User talk:Kilom691/Archive 2011 2012

Category Otto Fikentscher

Hello Kilom691, there seem to be at least two Otto Fikentschers in History of Art:

• Otto Clemens Fikentscher. (1831 Aachen - 1880 Düsseldorf)
• Otto Fikentscher, (06.07.1862 Zwickau - 26.02.1945 Baden-Baden)

I’m quite sure, that those “Gartenlaube” graphics are created by Otto Clemens Fikentscher, whilst this old book cover “Alte Märchen” was created by Otto Fikentscher. Maybe it would be usefull to create a second category for Otto Clemens Fikentscher. -- HornM201 (talk) 14:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, please do what you think is necessary. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Heinrich_Friedrich_Link.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Heinrich_Friedrich_Link.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Heinrich_Friedrich_Link.jpg]]). 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. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. 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!

Kelly (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

partition

Hi. I see that you are intrested in parititions. Maybe you can look at page about laminations/(paritition of the circle) at wikibooks. Regards --Adam majewski (talk) 09:48, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hippoglossus hippoglossus

Bonjour, as you uploaded this picture of Hippoglossus hippoglossus from "Pieni 2 0139.jpg" I want to talk to you. Hippoglossus hippoglossus is a right-eyed flatfish, not left-eyed fish as shown. So, would you mind if I flip horizontal the picture and upload it as a new version with the same name? The reason is that this picture is used in at least 3 Wikipedias, showing how this flatfish is, but it is a wrong display. --DPC (talk) 11:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Sure, you can do what you want. This is not a very good image, by the way. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 12:37, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done, thanks, --DPC (talk) 12:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Saint-Herbot 22 Eglise Piétà du XVe siècle.JPG

Wrong [Category:Pietas], for Mary holding Christ, see [Category:Pietà].

Eugenio Hansen, OFS (talk) 09:28, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

comment

You recently added some images to Category:Ships in Portsmouth. There are multiple ports named "Portsmouth". All the other images in that category were from the original Portsmouth -- Portsmouth, Hampshire, UK.

Several of the images you added were from Portsmouth, New Hampshire, USA. Geo Swan (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, Apologies.. I am indeed aware of the existence of at least two Portsmouth. Sorry for the mistakes. Frédéric (talk) 18:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

scalbert

thanks for doing the edit from my book-cover & for identifying the artist & the work, looks great! now all we need it an article to put it on...

(btw, will finally be adding a few more scans from the book this month; sry it's taking so long, too many things to scan, & not enough free time @ the scanner)

Lx 121 (talk) 08:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

File:La_dame_d'Elche.gif

File:La_dame_d'Elche.gif 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!

— Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 17:52, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Phalera bucephala MHNT.jpg‎

Merci de ton aide mais tu perturbes un peu mon travail. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Toutes mes excuses, désolé. Et bravo pour tout ce travail. Frédéric (talk) 06:37, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Museo Zumalakarregi

Category:Zumalakarregi Museoa or Category:Museo Zumalakarregi ? Which is "museum" and which is "art in the museum", or is it the same and one must go? NVO (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I was trying to clean up things, but I did also introduce disorder. This should be better now. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 18:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

posterized images and categories

Frédéric -Your English is very good. I have intended the images for illustrating my articles for English speaking travelers to the towns, villages and the countryside of Lower Normandy. I am a former illustrator and designer and prefer the graphic style of the 1920's travel posters, or 19th century tourist paintings in oil.

I began this project of writing and photographing this region of Normandy when I realized the enormous potential of smart phone GPS guide apps. The content for these apps came from Wikipedia usually. However,the tiny screen makes photos of stone buildings look like brown thumbprints, so the graphic images work very well for my purposes. Plus, they are much more attractive.

Most of the illustration needs for the articles are to create interest and to clarify the text with impressionistic images; detail and reality are less important.

I have used more realistic images when the detail was important. In the future,I do plan to include galleries with more traditional images, and because you have expressed interest, I will upload more of my original images for others to use.

As to the categories. I am very unhappy with my choices. After reviewing numerous categories, I concluded that most were either too locally oriented, or too general. I chose "too general" because I thought they would be easier for others to find ie.Orne. I'm open to suggestions, and I will make another effort to choose better in the future. if my english is unclear, I'll try in French if you prefer, but as i said, your English is very good. Thank you for your interest. Mlane (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Post Script - I just spent time researching categories, and yes I can do a much better job of choosing them. Thank you.Mlane (talk) 12:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice on Categories and feedback

Thanks for taking the time to explain categories better. Particularly, specific rather than general and avoiding nested categories.

Somewhere at my first attempts to upload, a note said to use existing categories, if at all possible. The only ones that applied seem to be very general. Anyway, I will learn eventually.

When I began, I read the Categories Help page several times, but now that I've done it, and I see the issues you've explained, I hope the next read will make more sense.

Someone else recommended HotCat, and although it didn't work the way I anticipated, it did work.

Thanks for taking the time to explain. - Mlane Mlane (talk) 13:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Ernst Stoehr - Mondnacht.jpg

Hi Kilom691, could you add the date (year) for the original painting and for the photography/print from which you made an reproduction. Otherwise we cannot be sure about PD-old. --Túrelio (talk) 12:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, really ? I take great care to upload only painters and sculptors in the public domain. I thought that I did not need to check photo permission for "photography of 2D art" which is in the public domain (because the author is dead for more than 70 years). I admit that I have sometimes been not careful enough concerning "3D art". Has something changed in the official policy of Commons recently ? Frédéric (talk) 12:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I did not doubt that this painter's original works are in PD. But if the photography is not, then we need to tag it PD-Art, not PD-Old as far as I know. --Túrelio (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I understand. What choice should I make in the upload form ? I usually choose choose "dead for more than 70 years" and sometimes "dead for more than 100 years". Does this make any difference ? Frédéric (talk) 12:55, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

No idea, as I have never uploaded such works. But you can always manually add any license tag you want. Coming back to the above image: you need PD-Art only if the photographer is not dead since >70 years (and eventually when he is unknown, as an additional PD-anonymous tagging might be overkill). --Túrelio (talk) 12:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Could you please show me a written reference here on Commons for this usage of PD-Old versus PD-Art ? I would like to have more explanations, because (excuse me) I have doubts on your prescription. For this kind of images, it is usually almost impossible to find the photographer's name. I think it is quite clear that "dead for more than 70 years" refers to (and only to) the painter. It would be a burden to have to change by hand the license after the upload. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 13:05, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Try this: Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag. --Túrelio (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand that PD-Art is a more precise license than PD-Old, and should use this license when possible. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 13:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Wrong name on photo

Dear Kilom691,

Please note that the photo http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rhynchophorus_palmarum.jpg is NOT depicting Rhynchophorus palmarum (which is a large weevil) but two Strategus (probably male and female of S. aloeus) which is a rhinoceros beetle. I'm new on Commons and don't have time now to figure out how to fix this myself. Since you did something with this photo I hope you can take care of it. Thanks. Scarabaeoid (talk) 03:32, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Biessy Alibech.jpg

Shouldn't think that it would require much straining after an explanation -- I replaced an invocation to a non-existent and null creator template with a brief explanation of why her work is now out of copyright. By the way, it's not very useful (and could be confusing) for your signature to read "Frédéric" when your username is Kilom691... AnonMoos (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but not necessary

I will go through all these uploads, as is indicated on the description page in the next days. It is complicated to find all these painters and their life dates, correct categories, authority control data etc., so it's not possible to do it all at aonce. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

upside down

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Quaker003.jpg&diff=63321722&oldid=44133768 ? Cordialement - Drongou (talk) 12:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, it was upside down before, and now that it has been reversed, and it is upside down again ! I guess that this has something to do with EXIF data. Please tell the bot to turn it again. Frédéric (talk) 12:39, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done There were some bugs in the house, for sure. :))) - Drongou (talk) 12:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Entrelac tibet.svg

Think "endless knot" is more commonly used to refer to "unicursal" knots, rather than multi-loop "links"... AnonMoos (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, feel free to remove the category if you are sure of what you claim. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

"no uploads" concerning the category:Angélique Bègue

Hello, Kilom691, Here are the permissions for the pictures in category:Angélique Bègue (in French and in English). Envol The permission for use of this work has been verified and archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system. It is available as ticket #2011012910012081 for users with an OTRS account. Ticket link: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2011012910012081 Gisante The permission for use of this work has been verified and archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system. It is available as ticket #2011012910012081 for users with an OTRS account. Ticket link: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2011012910012081 Maîtrise The permission for use of this work has been verified and archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system. It is available as ticket #2011012910012081 for users with an OTRS account.Ticket link: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2011012910012081 Portrait, with consent. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Thank you for deleting "no uploads" and congratulation for your work. Yours Cquoi 10:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Phalanger.jpg

File:Phalanger.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!

Seb az86556 (talk) 02:48, 14 January 2012 (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!

Dereckson (talk) 10:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hradčany (Praha 6)

Hi. You have categorized several images of mine to the category Hradčany (Praha 6). But I disagree. Most of them are according my opinion Prague 1.--Juandev (talk) 18:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, sorry for that, please correct them. These images were not categorized at all. Please do not forget to add categories when you upload images, in order to avoid this kind of problem. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 20:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Could you move them to category Prague than? I dont have a time for that.--Juandev (talk) 05:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Autorité

Bonjour, si tu veux ajouter des notices d'autorité, au créateur, tu peux écrire importScript('User:Inductiveload/addVIAFdata.js'); sur User:Kilom691/commons.js. Ca ajoute un bouton "add authority control" dans le menu de gauche, et ça permet de gagner du temps. :)--Zolo (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, merci du conseil. Ca n'a pas l'air de marcher, j'ai peut-etre pas fait ca comme il faut, en tout cas je ne vois rien apparaitre de nouveau dans le menu de gauche. Frédéric (talk) 18:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Ooops, j'avais juste oublié de sauver... Frédéric (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Inductiveload/addVIAFdata.js

You might be interested in the above java script. I noticed that you add a lot of authority control data to Creator and category pages (great), and User:Inductiveload/addVIAFdata.js is a new tool recently transplanted from Wikisource that can do it with 3 mouse clicks. --Jarekt (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Cesare Laurenti - Vision antique.jpg

---

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 11:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

smoking in art

Funny category, perhaps interesting for you to know that also Isaac Israels smoked a lot.... I didn't scan his paintings though. Regards, Elly (talk) 13:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Berceau slovene.svg

File:Berceau slovene.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 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!

Eleassar ^(t/p) 21:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Re:File:Joseph Prestwich.jpg

Can you please clarify why you removed the Category:Popular Science Monthly/Contributors from this image? — Ineuw 20:14, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Because I added this category to the category Joseph Prestwich. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 20:15, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Now, I understand, but we need to make an exception for the Contributors because we track the images for use in Wikisource Authors' pages, and then users also create more extensive biographical pages in Wikipedia. Without images, our work becomes more problematic (time consuming). I already had to make such changes to some 10 contributors for the same reason. I will reverse your change and thanks for your understanding. — Ineuw 21:41, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

P.S: I used another image from the collection: File:PSM V52 D158 Joseph Prestwich.jpg. — Ineuw 21:46, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I have added a warning on top of Category:Popular Science Monthly/Contributors. Please feel free to modify it. Yours, Frédéric (talk) 09:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Many many thanks for your help. — Ineuw 09:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Misidentification

Hi Kilom691/Archive 2011 2012, you categorized the images below as Category:Erodium cicutarium, which matches the author's description:

• 
• 

Unfortunately these images look very different from any flowers of Erodium cicutarium I have seen so far. The petals should be more strongly asymmetric (as in File:20100505 Erodium cicutarium.JPG or File:097-v-p4181879.jpg and they look much more like the usual flowers of Geranium robertianum, such as File:Geranium robertianum01.jpg or File:Geranium Robertianum - Detail - Blossom.jpg with their conspicuous stripes than flowers from Erodium cicutarium. In addition, the fruit beaks of Erodium cicutarium grow much longer than those of Geranium robertianum, but as the fruit is very young, this might not be useful for getting an ID. I suggest moving the images either to Category:Unidentified Geraniaceae or to Category:Geranium robertianum (which would be extremely likely if the photographs are from central Europe). Probably the description would need some adjustment as well to avoid further miscategorization. What do you think about this? Best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, indeed, these do not look the same as the other images. Please do what you think is necessary. Frédéric (talk) 13:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for your prompt answer! --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 18:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)