducs de Styrie.svg lui a été apposé sans qu'on prévienne l'auteur de l'image puis cette dernière a été écrasée de la même manière.

N'y a-t-il pas un petit peu d'abus ??

A bon entendeur...

Cordialement, Jimmy44 (talk) 13:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC).

Gryffindor, s'il est peut-être difficile pour vous de prévenir un utilisteur qu'une de ses contributions est sous le coup d'une Commons:Deletion requests, puis d'en discuter avec lui ; il vous sera peut-être de faire traduire ce message et d'y méditer...

J'ai fais une copie de ce message à User:Odejea ainsi qu'à fr:Utilisateur:Odejea. Cordialement, Jimmy44 (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC).

Hindu temples in IndonesiaEdit

hi there, why did you remove the category "Hindu temples in Indonesia" from Category:Prambanan? I have readded it. Gryffindor (talk) 13:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, did I? It must have been by mistake... :-( Djoehana (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pays-de-la-Loire flag.svgEdit

Image deletion warning Image:Pays-de-la-Loire flag.svg 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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


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

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 13:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Campus of the University of ViennaEdit

Dear Gryffindor, you undid some of my changes today but I do not yet understand your reasons for this very clearly. Your renaming of Category:Main Building of the University of Vienna to Category:Main building of the University of Vienna was definitely a good idea, but I do not understand why you made some other changes:

  1. You emptied Category:Campus of the University of Vienna and put the images from there into Category:Altes AKH. The current name of the location is, however, "Campus of the University of Vienna" as evidenced by [2]. The University of Vienna owns, maintains and uses the campus since it was donated by the city of Vienna to the university more than ten years ago.
    I suspect that you repopulated Category:Altes AKH in order to preserve the connection between the location and Vienna's General Hospital that used the buildings for a long time in history. But, in order to preserve this connection, I added a link from Category:Allgemeines Krankenhaus Wien to the Campus category for exactly that purpose (maybe you did not notice this). Is this alright and sufficient for you to preserve the connection between the "Allgemeines Krankenhaus" and the "Campus der Universität Wien"?
    Or would you prefer to add the images to both categories: "Altes AKH" for images relating to the historical usage of the buildings and "Campus of the University of Vienna" for images relating to the campus as it stands now (including its history)? But in my view, this would amount to unnecessary duplication, so I would prefer to just use the current name.
  1. As to Category:Bethaus im Campus der Universität Wien versus Category:Synagoge im alten AKH Wien, I do not have that strong opinions as on the first issue, but the images contained in this category without exception show the current state after the remodeling by the University of Vienna, which would in my view be an indication to give preference to the new name (see [3]) over the old name.

What are your views on this? --UV (talk) 21:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

hi there UV,
well you renamed all images pertaining to the Old AKH into "Campus", including this image here Image:AAKH-1784.jpg. What would you suggest we do with this image, which shows the old hospital? About the Synagoge im alten AKH Wien I can only say that that's what it's called in many books. Now whether it is called "Synagogue" or "Bethaus" I don't care so much. But it was constructed as a place of prayer in the old AKH, not for some campus. Gryffindor (talk) 19:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello Gryffindor, thanks for your reply and sorry for the delay in my reply. My suggestion would be then
  1. to add Image:AAKH-1784.jpg to both Category:Allgemeines Krankenhaus Wien and Category:Campus of the University of Vienna, so that this image can be properly found both when looking for the history of the Allgemeines Krankenhaus and when looking for the history of the campus of the University of Vienna,
  2. and to move the other images back to Category:Campus of the University of Vienna, because they do not show what the Altes AKH looked like, but they show the current university campus, after the remodeling work undertaken by the University of Vienna.
As to Bethaus vs. Synagoge, I as well do not really care that much. I still believe that "… im Campus der Universität Wien" is a more accurate name for these images than "… im alten AKH Wien", because, as I said, the images contained in this category without exception show the current state after the remodeling done by the University of Vienna. But I will not quarrel with you over this one.
Concerning Image:AAKH-1784.jpg and the campus images: Would you accept the proposal I made above? Greetings, --UV (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello Gryffindor, do you have any objections if I follow the proposal that I have made above? --UV (talk) 11:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I see what you mean. Yes, the old image can be left in the "Altes AKH" and the rest can go to "Campus..". As of the synagogue, I would prefer if it was left where it is. I hope that is fine with you. sincerely Gryffindor (talk) 12:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
That is fine with me, thank you for your reply. Greetings, --UV (talk) 16:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Piazza SS Annunziata Firenze Apr 2008 (20).JPGEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 13:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:The Emperor Meiji 2.jpgEdit

Hi, Gryffindor. You marked Image:The Emperor Meiji 2.jpg as Duplicate. But Image:The Emperor Meiji 2.jpg is not a duplicate of Image:Meiji tenno3.jpg - their sources are different. If you believe Image:The Emperor Meiji 2.jpg should be deleted, use Commons:Deletion requests, please. Thank you! --miya (talk) 03:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Big Ben reuseEdit

I have reused Image:Big Ben London April 2006 016.jpg here, with credit here. Thanks for your work :-) - David Gerard (talk) 11:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Wladyslawjtyrag.JPGEdit

Gryffindor, could you tell me why did you removed English descriptions and important categories from the above image (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3AWladyslawjtyrag.JPG&diff=13796402&oldid=12963085)? I am all for switching to Painting template but please add to metadata, do not delete it. --Jarekt (talk) 03:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

After writing you I noticed that unlike most of the other paintings in the Category:Art lost in Poland during World War II this painting did not have the sources supporting this category. I also did not find it on http://www.mkidn.gov.pl/kolekcje/en/, so It is fine to remove it. Often presence of the painting in some western gallery means that either painter produced several similar versions of the painting (see Image:Bruegel Carnival Lent.JPG) or that the painting was never recovered by Poland. Also sorry about tone of above message. In retrospect it seems disproportional to your "offenses". Greetings --Jarekt (talk) 12:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

House of Orléans-BraganzaEdit

The House of Orléans-Braganza was created by the marriage of Isabel of Brazil and Gaston, comte d'Eu in 1864 and therefore the previous generations would would not have been of the House of Orléans-Braganza until 1864. Shot in the dark, but guessing your rational was the separate the Brazilian branch of the House of Braganza, but this way is misleading. Cladeal832 (talk) 17:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Infanta MargaritaEdit

Perdone, pero tengo que escribir en español. Sí es la imagen que pertenece al Prado: ver. La otra, la que usted ha encontrado es una réplica: Infanta Margarita

Autor:Velázquez
Fecha:1650-60
Museo:Kunsthistorisches Museum
Características:
Material:Oleo sobre lienzo
Estilo:Barroco Español

Nos encontramos ante una réplica más reducida del retrato de la infanta Margarita que conserva el Museo del Prado. La obra que se exhibe en Madrid se considera como la última de Velázquez, apuntándose incluso que sería acabada por su discípulo Juan Bautista Martínez del Mazo por lo que este lienzo que contemplamos debe ser obra de taller, posiblemente salida de los pinceles del propio Mazo. Quizá encontremos una ligera diferencia en el rostro, quedando el resto como absoluta copia.

Saludos Lourdes (talk) 18:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Non English NamesEdit

Due to our recent discussion, I take the opportunity for a couple of questions that I wanted to ask you since a long time;

  • In en:Category:Cathedrals in France, there are a couple of "Notre Dame"s that are not translated, along with a number of Saints, such as Saint Pierre, that are not translated. This looks not completely consistent.
  • According to the Commons naming rules, the name here should be Cathedral of xxx, not Amiens cathedral (and in Commons, the word cathedral should be in lower case (no title case)).
  • Proper names, such as the one used for the French cathedrals are generally accepted (such as Notre Dame de Paris). When is the name a proper name and when need it to be translated ?
  • Looking into Category:Cathedrals in France, the proper names seem to prevail. What to do with the few exceptions ?

Don't get me wrong, personally I would prefer to avoid or isolate proper names (and be more severe with it) and use a uniform syntax in the style of "Cathedral of Paris", and if a proper name is needed, added between parenthesises such as "Cathedral of Paris (Notre Dame)". But because the commons rules are so unclear and interpretable, it is difficult to enforce one single logic. That explains my, what you will probably call, tolerance. --Foroa (talk) 17:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Foroa. Well I do agree that it is not easy. My understanding of the policy is to use English whenever possible and wherever it makes sense, so I am just going with policy here. My gut feeling says that we should use English names for all buildings and churches (now if the format be "X Cathedral", "X cathedral" or "Cathedral of X" is another topic) whenever possible and wherever it makes sense without "inventing" a name of course. I think it makes sense for categories to be in English so that most users be able to find them with relative ease. If we start naming church categories in French, what argument are we going to use for someone who wants to use "Kölner Dom"? Gryffindor (talk) 20:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
I do agree completely with you, but the rules are just too much fundamentalist in the sense that only English is accepted except for the proper names. And the exceptions open up the hole for almost everything, you'll find plenty of exceptions on the English wikipedia too. I believe that there must be a place for local names so local people have a reference and feel "at home". More over, some parts of names are impossible to translate anyway (Saint-Pierre, Minoriteits kirche). Therefore, I am defender for a category name in two parts:
Part 1: "Topic in/of/from location", standard notation in English, no single exception (except geo and person names), stating what it is
Part 2: (Proper name), optional suffix in local (roman) language
Examples could be "Cathedral of Paris (Notre Dame)", Movie of France (La vie d'Amélie Poulain), "Cathedral in Cologne (Kölner Dom)", Triomph arch in Paris (Arche de Triomphe)", ...
This way, you could have extremely strong/strict rules while leaving place for the "untranslatable" and local names.--Foroa (talk) 05:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Note that I did some other french moves because for me, naming consistency is more important than the application/interpretation of the current rules.


Image:KylieX2008_July_Berlin_(6).jpgEdit

Image deletion warning Image:KylieX2008_July_Berlin_(6).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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


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

Polarlys (talk) 15:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Statues of the tetrarchsEdit

Hallo, there are several dozen "statues of the tetrarchs" around the globe. If we are talking about the group of statues of the tetrarchs in Venice, of course, there is only one group of them, the one at Piazza San Marco Square. But as it was before the name of the category did not mention any group at all, and was therefore too generic. It was like "Statues of the imperators". What does it mean? Furthermore, in reorganising Venice, I have added (Venice) to everything apart from the obvious "Doge's Palace". Why? Because the same families owned sevaral palaces scattered through Venice dominions. One "Palazzo Querini" might be in Venice, or in Brescia, or in Padua, or in Rovigo... Can you tell in advance how many of them and where they are? I cannot. Therefore I add the town as a rule. Perhaps in some cases it will be too much. But in most case, it will not.

My problem is simple. I have thousands and thousands of images to categorise (when I reorganised Venice, over 3,000), since for some reason Italians do not categorise their uploads. Perhaps for the fact that most of us do not speak English well . I therefore need a firm criterion to chain-categorise hundreds of images without checking EACH time what the exact wording is. The rule is therefore: nameoftheitem (Town). In this way I can put ANY orphan image into one category, without knowing by heart literally thousands of them. For this reason, to me it is more important to have a rule I can remember by heart ALWAYS, than to save the effort to type five extra letters. I can survive that. I hope you appreciate my reason. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hallo, I can't see the advantage in changing what already exists... Apart for the fact that I prefere to leave apart parts such as "basilica", "chiesa di", "Church of", "Duomo di", for the purpose of being able to tell at first glance what the category is. So if I had to change, I'd rather go for "Saint John Lateran (Rome)" or "San Giovanni in Laterano (Rome)". Would you guess the category had you to know by heart that "St. Mark's" in Venice goes under, say, "Patriarchal Basilica of Saint Mark"? Pompousness is of no avail here...
My reasoning goes this way. You can't know in advance whether there is only one such monument in the world. (in fact, encyclopedias exist to help you DISCOVER things you didn't know). For instance, you probably think there is one and but one Bridge of Sighs, and this one is in Venice, right? Wrong. There is one in Cambridge too. This happens because very famous churches and monuments are copied, or give their name to other minor churches. Churches called after the Madonna di Loreto are not only in Loreto, but all around Italy. For this reason, I am putting the town everywhere, as a rule, since too many times I have discovered duplicates of the names of "unique" monuments. Which I can't know in advance. When we are finished, in a couple years, we can decide differently, and have a bot move everything. But now putting categories rather than fixing them is the priority. (By the way, since you are interested in categorising Italy, I urge you to pick up some towns, and collect & categorise the thousands of uncategorised images about Italy present in Commons. It would be a help I appreciate...).
The only execption is Tuscany. There, Sailko is uploading thousands of images. So I leave him work with his method. He thinks Florence is the centre of the World, and there is only one Palazzo Vecchio, the one in Florence. Now, since "Palazzo vecchio" in Italy merely means "The old palace", you can easly tell in a short time there will be scores of them, from all around Italy. But since it is Sailko who is looking after Florence, I adapt to his method. Some day, we shall match them.
Add that Wikipedia in English follows this pattern "Name, Town", whereas the one in Italian goes like "Name (Town)". It is more convenient to me to stick to the Italian method when I deal with Italy. In the future, we shall wonder about mass-matching the whole of the wikis. Now, it's a bit early.
Note: this I am doing about Italy alone. When you changed my categorisation of Istanbul, I did not object. You were looking after that part, so you had to feel at ease there. Put please do no mess up what I am doing in Italy, compelling me, theoretically, to know by heart, church by church, which bizarre name was capriciously given to each monument. I need a SIMPLE rule I can follow ALWAYS at FIRST GLANCE.
As for using English. Yes and no. For churches very famous therefore having an English name, such as Saint Peter's in Rome, yes - provided that it be a standard name; why some churches in Wikipedia in English are listed as "church of", others with the name alone, other with the complete titulus? Before using en:Wikipedia as a blueprint, they have to harmonise all names of churches following a stricte rule... Otherwise chaos will be the result.
And what what about each cathedral in Italy? Should every Duomo be translated into Cathedral, even when everyone, including tourist maps and tourist signs, calls Duomo the Cathedral? In Italy, for no reason, some cathedrals are called Duomo, some others, Cattedrale. It all depends from the local use. This complicates thing for me, but I know here in Milan everybody speaks about the Duomo, whereas in Genoa they talk about their Cathedral. So I'd rather translate case by case.
If you feel that a general discussion is needed in the village pump, ok, we'll do it.

Best wishes. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 17:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Italian catsEdit

You write:

There is only one cathedral in the world called "Basilica of St. John Lateran" AFAIK, see [4]. It would have to be changed.
You will forgive me if I don't accept Wikipedia as the ultimate source, althouh I agree with you on the fact that in this very case it is utterly unlikely that another basilica having the same name exists around the world. The reason is that Laterano is already a place name by itself, therefore the name sounds like "San Giovanni (Laterano)", Laterano being a hill in Rome, which amounts to saying "Saint Jean de Montmartre" or the like.
However, even with such an utterly peculiar name, you might be perhaps surprised in learning that "San Giovanni in Laterano" is also a church (not a Basilica, this is true) in Milan http://www.sglaterano.it/pagine/parrocchia.htm and that a nunnery of San Giovanni in Laterano existed in Venice, where a "Palazzo Cappello a San Giovanni in Laterano" still exists http://venice.jc-r.net/palaces/cappello-a-san-giovanni-laterano.htm
This is just to show you that things are not so simple as you seem to imply. In Italy names repeat again and again, thank to the fact that it was divided in dozen states, and taht famouse churches were "copied". There can be but a Royal Palace in England, maybe, but you have several of them in Italy...
The baseline is that no one has a "monopoly" on categories.
This is completely true. And it is a principle valid both for you, and for me.
The basic principle for all categories is to use English whenever possible, although agreeable there is a level of interpretation if all should be in English or only the most well-known buildings.
I think we therefore agree.
Interesting that you mention Tuscany, I have uploaded many images and cleaned up categories, apart from a misunderstanding on the use of interior images of museums I have had not problems with User:Sailko who let me move categories such as Category:Uffizi Gallery.
Interesting that you mention Sailko. :-) He is a nice chap, but he refuses to do anything more than uploading. For instance, he never writes a description of the image. I take the first image of his I can find: take this: Image:San quirico in monte san quirico 02.JPG. If this is the example I should follow, thanks, I can do without. I spent ages adding categories and descriptions to Sailko's images. He did not obiect either. He only wants to write as little as possible. No surprise he favors deleting town name...
BTW, I would have consented on the move of the Uffizi Gallery too. That's one of those evident cases where the English name is in wide use, in place of the Italian one.
About "Palazzo Vecchio" is there another Palazzo with this name? If in doubt it is maybe best to check on the Wikipedia [5]?
Again, please don't use Wikipedia as a source. It will take a while before the in-depth work is done. We are a mere work-in-progress, not the Encyclopaedia Britannica...
Take Google instead. The very first page of Google for "Palazzo Vecchio" minus "Florence" minus "Firenze" (which means taht I stopped after the first page) reveals the existence of a Palazzo Vecchio in:

Palazzo Vecchio is also the name of a small town at

And this is but the first page. The fact that most people only know the one in Florence does not mean this is the only one that exists. This is only the most famous of the several palaces with the same name, fullstop.
Ditto for the rest. The fact taht people only know one Basilica di San Marco, the one in Venice, does not imply that a "Basilica di San Marco" does not exist in Florence as well. And so on, and so on, and so on... And how was the case solved in Commons, btw? By using "Category:Saint Mark (Venice)" and "Category:Saint Mark (Florence)?" No, way too simple: it was solved by creating two uttelry different categories "Category:St. Mark's Basilica" and "Category:San Marco (Florence)". Ok, now, can you possibly guess the category of these two churches without checking it via a search? No, you cannot. What I am saying is that there must be a criterion, hazard being not a criterion. And add that there is also Category:Saint Mark (Florence), which is the Anglican church in Florence, whose name is in English. I hope you are notw getting a clearer picture of the terms of the problem.
I hope I convinced you a little bit more, now. And I insist that I shall greatly appreciate your categorising a little of the several thousands uncathegorised images of Italy that clutter WikiCommons. Just pick a town and start searching. You will be surprised about the quantity of uncategorised imaged there are...

Best regards. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 20:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Where is your reasonEdit

for this? In my eyes its totaly wrong. abf /talk to me/ 18:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I have to say the same for moving File:Maria Theresia as child.jpg to Image:Andreas_Moeller_001.jpg and Image:Emperor_Francis_Joseph_of_Austira,1865.jpg to Image:Franz joseph1.jpg (although less problematic imho). The name of the image gets less descriptive, instead of more so... Not making much sense to me, I'm afraid. NielsF ? (en, nl, fr, it) 21:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Image names should show in my oppinnion what the image contains, not the creator. abf /talk to me/ 11:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, abf (in this case might be even better to mention creator + description). Gryffindor, I see the point that a work by a Spanish artist having a French title might look strange, on the other hand, I find that replacing a descriptive title (albeit in a language other than the "original" one) with just the name of the author and a suffix does not fix that perceived problem, but just makes it worse. You wouln't rename an image of the Nightwatch by Rembrandt to just "Rembrandt_001.jpg", right? As for the naming scheme you say to follow, could you be so kind as to provide a link? (I'll follow abf's talk in order not to scatter discussion too much). NielsF ? (en, nl, fr, it) 19:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Dear Gryffindor, I use your Photo of Heiligendamm for the CD-Cover of my song about the "White Town by the Baltic See" named: "Heiligendamm, du meine Perle" Thank you for that photo. You can listen to the song on:www.myspace.com/josefnowak Greetings from Berlin, Josef nowakshow@yahoo.de

MaximillianEdit

You might want to check what you had DeLinker do: On fy: you've just had replaced a bright-coloured image, clearly showing the man's countenance, with a darker-coloured, that gives more the impression of decoration. The change doesn't quite match your description about clearer colours. Aliter (talk) 00:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vindobona Hoher Markt-62.JPGEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


Image:Vindobona Hoher Markt-63.JPGEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Kunsthistorisches MuseumEdit

Hi Gryffindor, is the new colour scheme OK with you? A quick tip: 'fg' stands for foreground, 'bg' for background. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure, what colours do you want? 'header fg' is the colour of the font for the name of the museum; 'left column fg' is the colour of the font for the left column; 'right column bg' (to be added) is the colour of the font for the right column. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 21:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC) PS: I liked my version better, more contrast ^^

Category:RömermuseumEdit

Hello, could you move the category Römermuseum to "Römermuseum Vindobona"? There are a lot of "Römermuseums" in Germany, Austria and Swiss, so this category is misleading. (Compare to a search for Römermuseum on the german wikipedia.) Thanks MatthiasKabel (talk) 18:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Moving of titlesEdit

Is there any particularly important reason of you moving 天安门 ‎to 天安門? I'm guessing the reason of you not using "Tiananmen" as the heading or title is to reflect the "native" usage of the site right? If that's the case, then 天安门 would be the correct title since I'm pretty sure in Beijing, they use simplified Chinese characters. Go to the Chinese version of Wikipedia, the Tiananmen article was written using simplified Chinese characters. Again, try to reflect the native usage?--HéctorTabaré (talk) 19:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Then what is the point of transitioning to Chinese characters for this place? Remember the site "is in Beijing", thus it is important to reflect the usage of Chinese characters in this place, otherwise it is kind of "dishonest". I think for the sake of no furthur argument, it would be better to use English as the title, and then include whatever Chinese character styles you what in the description.--HéctorTabaré (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles have to be in native tongue per Commons policy on languages. Really, well for Beijingers, it is certainly not the form of Chinese characters they use in Beijing. For places in Hong Kong and Taiwan, you should use traditional Chinese characters, and for places like Beijing (or Shanghai, or "places" that uses simplified Chinese characters... and I'm talking about places here), you should use simplified characters because that is the "characters" that are commonly in use. It is common sense. No one is asking you to change places that use traditional Chinese characters to simplified Chinese.

As of now, I'm going to change the Tiananmen Square title to traditional Chinese as well, for the sake of consistency with Tiananmen, but please, do not change anymore about places in Beijing, it would be a headache for me and other editors who are trying to upload pictures to Beijing related categories on the commons.--HéctorTabaré (talk) 20:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Is this okay?Edit

Hello. Another editor and I are trying to come up with a suitable collage image for the Somali people page on English Wikipedia. However, we have run into numerous problems, most notable of which are copyright issues. As a WikiCommons administrator, I was hoping you could answer for me the following question: Is it alright to put together a collage but not know or specify the exact copyright status, author and source of each image featured in the collage? The reason I ask is because the other editor I'm working with has just assured me that the image second from the left on the top row in this collage is uncopyrighted. He says he found it on a blog. I personally doubt it is uncopyrighted, as it is a staged, commercial shot of Rageh Omaar, a well-known journalist formerly with the BBC. It also looks to have been taken from the same photo sessions as this obviously copyrighted photo on the BBC website (same outfit, etc.). Nevertheless, the editor has already uploaded the image to WikiCommons and released it under a Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. Given the above, do you think that this collage image has any staying power, or is it likely to be deleted without us specifying the copyright status and source for the Omaar image? Middayexpress (talk) 01:55, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The Rageh Omaar image in the collage is, as it turns out, copyrighted; the BBC holds the copyright. Is the collage certain to get deleted now or can we still use it somehow? Middayexpress (talk) 02:26, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

COA of Holy Roman EmperorsEdit

Hi,

(I didn't know whether to post here or on my page) No problem, I enjoy doing it. I only wanted to tell you that I just finished these 3: Image:Rudolf II Arms-imperial.svg, Image:Emperor Frederick III Arms.svg and Image:Charles V Arms-imperial.svg. I'd be glad to help improve more COA, as far as my SVG lore (and time) are enough! Just leave me a message or something. Cheers --Ogre (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Marie AntoinetteEdit

Excuse me, why did you change this image? The old image is better and bigger.--Kaho Mitsuki (Dis-moi) 14:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image:Lanckoronski COA.jpg?Edit

Why is it different from Image:Herb Zadora.jpg? My guess is that it's not page six :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Lanckorońskis’ coat of armsEdit

Dear Gryffindor,

Roughly one may consider this image of the Lanckorońskis’ crest Zadora as their Polish noble coat of arms properly (theirs and of 100 more families) *, and the other one as their Holy Roman Empire comital coat of arms, granted to them in 1774 * together with the title of count.

As you can see in the Grand coat of arms,

Parted quarterly with a heart.svg

one get on 2 & 5 Poland (the white eagle); 3 & 4 Zadora proper (a lion head belching out flames) and on 1 a lion (may be with a sword as in the crest – I don´t see well... the drawing is small).

You may see similarities with Herb Traby, Radziwiłłs’ crest and Radziwiłłs’ grand crest. The same thing on Herb Lis, Sapiehas’ crest and Sapiehas’ grand crest...

Is it too confuse? Sorry.

Regards my friend.--Gustavo (talk) 05:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi,Edit

I just now edited [[6]] by adding newline-tags; in case you dislike it, revert. I am, btw., not sure about some details, e.g. Arbeitszimmer=Ketterlzimmer?, but have nothing at hand to look up, and, mainly, have all my interest at another place for the moment: Might you pass by and comment in Category talk:Vincent van Gogh? It is about cleaning up, creating optimized file names &c., therefore contributions by "oldies" would be most appreciated. Thanks, Wolfgang --WeHaWoe (talk) 06:42, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Photos of Simon Dach StraßeEdit

Hi!

Could you tell me when you took the photos of Simon Dach Straße which can be found at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Simon-Dach-Stra%C3%9Fe ?

Cheers!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ventolin

78.16.46.213 02:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Crop this imageEdit

Dear Sir/Madam,

  • You are cordially invited to crop this image: Image:Mayan Chac Mool by Luis Alberto Melograna.jpg with your image software since you added the 'crop' tag here. I've tried to upload a cropped version of the picture 3 to 4 times (as you may notice) and I get the same failed result. I don't have Photoshop or any of the fancy image software. This image is important and is used in this article: [7] I've given up trying to upload a 'cropped' version with my outdated image software and am totally frustrated. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:16, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes. I see it now. Maybe it took the Commons system a few minutes to adjust to the new cropped image. Thank You. --Leoboudv (talk) 10:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Privilegium maius detail.jpgEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 10:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Who cares? Category:Paintings by Albrecht Dürer in the Prado MuseumEdit

If I search for a special Dürer work, I would look for it in the Dürer category. Where else? kopfschüttel Mutter Erde (talk) 20:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Popolo della Bibbia.jpgEdit

Hi, could you undelete this image? It was just released in the public domain with tkt #2008110410014595 , thanks --Vituzzu (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there's a permission (if you have otrs access you could take a look at this)--Vituzzu (talk) 14:41, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I've just met Rjd on the irc, thank you the same :) --Vituzzu (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

BaburEdit

Are you sure that „باب “ is correct? Shouldn't it be „بابر“ (with „R“) like on ur:ظہیر الدین محمد بابر? --DorisAntony (talk) 16:45, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Deleting duplicatesEdit

When you delete duplicate files it is not very useful to only write "duplicated file". The deletion comment should at least contain a link to the other file, so that people following links to the deleted file can find what they are looking for. Even better (unless the deleted file name is really bad) is to redirect the deleted file, so that links are not broken at all. /Ö 13:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Improving a Commons imageEdit

Dear Sir...or Madam?

This is a pharaoh's mummy and may have belonged to Akhnaten himself. It is used in this article: [8] I thank you for your time and any help you can give. With kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

  • Just curious: May I ask who does the cleaning up of the image? Is there a team of image specialists on Commons who performs such difficult tasks? I thought you were 'the specialist' here given your excellent treatment of the treaty of Qadesh tablet. I'm afraid I am highly ignorant of Commons procedures. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Just curious: do you want a version of Image:The KV55 Pharaoh's Vulture by Ulises Muñiz.jpg rendered with a black background instead of what's there now? I only ask because it is easy enough for me to do, as I have kept the source PhotoShop source file and it is as simple as adding a layer of black underneath the pectoral image (which I had cropped out from the background in order to work on it). I only ask because I am not certain it would be an improvement, as the original background gives a bit of depth to the image. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 21:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Peter_Paul_Rubens_Venus_at_a_mirror.jpgEdit

Hello, pleasu see User_talk:Shakko#Image:Peter_Paul_Rubens_Venus_at_a_mirror.jpg for more information on this image. I'll sort it under a different category, so that something like this won't happen again. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 06:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Category:Theo van DoesburgEdit

Hello Gryffindor, I think I found the proper template to link to wikisource categories. Have a look at Category:Theo van Doesburg. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 14:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

vGEdit

Hi, I recently sent you mail on thisone; I meanwhile found out that you moved categories, but am somewhat unhappy whith that: drawings are no paintings, and vG left more drawings+mixed media pieces than paintings. So, maybe another term might be found? How about "pieces"?

Further: I left a question (well, a few) on Template_talk:Painting#ONE_more_line? quite a while ago. How are the chances to get answers? I'd really dislike to start an at-least-one-month's =180 hrs project just to learn afterwards that my ideas would not be welcome for such-and-such reason. tx, Wolfgang (talk) 19:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Moved talk to more appropriate place. tx. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh#copy.2Bpaste_from_private_talk.2C_User_talk:W..23your_message Wolfgang (talk) 21:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Phillip IIEdit

Hi, Gryffindor! I don´t understand why this image [9] is proposed for speedy deletion, with the reason "bad named", if it represents Phillip II. The tag is also only reccomended if the uploader is the same editor who puts the tag. Please see [10]. Thank you for your attention. Cheers!----Balbo (talk) 12:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind explanations. Nevertheless, the question about the name is still unknown for me. I guess this is a minor question, if all the categories of the deleted images go to the new ones. Thanks again and see you in Commons!--Balbo (talk) 13:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

StrasbourgEdit

Bonjour,

Je suis désolé de le dire mais de la majorité absolu des Strasbourgeois est le français aujourd'hui. Pour cette raison l'article doit être renommé en français. Cordialement Aaker (talk) 17:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Please stop!Edit

Please stop requesting silly renamings as MariadeMedici.jpg -> Peter Paul Rubens 095c.jpg. If you wish all three versions of Maria's portraits to have similar names, then ask for renaming the other ones. A file name like Peter Paul Rubens XXX.jpg is nothing worth and also not meaningful as it is demanded by the naming conventions. -- Sir Gawain (talk) 00:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

And why are these pics "incorrectly named" ??? Mutter Erde (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Stop destroying the image history and the pure artificial contextEdit

By ignoring the fact of my scientific arguments and delete the best versions of this image you show that you missuse your sysop rights. Also your rabulistic choice "used as edit war" is a violation of AGF. Several users posted as a cause of your missbehavior. --Herrick (talk) 10:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

  1. (Deletion log); 10:40 . . Gryffindor (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Pieter van der Werff 001.jpg" (Deleted old revision 20081126103915!Pieter_van_der_Werff_001.jpg: not pd-art, used as edit war)
  2. (Deletion log); 10:40 . . Gryffindor (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Pieter van der Werff 001.jpg" (Deleted old revision 20081124223231!Pieter_van_der_Werff_001.jpg: not pd-art, used as edit war)
  3. (Upload log); 10:39 . . Gryffindor (Talk | contribs) uploaded a new version of "Image:Pieter van der Werff 001.jpg" (Reverted to version as of 22:32, 24 November 2008 a frame is three-dimensional, it would be in conflict with pd-art since this is an image from a website, not self-done, please read upon the policy Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag)
  • Look what you have done to this "incorrectly named" (your words!) file Image:Guido Cagnacci Death of Cleopatra.jpg. And now see the history in the now correctly named file: Image:Guido Cagnacci 003.jpg. Shame on you! Where is the source that this pic is now correctly named? I can present 10 more of your manipulations. If 10 are not enough, when the next 10 will come and so on. Unbelievable, that you have some supporters for this crazy rubbish. Mutter Erde (talk) 11:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC) PS: I order you, that you give back the correct names to all these manipulated files. Why should another admin do this for you? Mutter Erde (talk) 11:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Mutter Erde, please it doesn't help talking like that. --Kanonkas(talk) 20:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alcazar Segovia 200823.JPGEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 21:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


Image:Alcazar Segovia 200820.JPGEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 21:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Native language namesEdit

Hi! I am absolutely of the same opinion: geographical names should always be in the language that is native to their populations. But you changed the article title to a language which is (unfortunately) spoken only by a small minority on that city today. For the same reason, I'm going to change the order of the names in the title since French is the majority language. Have a nice day! Aaker (talk) 17:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Gryffindor (de-adminship)Edit

In case you didn't notice, some users have asked to have your admin tools revoked by the community. Please respond there.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Palacio Real Madrid 2008 3.JPGEdit

Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

  • Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
  • State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
  • If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
  • Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
  • Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Laughing boy (bust)Edit

Hi Gryffindor
Just a quick note to let you know that your laughing boy image is now incorporated in my surreal Rimbaud video
Voyelles
Many thanks Dwsolo (talk) 19:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

De-adminshipEdit

Dear Gryffindor, following community decision and consensus among the closing bureaucrats, I regret to inform you that I have requested your de-adminship on Meta, which has been performed.

I am sorry it turned out this way. Patrícia msg 21:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry too... Just to say this I'm not rather happy of how the bureaucrats handled this here at all, but this was the result unfortunately. --Kanonkas(talk) 21:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, Image:Lion key Augusta Raurica 3.JPG, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

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

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

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

Herrick (talk) 09:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

We need the information about the museum or exhibition where you have made the images, because some museums in germany and austria don't allowed photographs. See also File:Lion key Augusta Raurica 2.JPG File:Lion key Augusta Raurica 1.JPG Happy X-mas --Herrick (talk)
I've removed the "no source" tag as a source was clearly given: "own work", i.e. this photograph has obviously been taken by Gryffindor himself. --AFBorchert (talk) 17:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
And even if taking photos would not have been allowed in that museum, that is none of our business here at Commons. The work of art photographed is public domain and the museum therefore does not have any rights on it. If it wants to persecute Gryffindor for taking pictures without permission the museum is free to do so. But that again is none of our business. --Wuselig (talk) 19:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
And the Augusta Raurica museum is in Switzerland, I think. --Foroa (talk) 20:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I just received an email from the museum in Augusta Raurica explicitly stating that photography is allowed in the museum. For those not familiar with it, you might want to read up on the Commons rule Commons:Image_casebook#Museum_and_interior_photography. Merry X-mas. Gryffindor (talk) 04:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Gryffindor/Archive4".