User talk:Mike1979 Russia/Archive 1

File:C.205 V.JPG

Answering your request on my talkpage: User:G.dallorto changed the license from {{PD-ItalyGov}} to {{PD-Italy}} which redirects to a speedy deletion tag. The description says: likely a factory PR photo from 1942-1943 -> artistic!

• PD Italy (in short: non-artistic images enter the public domain 20 years after publication) is not accepted here, see {{PD-Italy}} and Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Italy
• PD Italy does not apply to this image till it is an artistic image.

Hope that answers your question, regards, --Martin H. (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

This image is not factory PR photo, because the plane on the image has roundels of the italian air force and there is another aircraft of the same type near, so this image created by italian government and should have license {{PD-ItalyGov}}.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 14:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Im not a specialist on Italian copyright law and im also not a specialist on Italian aircraft. I just follow the facts in this case: The description says: Factory PR photo, the license says {{PD-Italy}}, thats it. If there is not a 100% proof that the image is from the government you cannot simply change the license to keep the image, assumption are not accepted here. I keep the image deleted because of the {{PD-Italy}}, maybe you like to ask others for undeletion of the image. --Martin H. (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I followed the edits made by User:G.dallorto to your images, he reverted your license change back from PD-ItalyGov to PD-Italy. I dont marked the image with the speedydeletion but with no source, because if an image is PD-ItalyGov it must be the work of the Italian Government. --Martin H. (talk) 18:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Typhoon class Schema.svg

Thank you for this, it's a great work and very useful! Kind regards, Dunee ^msg 17:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Su-28.JPG

File:Su-28.JPG has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Masur (talk) 02:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Su-35BM_on_Khabarovsk_AFB_Jan_2007.jpg

File:Su-35BM_on_Khabarovsk_AFB_Jan_2007.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!

High Contrast (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Roundel of the Serbian Air Force 1915.gif

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Roundel of the Serbian Air Force 1915.gif, 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:Roundel of the Serbian Air Force 1915.gif]]). 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!

--User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

File:French_Farman_F.222_in_Africa.jpg

File:French_Farman_F.222_in_Africa.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!

Masur (talk) 19:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Fiat_BR.20M.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Fiat_BR.20M.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.

Trixt (talk) 23:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:CANT_Z.1007bis.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:CANT_Z.1007bis.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.

Trixt (talk) 23:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Victor class submarines

Hi, you already made two high quality SVG drawings of the Victor I and Victor III class submarines. Just for comparison, could you make a drawing for the Victor II class as well? Kind greetings! -- КГФ, Обсудить! 15:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course, I'll do it. It is in my work plan.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 07:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks very good. Thanks a lot!-- КГФ, Обсудить! 23:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Valued images

Здравствуй. Я тут номинировал Commons:Valued image candidates/Submarine drawings by Mike1979 Russia. Ознакомься и добавь в список наблюдения, что ли :) Можешь откомментировать, если посчитаешь нужным. --Rave (talk) 06:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for a drawing

Hello Mike1979 Russia!

I have noticed your delightful drawings of submarines. Thanks for contributing them to Commons.

I have one request: Can you draw an image of the russian Topol-M ballistic missile system for Commons? Our category here lacks of such an image. I think of a drawing like this.

Would be great to receive a positive answer of you.

Thanks in advance, High Contrast (talk) 16:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Borey class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--Rave (talk) 19:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Shadowgraph S-56 submarine.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 20:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Shadowgraph Kreiserskaya class submarine.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 20:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hotel II class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. All this drawings i saw as VI candidates --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yankee class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yankee II class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Delta I class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Delta II class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Delta III class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Delta IV class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Typhoon class SSBN.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 16:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Topol M SS27 Sickle B sketch.svg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good drawing! --Jovianeye 20:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Mike1979 Russia!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

• Image:Republican air force roundel.gif was uncategorized on 10 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
• Image:Rhodesiaroundel.gif was uncategorized on 10 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

regarding Typhoon class SSBN.svg

Dear Mike1979_Russia,

I would like to make use of your vector graphic for the Typhoon class SSBN in my doctoral thesis. It would be a valuable addition to a composite figure demonstrating the basic principles of sonar ranging. As this will be such a small part of the figure, do you still desire attribution?

Yours faithfully

R.bares (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• I don't desire attribution in this case.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

That is very kind of you. Not meaning to take advantage of your generosity but may I also make the same use of the svg for Quebec class SS in the same figure? This would work nicely as the vessel towing the sonar array. At present the figure shows the Typhoon SSBN towing an array and with reverberant reflections from the sea floor. If I included the Quebec SS as the transmitter the Typhoon SSBN could be used as a target instead, which would naturally be preferable. R.bares (talk) 05:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

OK. You can use "Quebec class SS" in the same way.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Tango_B-396_Model.JPG

File:Tango_B-396_Model.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!

Saibo (Δ) 03:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

File:RSAF_Roundel_1990-present.svg

File:RSAF_Roundel_1990-present.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!

— Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 08:01, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Ship format

Very glad to see your work on ships. Simple request: Please make a difference between the details of the ship herself and her history. I myself always use:

==Ship==

• Type:
• Design by:
• Order date:
• Built by:
• Yard No:
• Keel laid:
• Launch date:
• Date of completion:
• Length over all: m
• LPP: m
• Beam: m
• Draught: m
• GRT:
• DWT:
• NET:
• Sail area:
• Main engine:
• Speed: kn
• TEU:
• Reefer points:

==History==

• (year) Named:

and leave out what isn't applicable, as Sail area for motorships and TEU and Reefer points for old ships. See that you make a difference between the builder of the hull and the final builder. That is much better than what I did. I'll try to follow that. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

• OK. But, what is LPP? What about displacement and tanker's volume?--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

LPP means Length Per Perpendiculars, as far as I know measured on the waterline. I haven't an opinion on displacement and tanker's volume. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:23, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Ships of

Please realise that you create a hell of a lot of work when you categorise by old names of coutries. For the Netherlands we will have in that case at least:

• Ships of the Seven United Provinces (translated)
• Ships of the Republik
• Ships of the Kingdom of Holland

and so on. I just used Russia and did not deviate between the old country names. Do you see what will happen with the ships of the former DDR ? --Stunteltje (talk) 07:47, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

• OK. But what about Category:Naval ships of the Soviet Union, for example? And what about Category:Ships of the Soviet Union, which was created in 2006?--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
• Sorry for the delayed anwer. (Brought my ship from Meerkerk to Gorinchem.) The categories were created far before I started in Wikipedia and I haven't a solid answer. I saw you opening a new category and was afraid that we have to split all ships by ancient countrynames. Perhaps the question was raised earlyer. So perhaps you can ask this at the right place. (Village pump ? Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships on the English Wikipedia?) Problem must be wider than for ships only. --Stunteltje (talk) 18:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
  • After all I think you were right. We are all working on the basic material of an encyclopedia and extra work is not a good reason not to do things right. I assume you are in the position to give a correct timetable and the correct countrynames. It has to come on top of the categories, to make clear what happend. We have to recategorise the Russian ships (and the German, I am afraid). Some ships will have two countries in succession, but they had, in fact. --Stunteltje (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The other day I created Ships of the German Democratic Republic. I guess it's debatable if this should go into Category:Ships by country or into a separate hierarchy. Personally, I think it's an advantage if ships can also be found by historic entities, especially for naval ships. Obviously, for ships that still exist, the current flag is also of importance.

Eventually, I will try to generate another list (Commons:Ships by flag), similar to Ships by shipyard. As there are a couple of things I'd like to do before, this might take some time though. --  Docu  at 21:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the Category:Ships by flag will be equal to Category:Ships by country because ships are categorized by flags into categories by country.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 05:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

According the English Wiki the Soviet Union existed between 1922 and 1991. The Russian Federation assumed its rights and obligations. Can the move be done by bot or have we te recategorise by hand? --Stunteltje (talk) 05:42, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

If the photo created between 1922 and 1991 the ship's category with it must be move into Category:Ships of the Soviet Union. But all ship's category from Category:Ships of the Soviet Union will not in Category:Ships of Russia because some of ships was got other flags after 1991, for example, flag of Ukraine. I think bot can do first condition.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Project 667BDRM

Hi Mike, if you find the time, please correct Project 667BDRM drawing [1]:

• 667 BDR = ПМУ радиосекстана & перископ астрокорректора «Волна»
• 667 BDRM = ПМУ радиосекстана &перископ астрокорректора «Волна»

With best regards, Alexpl (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

What is your source? I have photo of 667BDRM with astrocorrector only. So I should delete radiosekstant.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 05:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The one and only Ю.В.Апальков from Корабли ВМФ СССР Том I, his drawing of a 667BDRM turret shows only "радиосекстана".

667BDRM one hatch only in the middle of the turretroof: [2]

667BDR two hatches in the middle of the turretroof [3] Alexpl (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Photo with astrocorrector. I think Ю.В.Апальков made mistake.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:06, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Is that from a book ? Alexpl (talk) 14:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I found the photo on forum (previous link).--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 15:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hm, I´m working on a 667BDRM drawing (turret only) myself - so I wonder if the photo from the forum may be photoshopped. Alexpl (talk) 20:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. For what?--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 04:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Only picture of its kind on the web, bad quality, greyscale, 90° sideview - are good indicators. I will try to find out more, but it may take a while. Alexpl (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it's official photo. They were shoot near 90° in gray scale. Bad quality is a result of non qualified scanning or scanning from book. For example, see ISBN 5-85879-155-7 for other such photos.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

• Done according photo.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:40, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Good work. I checked the photo with others (not showing the astro-sensor) and found out that the dimensions do match. So it could be correct. From right to left we have now: 1.Sintez Sat Com/Nav (Pert Spring) 2. MT-70-8 TV-periscope 3.IBA-MB antenna 4. commanders periscope 5. astrocorrector 6. "Park Lamp" (7. "Kaskad" Radar 8. Anis antenna "Shotgun") 9. I dont know 10. MRP-21A Zaliv-P ESM.Alexpl (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. 9 is snorkel.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, so they used a different snorkel on Delta IV compared to the models used on Delta-I/II/III. Do you know a photo of the Radiosextant on Projekt 667BDR, 667BD, or 667B ?Alexpl (talk) 09:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Delta IV have combined device: snorkel and VAN-M antenna (ru: ПМУ РДП и ВАН-М). Unfortunately I didn't find photo of Radiosextant.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I uploaded my drawing. I would appreciate your help in checking it for mistakes. Alexpl (talk) 17:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

BDRM drawing

Good. All major elements are correct. Minor elements have differences: wire laid on the turret side differently; turret has two rectangular elements (I don't know what is it), but you draw only one; you didn't draw front antenna. --Mike1979 Russia (talk) 05:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, you think the second (left) "diving plane" [4] should be visible and the wire on the turretside follows a different path. Ok. What "front antenna" do you mean ? Alexpl (talk) 07:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

No. I talk about two little panels near roof of turret and not about diving plane (And I think portside diving plane willn't be visible). The second of them (from front to poop) is where the wire end. Front antenna is on turret. It has rectangular shape. It's like Delta III has but bigger. Апальков didn't draw all of this elements.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 07:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

See photos from [5]--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see, the antenna left from the windscreen ! I have uploaded a new version of the file, but I´m not totally sure about the wire, going down on the right side of the turret. Alexpl (talk) 09:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Cruise ship in Villefranche harbour.jpg

Hi, Mike
Congratulations for your identification of the ship on my photo. --Tangopaso (talk) 05:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:P&O Nedlloyd Vera Cruz (ship, 1984)

You are doing a great job, but unfortunately on the last move I have to make a remark. Please look at the bow of the ship. She isn't the Vera Cruz, but the P&O Nedlloyd Vera Cruz. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes. That's why I changed sorting key in the Category:Ships of P&O Nedlloyd only. It's like Category:Ships of CMA CGM or Category:Ships of COSCO.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, understood. --Stunteltje (talk) 07:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

• Stunteltje, what sorting key use for shipping vessels in Category:Ships by name? I found two variants: by license number and by name.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

For Category:Fishing vessels by license number there is no sorting key, as the number is painted in big capitals on the ship and the name in most cases somewhere in smal capitals only. For that reason the title of the category of a fishing vessel starts with the license number, followed by the name. I used the sorting key "name" for category:Ships by name. --Stunteltje (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thank you.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 12:44, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for recent identification of some ships in NZ

Appreciate it. Ingolfson (talk) 12:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Bunker vessels

I have my doubts about the bunker vessels. Here in Rotterdam we see a bunker vessel as a barge that brings the fuel to sea-going vessels. Sometimes somewhat bigger, an old coaster, but we see no chemical tankers as bunker vessels. Please have a look. --Stunteltje (talk) 20:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Which ship makes you doubt?--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 05:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

E.G. This one File:Bestella at Panama.jpg. Might be that in other countries the bunker vessels are bigger, or this one is a speciality. Cannot find the one you added to the category any more, as Docu filled my list with ships :=)) --Stunteltje (talk) 06:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Sea-river going vessels

Dear Mike1979Russia, not all small ships travelling on the rivers Elbe or Weser to the ports of Hamburg or Bremen are sea-river going vessels. We understand this term for sea ships that are capable of using the river Rhine to the interior of Germany. Bremen and Hamburg have ports that can be reached by big vessels although it is a three-hours-journey from the sea. Please have a look on the website of the shipping company of the ship you want to categorize before telling the world that a ship is a sea-river going ship.78.55.61.122 17:33, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Ships of China and Hong Kong

Dear Mike1979_Russia, please be aware that Hong Kong has an own ship register which is separated from the ship register of the People's Republic of China. Hong Kong has a special status, see Wikipedia article about Hong Kong.78.55.4.84 10:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Шаблон для кораблей

Template:Ship --AVRS (talk) 12:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Farafenni, completed by Damen Shipyard, Romania?

[6]:

Source: "In this regard, in February 2002, the GPA on behalf of the Government entered into a contract with Kiev Shipbuilding and Repair Yard of Ukraine (KSSRY) for the construction and delivery of 3 new passenger Ferries to the tune of USD 6.65 million. Due to delay in the construction works, the ferries were transferred to Damen Shipyard in Romania for completion. Construction works on the first ferry-Kanilai, have since been completed and delivered to the Authority. This ferry was commissioned on 25 th of July 2005 and is fully operational between Banjul and Barra. As regards the other two ferries, namely Soma and Farafenni, Construction works are at an advance stage and they expected to be delivered in 2006, and will be deployed to Transgambia."

In servcie: 4. September 2006 [7]

--Atamari (talk) 10:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I get info from seaagent.com. There's a place of building specified Ukraine. Maybe some works was done in Romania but most of ship was built in Ukraine.

We write the date of completion in template which is not equal to the date of commission.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Russian Typhoon-class submarine in 2007.jpg

Hello Mike!

An IP editied this image by having identified the submarine differently. I do not know which sub it is. Can you help? Do you know if this edit by the IP is correct? Thank you in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 13:23, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

She is TK-202.

1. TK-13 has pairing the light hull near the Rescue chamber more smoother. So she is TK-208 or TK-202 with sharp pairing.

2. The source of the photo give a date 27.11.2007. But another photo of the same ship [8] and the article have date august 1999.

3. Only TK-202 went to utilization in 1999. You can see she during utilization in GoogleEarth on Severodvinsk 2003 photos in the same place.

4. TK-208 has name "Dmitriy Donskoy" and never been utilized.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I identified this sub as TK-13 according only to date, stated in description (2007). TK-202 and TK-12 were scrapped before 2007. TK-208, TK-17 and TK-20 are still "in service", so TK-13 was the only variant. But now I see that flickt tells that photo was taken on November 27, 2007, while this one in the same time is stated to be taken in 2009, despite the fact that it describes the event in 1999. According to Mike's arguments about differences between TK-208+TK-202 and other ships of class, I claim that there is a mistake in flickr dates, and this is TK-202 without any doubt, 'cause TK-208 is still in service at the moment. This photo must be renamed, because it was taken not in 2007, but much earlier. --Rave (talk) 14:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

• Я сегодня утром не смог найти фото для немецкой и эстонской страницы, так как этого проекта (Октябрьская революция) нет в перечне. Я поставлю категорию проекта сейчас. Мою статью в русской Вики Виктория (теплоход) удалили несмотря на Обсуждение и всё прочее, но всё равно ищу фотографию, так как веду немецкий и эстонский разделы по речным судам. Спасибо Вам, иначе бы многие из моих статей были бы инвалидами, с уважением

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 15:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Tankers

Thanks for correcting the tanker categories. I have no idea where the information can be found, so I just use "tankers" as category. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Volga Drim (ship, 1959)

• В описании возможно(?) пропущено промежуточное название "Речное облако" Rechnoye Oblako, видел на сайте - Volga Drim

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 01:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Дополнил.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:46, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Aleksandr Pushkin (ship, 1974)

• Thank You Mike, ещё один момент, я сегодня дополнил эту категорию, там ошибочно дана верфь ГДР, там был построен океанский Александр Пушкин (1965), я сам ставил фото на немецкую страницу - это сейчас Marco Polo, даю линк для проверки [Photo Aleksandr Pushkin (1965)]. А тут австрийская верфь, есть статья в Википедии по-русски, сейчас напишу по-эстонски, всего хорошего, спасибо за фотографии и отличные тексты,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

• • Поправил.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 09:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Ships_by_name_by_type

Ships by name by type has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Badzil (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Xian Ni (Princess Jeannie)

• Mike, ты случайно не в курсе, как эту фотку Xian Ni (я сегодня сделал статьи на эстонском и немецком) и другие загрузить в Wikimedia Commons, я в основном пока загружаю фотки от Алексея Яблонского типа File:785 shevchenko 3.jpg, и не могу понять, как получить разрешение у других участников, фотки которого есть на его сайте, особенно проект Россия 785-й интересует.
  • Второй момент, многие сайты пишут, что Xian Ni (Princess Jeannie) - это Александр Грин, что самое неприятное, даже те, кто путешествовал на нём. У меня в статьях этот пошёл как "Константин Станюкович".

Заранее спасибо, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 07:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Читай ru:ВП:ДОБРО. Единственный способ списаться с авторами фотографий. С автором Xian Ni можно попробовать связаться через Фликр, возможно он даст разрешение или заменит лицензию на Фликре на поддерживаемую Коммонс. А с авторами фотографий с сайта Яблонского через него.

Также при загрузке фотографий Яблонского нужно указывать только лицензию GDFL насколько я понял из описания. Лицензию CC нужно убрать. Не знаю насколько это критично.

Дополнительные вопросы можно задать на ru:ВП:Авторское право.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

• Спасибо за ответ, я загрузил от Алексея Яблонского (Aleksey Yablonskiy) десятки фотографий на Викисклад и проблем ни разу не было, а вот до Фликр я так и не дошёл пока. Я даже не совсем понимаю, что это такое. Я сейчас пишу по поводу "Дмитрий Фурманов"а, информация, что это был Сергей Рахманинов не подтвердилась, возможно в Infoflot ошиблись, а в регистре никаких других названий не видно, там тоже масса фоток, вот бы достать! Регистр с фотографиями, и я подал заявку на переименование категории с Dmitri ... на Dmitriy Furmanov, с праздниками,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 06:18, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Mike1979 Russia/Archive 1== New line drawings ==

Hello Mr Mike, I'm a Wikipedian from the English subdomain, and I'm at the moment working on Soviet/Russian articles. I'd like to know if you would mind creating a number of line drawings of missiles and ships for my work. I'm very passionate about Soviet/Russian maritime affairs, and I would have thought it would be great I can have some assistance from a great person like you. You can contact me at en:User talk:Sp33dyphil. Thanks Sp33dyphil 04:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

789 Adelia (ship, 1984)

The reason why I put the pennant number in front of the name has no other reason the consistancy with the fishing vessels. They have a license number painted in big figures on the hull and very small painted nameplates. That is why we have categories like Category:Fishing vessels by license number. The image is of a certain date and at that time she had that pennant number. Glad to see that i wasn't completely mistaken about the vessel. Cannot read nor speak the Russian language. --Stunteltje (talk) 17:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

This number is tactical number in Russian NAVY. It isn't pennant number (constant during ship's life in most cases) or hull number (constant during ship's life). It changes randomly and it doesn't mean anything (so there isn't any consistency with fishing licenses). And ship can have many tactical number or only one during her life. That's why Russian navy ships categories are without it now.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 18:14, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Understood. No problem with renaming of category. Please copy the reason to the category too. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Ship info

Hi, I thought it would be possible to run a bot to put existing ship info into a template but actually it seems rather complicated as there are so many parameters and data are not page structures are not totally standardized. I am afraid that it will not be much quicker than to do it by hand. Another thing, is there are any freely accessible authoraritative database for ships on the internet ? If so it could be a good idea to add a link to it in the template. To an external reader there is always a suspicion that data in Wikipedia / Wikicommons have been vandalized or are otherwise incorrect, so having a link to another website could be a kind of warrant of reliability. --Zolo (talk) 08:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

1. I think too because the information is enough formalized. Docu advised me to ask about it on Commons:Bots/Work requests‎‎. Maybe you'll make a request.

2. There isn't any complete authoritative database for ships in the internet. There are some open official registers (Russian, DNV, German Lloyd, Nippon, ABS). But they don't have information about all ships. Сontent of the information from them differ to each other, for example, DNV has info about previous flags but German Lloyd hasn't. When ship dead information about she is deleted from registries. That's why I find additional info and info about dead ships on non so authoritative databases, for example, on shipspotting site. But I think it's possible to make a string for registry from which info was got.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok the simplest solution may be to add a "reference" field, so that we can add registries or any source from which we can get info. Maybe add a reference section in a separate section below ship history ?--Zolo (talk) 08:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes. (May be "sources"?)--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that if we have just one field for all info, (rather than the more demanding "one info = one source" format), we should use "reference" rather than "source", so that if we change the source of the info and do not update the references, it is still correct. Beside "references" has already been translated in many other languages for other templates. --Zolo (talk) 08:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

OK Try to do it.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:54, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done--Zolo (talk) 09:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

• I try it Category:IMO 7945869. It can be more than one sources. I think It'll be better if references will be in the end of page after name categories.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 09:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
• Another Category:Itelmen (ship, 1918). I think references must be after photos in the end of page.
• And "text" string must be separate and be first.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I dont know how to put references below subcategories and images. I am not sure it can be done with simple templates. Maybe put registry links at the bottom of the infobox like database links in Creator:Leonardo da Vinci ?

Yes.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 12:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I have added a "russian registy" paramter. See Category:IMO 7945869. It can be done for national registries but not for all possible databases. Other will still have to go to "references". When there are several of them, they should go in the same parameter (that is |references= Ref 1 Ref 2 not |references= Ref 1 |references= Ref 2).

Let's add other official registries: German Lloyd, DNV, ABC and Nippon.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

About the "text" parameter, I'll try to do it, but it seems to be a bit tricky to do it correctly. For cases with a simple word like "decommissionned", I think it should go to the "type" parameter. This way we can check afterwards which common events are missing and thus add them to {{ShipEvent}}--Zolo (talk) 12:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

There is no list of type parameters so it is difficulty to use this variant for me. And De/Comissioned words will not be bold because of confusion with the name. And nevertheless "text" must be separate.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 12:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I have tries do simplify {{ShipEvent}}, moved the "text" parameter and removed the bold. If there are other type of events that can be useful, you can add them to {{ShipEvent}} and {{Ship/i18n}}, simply following the same pattern as "shipwreck" and "scrapped". --Zolo (talk) 13:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

OK Update the docs, please.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

• I think reference to registry can be done with two strings. The first will have the code of registry (RU, GL, ABC and so on), and the second - register number. Like this:

|registry=DNV
|registry number=18269

--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 07:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

If a ship is in several registers, we cant do it this way, there cannot be two parameters with the same name in the same template. As {{Ship}} is already so long that we cannot document all parameters using a {{TemplateBox}}, I think the best solution would be to have one "register" parameter, that should be filled with a {{ShipRegister}}, like {{Authority control}} here.--Zolo (talk) 09:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Ship cann't be in several registries at the same time. But your idea is good.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 09:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Done in {{Ship register}} (example). I did not find how to do it for NK. If thhey remove destroyed ships from public databases, it is also a bit bothering. Apart from that it should work. --Zolo (talk) 13:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. When I find how NK work I ask you.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:53, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

toolserver is back

Hi Mike, Just to let you know that New ships and Commons:Ships by shipyard have been updated. --  Docu  at 18:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I see. I think you was right when delete from New ships ships with IMOcat only.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 07:06, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Usually there are not that many. There was a bit of a backlog in them (ships by name kept updating). --  Docu  at 18:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Lukull -> Çankaya

Hi, Mike. I know that photograph is one of Lukull. But your this blind revert is not appropriate. Because we (both you and me) used thıs source: MV Cankaya (Çankaya) (+1942). Moreover you deleted correct information about this ship.Takabeg (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Ships are categorized according to the current name. If the name of the ship on the photo is Lukull the photo should be in Category:Lukull (ship, 1886) only. And Lukull wasn't turkish ship so the Category:Ships of Turkey is not correct in such case. When somebody upload photo of Çankaya this new photo will be in Category:Çankaya (ship, 1886) and Category:Çankaya (ship, 1886) will become "mother" category for Category:Lukull (ship, 1886). See description on the page Category:Ships by name.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:42, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I uploaded only one picture (of Lukull). But other users (maybe I) may upload pictures of this ship. Some of them will be of Lukull, some of them will be of Çankaya). As long as I know, projects of Wikimedia are sustainable projects. So we have to consider this point. Shall we continue to discuss this issue at Category talk:Lukull (ship, 1886). Takabeg (talk) 13:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Deira ship

Hi Mike, It is possible that the date on my camera was not set right! It was may years ago so i have no other indication than my camera date. Sorry for the confusion. Regards, Alf

Thank you.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 09:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For your fixing up the Svitzer Falcon info - it is appreciated ! SatuSuro (talk) 10:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Its really good to think IMO numbers and info are accessible to help fix info so well SatuSuro (talk) 14:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

New extension category Ships by name

Experienced a new phenomenon: ships built at the same yard in the same year. Solved it by adding the yard number. But of course this had te be discussed. I am preparing an extension of the on-going discussion about ships by name. See the first parts of User:Stunteltje/Sandbox/Ships, not finished at all, just a start. Please comment there between the lines, because after all I intend to present the suggesions without comments, if we agree on the subjects. I'll ask a few other people too to react there. What do you think? --Stunteltje (talk) 07:57, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes. But I think it is not necessary to add a place of built in such cases because the name of category become too long and difficult. And I would add a "№" or "No" before the yard number to avoid confusion with the year. Example, Stena Tractor (ship, 1999, No 666).--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

• Hi Mike, отдельные части судов лучше не переносить в категорию (ship, year of build), я раньше ставил, но кто-то потом всё удалил, и наверно это было правильно. Будут ли новые фотографии речных Викингов (не Viking)? С приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 16:12, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

• Ты про трубы? Я думаю, лучше вносить, т.к. в противном случае не найдешь, от чего труба. Я столкнулся с этим, по этому, думаю, удаливший был не прав. Будут. --Mike1979 Russia (talk) 16:49, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Sergei Yesenin or Sergey

Mike, наверно категорию надо поменять - Sergei Yesenin (ship, 1984) на Sergey? С приветом --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 07:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Не уверен, какой вариант правильный. В англ. вики en:Sergei Yesenin, собственно написание я взял оттуда. На самом "Есенине" таблички с названием судна на латинице, к сожалению, нет (в отличие, например, от "Бенуа", у которого такая табличка есть). --Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• Я посмотрел статьи в en Sergei Yesenin и en:Sergey Kirov, если посмотреть текст, то всё идёт в перемешку, особенно у Кирова, он то Sergey, то Sergei, Есенин там реже Sergey. Я полагаю, что нужно исходить из RS, как они передают названия морских судов. И применить это дело для речных. Я поэтому Бенуа и не пишу статью, что на судне вывесили Benois или что-то в этом роде. Ну типа Peugeot - Пежо. Мне в принципе всё равно, но должен быть какой-то порядок. Турфирмы ставят, что им вздумается, лишь бы завлечь туристов. Типа Alexandre Pushkine. Ещё у меня вопрос по категории в Викимедиа. Мы ведь ставим дополнение в скобках типа Costa Concordia (ship, 2006) по году постройки согласно регистру, а не по спуску на воду. Правильно?

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 17:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

• • Пока ты отдыхаешь, я посмотрел [Регистр], SERGEY по регистру. Кроме того я подал на исправление ошибки по Красину (1917). В названиях файлов стоит ошибочно (дата постройки 1916). Там написано, что об ошибке можно сообщить по-русски. Посмотрим, кто этим занимается, и какой будет результат, мне нужно исправить на Category:Krasin (ship, 1917), --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

• Первое. Да, дата постройки должна соответствовать таковой в регистре. В российском регистре дана только дата постройки, в остальных, как правило, три: закладки, спуска и постройки. Для категории берется последняя. Второе. Базы российского речного регистра в публичном доступе пока не нашел, возможно там вообще нет латиноязычных имен (как в морском). Таблички с латинскими названиями вешают не турфирмы, а операторы или владельцы судов, которые и определяют название судна. Думаю, именно эти название присутствуют в англоязычных документах компаний (например, в договорах с иностранными турфирмами). Следовательно, для судов с табличками нужно использовать написание согласно табличке, для судов без можно использовать систему транслитерации, как в морском. Третье. Т.о. категорию с Есениным стоит переделать аналогично остальным Сергеям. Это можешь сделать и ты, не сообщая об ошибке. Для этого переносишь файлы и инфу, если есть, в новую категорию, а со старой ставишь перенаправление. Последнее. Статью всегда можно переименовать, если выясниться, что название не верное, поэтому смело пиши статью про Бенуя. Если все-таки выясниться, что в речном регистре другое латинское название, просто переименуем статью.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 05:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Was there ever any clearance to do stuff like that [9] on commons and put data on image pages ? Information like that should better be kept in wikipedia, not in commons, since we have no option here to discuss data in an appropriate way. wbr. Alexpl (talk) 21:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

• I don't know when and where discussed this question but I agree the minimum standard information about ship in category help a user to reliably identify the ship because most of the ships changed their names, owners, numbers, bases and so on. This minimum information is too little for discussing and if you find any errors fix them. The template has "references" field so you can check the info in any time. Of course this info should be in wikipedia too if wiki has an article about ship but this minimum is not enough for a wiki article.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, I think this could be potentially dangerous, as it allows to post false information. But since such information are also used in much more delicate fields (Introtext Muhammed for example), I may be ok. At least until Wikidata starts to work. Alexpl (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Khirurg Razumovskiy

• Mike, спасибо за ответ выше, я так и не разобрался с Красиным, дело дошло до международного скандала, но тебе можно ты из России - посмотри работу Витольда Муратова Красин, там неправильно озаглавлен файл, а из-за этого и категория Krasin (ship, 1916). Год постройки - 1917. Ещё один международный скандал разгорается с Хирургом Разумовским. Там у людей окончательно съехала крыша, и они начали переводить названия судов. Появилась доска на судне, см. фото, дискуссия на немецкой странице de:Diskussion:Rodina-Klasse, и есть попытка ввода категории - Category:Surgeon Razumovsky (ship). Категория уже есть, только не подключена к верхней.
  

Я начинаю на русских страницах Википедии вставлять таблицы с английской транскрипцией судов по правилам согласно Российскому морскому регистру судоходства, иначе вообще полный отстой. В соседней республике Михаил Ломоносов уже давно с доской Викинг Ломоносов ходит, как впрочем ещё недавно Викинг Киров. И ты наверно видел, что с Александром Блоком сделали. Alexandre Green, да ещё Дату постройки, верфь и т.д. на доске сфальсифицировали, с приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 04:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

"Сергей Киров" не переименовывался в "Викинг Киров", также не нашел ни одной фотографии с "Викинг Ломоносов", так что этот "креатив" можно не учитывать.

Таблицы с латинскими названиями отличными от написанных на судах - плохая идея: фактически ты создаешь ОРИССное название, которое нигде не встречается и вносишь дополнительную путаницу. Интервик достаточно.

Правила наименования статей о судах в каждой вики различны. На коммонс название Krasin (ship, 1916) неверное, надо поправить. Но названия фотографий здесь не причем.

Нужно четко понимать, что название судна "Хирург Разумовский" - по ходу никакой латиницы в речном регистре вообще нет. (Иначе официально был бы "Viking Truvor", а не "Викинг Трувор"). Т.к. перевод названия значительно отличается от официального названия судна, эту табличку можно игнорировать как исключение.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:29, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

What is the name of the rear ship ?

In the german Wikipedia-article "Funchal" I have set a photo of 2 passenger ships. - 2 cruise ships of the Black Sea Shipping & Co. - 1978. - As you know, in front is the Maxim Gorkiy and rear ? - Can you find out which ship it is ? - Thanks for the effort. -- Buonasera (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I think she is Category:Odessa (ship, 1974)--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 15:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I am sure you are right, thank you ! -- Buonasera (talk) 16:51, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Ships_at_Tonnerres_de_Brest_2012

Ships at Tonnerres de Brest 2012 has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--  Docu  at 16:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Ю. Никулин

• Mike, спасибо за новые фотографии судов, которых раньше на складе не было. По Крылову отсутствует пробел между инициалами, это пол-беды, я с этого тоже начинал. Например, Н.В. Гоголь, но потом сделал как надо Н. В. Хуже дела обстоят с Ю. Никулиным, на fleetfoto его тоже написали полным именем, так как не было фотографии. Ты же видишь, что на носу и на корме написано Ю. Никулин, ну а посередине на фанере для тех кто не знает, как расшифровывается Ю., я буду в Википедии править на Ю. Никулин по схеме Л. Доватор, у не вижу оснований считать судно Юрий Никулин, какое твоё мнение, с приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 22:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• Согласен с тобой. Поправил.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 04:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Picture ID Needed

We got a bunch of pictures from a new user, including this one, but the user didnt give us much info about what we see or when the picture was taken. I´m not 100% sure, but I guess we see a Kirov-Class cruiser or maybe a Project 956 destroyer. I added "Category:Kirov class battlecruiser", what do you think? wbr, Alexpl (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I think you're right she is Kirov-Class cruiser.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I asked user Y7mx to add the correct dates for his pictures, so we may be able to find out which cruiser it is. Shouldnt be very difficult since GDR ship "Wismar" never left the baltic sea - and not many Kirovs came into the baltic sea if i remember correctly. Alexpl (talk) 15:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

www.submarines.narod.ru

Доброго времени суток! Mike1979 как с Вами связаться? Есть вопросы по изображениям подводных лодок. Я автор сайта "Русский Подплав" www.submarines.narod.ru

По эл. почте ("Письмо участнику").--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Ocean Diva

• Hi, Mike, мне кажется, что Rolf из Кёльна ошибся с категорией, было бы разумно поставить 1996 (RiverFleet.ru) или 2003 год, точно сам не знаю, что делать. Категорию Lembit 1936 (спуск на воду), я поменял на 1937 (Year of build), Indienststellung - 14 мая 1937 года. С приветом,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 07:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

• Скорее всего да. Но надежного АИ по этому судну нет: RiverFleet.ru имеет тот же статус как АИ, что и множество иноязычных источников с датой 1995 год. Сложно будет обосновать. Хорошо бы реестр найти.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Ivan Franko 1964

• Mike, извини за беспокойство, тут на fleetphoto.ru у некоторых работ стоит Общественное достояние, не знаю, можно ли грузить, там где было CC-BY-SA, я вчера пару фоток загрузил, а у меня нет Франка, с приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 01:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
  • А сайт указать я забыл, уже 4 часа утра, Ivan Franko --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 01:12, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

• Не стоит. В источниках указаны книги и брошюры, т.о. загрузившие вряд ли имели права на фотографии. Теоретически можно загрузить только изображение открытки, аналогично маркам и конвертам, но этот вопрос я бы уточнил.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 07:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

• Спасибо за ответ, я вот тоже подумал, что если бы он к своей фотографии поставил Общественное достояние, это одно дело, а тут супер-фотки из советских журналов, в принципе понятия Copyright на фотки в СССР не было, но вот кто бы это проверил и поставил в Commons, причём под свободной лицензией, Александр Савин по идее должен знать, но мне как-то не с руки на него выходить, с приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 08:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Queen of Seattle

I've reverted your edit. File:Queen of Seattle 03.jpg: this ship was absolutely not built in 1884: it dates from the early 1980s; I can't find any documentation of the exact year. See http://www.queenofseattle.com/pages/aboutus/from-the-start.asp. If there was an 1884 Queen of Seattle, this is not it. - Jmabel ! talk 15:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

New version of flag

• Mike, тут какой-то Патрик дров наломал с изменением флага, у меня везде стоят флаги 20-25 px, а он видим только теперь с 30px, я не могу дать undo, может у тебя есть права администратора? Он наверно спит целый день. Я ему отписал, правда, недавно, думал, что другие это сделают:

30px --> 25px

• Hi, Patrick, please, check this page en:List of river cruise ships or de:Liste von Flusskreuzfahrtschiffen, we don't see Your version of flag, thanks,

Вот такие вот дела, с приветом,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 17:55, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• У меня таких возможностей нет.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 04:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Спасибо за ответ, Mike, но кто-то сделал, с приветом,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 09:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Soviet Fleet

Вспомнил, зачем я ввёл эту категорию. Я создавал категорию конкретно под этот сайт: The Soviet Fleet - Советский Флот

Category:Passenger ships of the USSR by class и Category:Passenger ships of Russia by class.

• • Я очистил категорию и дал перенаправление, Passenger ships of Russia by class, полностью удалить - у меня наверно нет прав,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 14:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

• • Спасибо.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 15:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Categories correction

Hi Mike - thanks for the categories set Korretur of my photos! -- Buonasera2 (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:G. Pirogov (ship, 1961)

• Mike, там по фотографии видно, что название - Г. Пирогов. Это кто-то на Волге прикалывается и крепит на судне сбоку доски с полной развёрсткой имени, а иногда и делает переводы названий. К сожалению фоторегистр тоже не вдаётся в тему и не проверяет книги, особенно по типу Дунай, проект 305. Раньше были нормальные названия рек, кто разрешил менять? С приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 11:34, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

  Да, поэтому я перенес фотографии в новую категорию.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 04:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Похоже он, вообще, называется "Гр. Пирогов".--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 09:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Разбор изображений

Добрый день! Обращаюсь к Вам за помощью по рекомендации User:PjotrMahh1. Загрузил более 160 фотографий, в основном судов, сделанных мной в Севастополе. Прошу помочь в разборе и категоризации, я сам в морской тематике плаваю. --Art-top (talk) 04:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

• Огромное спасибо за титаническую работу, которую Вы проделали! Я нашёл ещё несколько фотографий судов в Севастополе, сделанных другими участниками и не категоризированных, может быть посмотрите?
• File:Boat Pilot 2008 G1.jpg
• File:Sapfir ship 2008 G1.jpg
• File:SevaBuhta.jpg
• File:Tugboat Mayak 2012 G1.jpg
• File:Мыс Айя.jpg
• File:Севастополь 005.jpg
• File:Севастополь 019.jpg
• File:Севастополь 020.jpg
• File:Севастополь 035.jpg
• File:Севастополь 036.jpg
• File:Севастополь 041.jpg
• --Art-top (talk) 08:20, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Grigorovich I-Z.jpg

File:Grigorovich I-Z.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!

Diannaa (talk) 00:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Polikarpov I-3.jpg

File:Polikarpov I-3.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!

Diannaa (talk) 00:27, 28 October 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!

Affected:

• File:River cruise ships in North River Port 9-jun-2012 02.JPG

Yours sincerely Stefan4 (talk) 14:55, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Vodohod

• Привет, Mike, думаю, что ВодоходЪ надо писать, как у них trade mark на странице - Vodohod, я в прошлом году страницу делал по-немецки Vodohod DE

см. здесь официальную страницу фирмы: Vodohod EN, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

• Так оно и написано Category:Vodohod.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 16:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

• • Категория в порядке, я не об этом. Писал сегодня статью Feliks Dzerzhinskiy, а внутри категории Owner Vodokhod Co., а судно наоборот Vodohod. Что касается судна ВодоходЪ, то тут однозначно Vodokhod по правилам Регистра, а что касается названия фирмы, то я ссылаюсь на их собственную страницу в Интернете, хотя где-то мне попадались документы фирмы (лицензии и т. д.), только я не помню на квком языке они были, надо поискать,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 19:56, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

    Поправь. Когда я заполнял шаблон, я ещё не был знаком с их страницей в интернете. --Mike1979 Russia (talk) 16:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Хорошо, где попадётся, компанию буду править на Vodohod без kh, а судно пока описывать не буду, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 00:59, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Majoritems

• Mike, тут в Викимедиа появился какой-то майор, до этого был ЛосталтеллеристМэн, посмотри, пожалуйста, здесь: Category talk:Petr Velikiy (ship, 1996), я исправил вчера название на правильное Petr Velikiy, этот тип исправил снова на Pyotr, у нас уже был один случай с Демьяном Бедным, кажется ещё один мозг появился, с приветом Пётр --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 00:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC) Mike, я нашёл и загрузил Указ. Это может помочь в разборке. В русской Википедии тоже моё переименование откатили.

, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 02:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

• Необходимо требовать источники, где указано, что название корабля "Пётр Великий".--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

• Совершенно верно. Я там вчера поступил таким же образом, может несколько на повышенных тонах, вот текст записи:

Это ты переименовал? Ссылка на Указ есть? Я не против, но мне нужен официальный документ, даже на борту никто не посмел написать ПЁТР см. сюда . Если плохо видишь, открой пошире, с приветом, Пётр, Дисскуссия на моей немецкой странице, пиши туда. Надеюсь, что не слишком грубо, но доходчиво. Причём уверен, что ничего не исправят. Я этот сорт людей знаю. Будут свою задницу теперь прикрывать, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 14:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Reverts on G.V. Plekhanov (ship, 1959), Dmitriy Poscharskiy (ship, 1957) etc

Hi, these are overcats. The discussion Umkatgorisierung_Kreuzfahrtschiffe is unrelated to this. All Project 588 Riverboats are built by MTW, Wismar (hence in Germany) and already sorted acordingly. Best, --MB-one (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

No. The categorization by class (project) is additional, optional ship categorization. Main ship categorization tree don't include categories by class (see Category:Ships and User:Stunteltje/Sandbox/Ships). So you can add categories by class (for example, add Project 588 Riverboats to the Ships built by MTW, Wismar) but don't delete categories from main tree. And it is explained in the discussion why such cases isn't overcats.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:48, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

The main category isn't deleted. It is still there just one step away. There is absolutely no reason, why G.V. Plekhanov and all the others must be in Project 588 Riverboats and in one or more of their parent categories. --MB-one (talk) 14:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I think Rolf H. give clear explanation on your discussion page. For example, I don't want to search G.V. Plekhanov in every subcategories by class (project) if I know her registration state and functional.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 14:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

MB-one: Commons:Ships by shipyard wont work if you don't add it to the individual ships as outlined on Category:Ships by shipyard.

BTW, Best Wishes for 2013 to both of you. --  Docu  at 09:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 11:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Category:Chizhovka (ship, 1989)

I forgot to classify her, thanks for the hopper. But she has an IMO number, so I assume not a barge. It might be that a barge operates there in another scale of water than here in the Netherlands, but otherwise I think we can use: Category:Suction hopper dredge ships. --Stunteltje (talk) 16:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

OK.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 16:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

7523752 TICHIY DON

• Привет, Mike, не знаю, кто записывал суда сюда: 7523752 TICHIY DON, но начиная с "Федора Достоевского" начинаются проблемы, с приветом, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 10:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Или 8422606 VIKING SURKOV - то есть названия там записаны от балды непрофессионалами, поэтому лучше писать самим, исходя из логики транслитерации,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 11:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

    Вероятно, у них нет русскоязычного модератора.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 12:59, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

---

Wiki Loves Public Art about to take off! Dear Mike1979 Russia, During May we are running Wiki Loves Public Art, a photo contest focused on getting photographs of artworks and sculptures uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Have a look at the lists of objects included, and of participating GLAMs in your country, and upload as many images as you can. Kind regards, the organizers of Wiki Loves Public Art

Message delivered by odderBot on 14:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ryleev on Khimki Reservoir 17-jun-2012 02.JPG, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Can we have english description in the file page? --Christian Ferrer 16:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC) Yes, done for both --A.Savin 17:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC) Ok. --Christian Ferrer 17:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prikamye on Khimky Reservoir 27-jul-2012 08.jpg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Can we have english description in the file page? --Christian Ferrer 16:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC) Ok. --Christian Ferrer 21:27, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Museum submarines or submarine museums?

Dear colleague, please don't get upset, since I have restored a category "museum submarines" at File:INS Kursura (S20).jpg which I took the liberty to transfer from en:wikipedia. Actually, I have proposed both categories, but later realized that "submarine museums" did not work, because many decommissioned submarines around the world are part of various, not necessarily naval, museums. The category "museum submarines" seems to work better and allowed grouping many of the submarine images together. Please take a look yourself: Category:Museum submarines. With best regards, --Photojunkie (talk) 02:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I remove the file because there is "INS Kursura (S20)" category in "Museum submarine" category. There is no need to include separate files if there is a category which has all of them.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:24, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Container Ships and subcats

Hello Mike, I'm not sure, if we already talked about this. But categories like Category:Ships of COSCO‎, Category:Ships of CMA CGM etc are of course subcats of Category:Container ships. Hence it is plain overcategorization to put categories of specific vessels in both of them. Best regards --MB-one (talk) 16:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't agree with you. There are two branches of categorization: by customer (ship's operator) and by function. When user doesn't know ship's operator it's very difficult to find ship because he must search in all ship's operator categories. It's OK work if ship's name consists of operator's name (COSCO Xxxx, CVA CGM Yyyy, etc).--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Drawing request

Hello Mike1979 Russia!

Thank you for your very good drawings of watercraft. Thank you very much for these contributions! They are a great addition for Commons!

I have another request: Can you draw an image of the Iranian Bavar 373 missile system for Commons? This system is an Iranian attempt to copy the well-known Russian S-300-SAM. Here is a photograph of the launching vehicle: [10].

Would be great to receive a positive answer of you.

Thanks in advance, High Contrast (talk) 19:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

OK.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 08:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Bavar 373 sketch.svg--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this high quality drawing! Best regards! --High Contrast (talk) 21:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

RoRo-Ship Grand Portogallo

The Grande Portogallo on the Elbe

Hello Mike,

Please pay attention to this photo ----------------------------------->>>

greeting -- Buonasera (talk) 07:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you ! -- Buonasera (talk) 09:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Specially named ships categories

Hallo Mike

Thank you again for creating special categories of ships, for many ship photos that I've set! - In this way, I have the possibility to set different photos of the same ship in one category. - As far as I have these kind of photos, I'll do it now. greeting -- Buonasera (talk) 12:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

MS Lindenstein from the North German Lloyd

Hello Mike,

German motor vessel Lindenstein of the Bremer North German Lloyd - 1968

Thank you for the category rectification of the two vessels Cosco Hope and Norilskiy Nickel. - I've also adjusted the German NDL ship Lindenstein. - Greeting -- Buonasera (talk) 08:12, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Great ! - Thank you. -- Buonasera (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Filemover

Considering your experience and good rename requests, I've made you a filemover. INeverCry 21:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Pobeda (1900)

Mike, спасибо, я там ещё переименовывал один файл из Suwo в Pobeda, там российский гюйс, здесь лучше видно, нашёл источник. , regards--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 16:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

• • Проблему вчера решили,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 10:25, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

SIBIRSKIY

• Mike, в общем списке судов РМРС SIBIRSKIY отражён правильно, однако при нажатии выскакивает SIBIRSKIJ, аналогичная ситуация и на русской странице: SIBIRSKIJ, я не знаю, что там произошло конкретно, о новых продвинутых кадрах в РМРС я уже читал, будут писать Typhoon (Тайфун), Maria (Мария). Я думаю, что при присвоении категории надо исходить из записи в регистре, хотя как можно менять написание старых судов без фиксации изменения с графе бывшее название судна, так как в море русское наименование судна не играет никакой роли при spelling (произнесение слова по буквам), с приветом,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

SPRAVEDLIVYJ

• Name of ship : SPRAVEDLIVYJ (RS 790465),--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 01:12, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Кубинка

Майк, здравствуйте. Вы идентифицировали несколько фотографий в категории Танковый музей в Кубинке, загруженных ранее (и не подписанных) пользователем Hornet Driver. Видимо владеете информацией по теме. Помогите опознать еще и этого зверя. Спасибо. --Gandvik (talk) 10:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Ships_scrapped_in_Venezia

Category:Ships_scrapped_in_Venezia has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Lev. Anthony (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Category for Bulk Carrier Navios Happiness

Hi Mike,

Bulk carrier Navios Happiness runs in the Port of Hamburg in March 2015

The bulk carriers have their own area. - Can you please create a separate category for the Navios Happiness? - Other Navios bulk carriers are already present in the area. - Greetings -- Buonasera (talk) 14:31, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Mike! -- Buonasera (talk) 17:46, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Фотий Крылов (корабль)

Dear Mike1979,

may you fill information to the ship at Category:SB-135 (tugboat)? I'm not good with Russian language.--Kopiersperre (talk) 11:16, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Unknown ship (1112).jpg

Добрый день. Вам не кажется, что это Кировоград? –Mitte27 (talk) 15:34, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Разве что СДК-137. Кировоградом он стал не ранее 1992 года, а снимки можно датировать 1976-1981 годами. Но почему вы так предположили? По номеру я ничего не обнаружил, а на ЧФ отправили 5 кораблей этого проекта и они все базировались в Крымской ВМБ.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 16:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Просто именно он стоял в последнее время на Донузлаве. А какие ещё 4 корабля этого проекта базировались в КВМБ? — Mitte27 (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Неудивительно. Кировоград - последний оставшийся в живых корабль этого проекта на ЧФ. А еще там присутствовали СДК-82 (RIP 2002), СДК-83 (RIP 1994), СДК-154 (RIP 1998) и СДК-164 (RIP 1998).--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 06:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge/2015 - November - Day and Night/Winners

	Photo Challenge – Third Place
	Congratulations! Your picture Moscow North River Station 2011-11-16.jpg won the 3rd place in the Photo Challenge Day and Night, in November 2015. You can find the results of the challenge here.

File:Ukr naval air jack.gif

File:Ukr naval air jack.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!

Kwasura (talk) 05:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow North River Station 2011-11-16.jpg, which was produced 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. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

W:m Crichton & C:o vs. Petrozavod

Hi. The builders of the ships shall be categorised according to the company that built them - not according to another company that has later operated on the same area. W:m Crichton & C:o has got nothing else in common than the area where they operated, in different eras. --Gwafton (talk) 11:34, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

No. Ships are categorised according shipbuilding sites and last name of site is used for categoristion. This area used for shipbuilding from 1721. Wm Crichton & Co is a page of this yard. Company used shipbuilding structure of previous companies and Petrozavod used Crichton structure after bankruptcy. It's not correct to cut any middle years from the long history.Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Would you then link me the page where this convention has been agreed? It makes sense to categorise the ships per yard name, not by company name. In any case, Crichton shall exist at each ship as a category, because the builder was not Petrozavod company but W:m Crichton & C:o. --Gwafton (talk) 11:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

First of all you made discussed edit so you should give me links to the pages with agreements according which you did changes. But ok. We can accept your suggestion.Mike1979 Russia (talk) 12:15, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Category:BMPT

Is this movement proper? I don't know if it is not a vandalism... Wieralee (talk) 10:43, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

No, it's not. Object 199 is official name of this vehicle, but BMPT is widely known promotional name.--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 12:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Lembit

Mike, ответ на моей странице, это дополнение. Правый борт закрывает рампа для подъёма на уровень моря, по легенде пол ангара - это дно моря. В ангаре мрак, хотя в 2012 бывало светло, судя по фотографиям. Вспышка не пробьёт с расстояния. Отойти от лодки подальше для съёмки всего правого борта под прямым углом помешает стена ангара. Пока поднял 6 фотографий Lembit из запасов 2014 года, но если повезёт попасть в музей, то только в следующем году, с наступающим,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 04:23, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

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

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

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Siemens D.IV Udet.jpg

File:Siemens D.IV Udet.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!

Jcb (talk) 23:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Kaunas_Seaways_(ship,_1989)

Kaunas Seaways (ship, 1989) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Andrei (talk) 01:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Ierusalim (ship, 1901)

Русское Общество Пароходства и Торговли translates as Hospital ship "Jerusalem"; not Ierusalim. Any comment as to why that category should not be renamed? Broichmore (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

File:DH88 Comet in the clouds.jpg

File:DH88 Comet in the clouds.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:27, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

File:USAAF Roundel 1942-1943.svg

File:USAAF Roundel 1942-1943.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!

NiD.29 (talk) 22:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)