User talk:Yarl/archive

Re: Licensing

Hi Yarl, thanks for your response. Could you please check over your existing uploads? (See here) If they are from enWiki, you have to provide a link to their original page, and copy all the information on the image description page.

If you do this and you find that some are not free, please tag them for speedy deletion like this:

{{db|Mistaken upload, non-free image from en.wp, see (URL). ~~~~}}

Thanks, pfctdayelise (translate?) 21:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Cześć

Wysłałem na serwer commons grafikę Image:Toyota logo.jpg, która zastąpiła (przez przypadek) Twój plik. Twoja grafika jest ładniejsza więc jeżeli możesz wyślij ją jeszcze raz. Pozdrowienia Kojotw 20:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:POL Łęknica map.svg

Thank you for that image, I didn't know of that tool. I've changed all remaining uses of my version to that one. --32X 12:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Autor zdjęcia

Ale jakiego tu autora podąć :( przecież nie będę wymyślała :( Może coś doradzisz? --Ala z 14:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• widzę, że już to zrobiłeś :) dzięki --Ala z 15:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Simulated view of Naiad.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Simulated view of Naiad.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Augiasstallputzer 13:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Microsoft_wordmark.svg

Image deletion warning

Image:Microsoft_wordmark.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

—LX (talk, contribs) 12:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

"box"

Hello, please do not remove the history of a file. Also, please do not change correct source information against some suboptimal tool info. Thanks --Überraschungsbilder 00:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Die linke logo.png

Image deletion warning

Image:Die linke logo.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

  — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 09:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

AWB

Prosze nie puszczac bota spod swojego konta --Szczepan talk  16:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

A, sorry, nie dojechalem do konca sekcji, przepraszam za klopot, pozdrawiam --Szczepan talk  16:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Michael Johnson.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Michael Johnson.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 01:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pete Townshend Windmill-1.jpg

Hello Yarl, this image is not a duplicate but an improved version of Image:Pete Townshend Windmill.jpg (from the German „Bilderwerkstatt“). It should not be deleted. Thanks, Rainer ... 20:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

{{Categorise}}

Hi Yarl/archive,
Please tell me why you think that {{Categorise}} should be replaced by {{CatDiffuse}}
As you may thought by reading this, I don't agree. {{Categorise}} is generally for every main category and says (not exactly but summerised) do not use this category for articles or pictures while {{CatDiffuse}} says this category should get emtied, because it's too large.
I think both templates are usfull. {{Categorise}} if the category is empty and {{CatDiffuse}} if the category is full (which are a lot and will become evertime, because newbees don't know that rules)
hf --D-Kuru 17:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

AWB edits

Please be careful when using AWB, your edit here removed the {{Object location}} template and here removed {{Picture of the day}}, in both cases destroying useful information. If AWB is being used to somehow automate the task of inserting ==Summary==, can you get it to only replace the line just before the info template if it starts with "==" ? I am now having to check all your edits to my uploads, will you check all your other edits to other files for this systematic mistake? Thanks :-) --Tony Wills 20:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. Often there are templates like {{QualityImage}} or {{Featured picture}} at the top too. --Tony Wills 21:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Categories like "Taken by Fujifilm finepix S6500fd and so on

Hmm. I have quite a mess in my watchlist because of you have updated all images so they are included in this simple category :-). But I think that's no problem, I am not using it anyway. However, I think this is quite useless job, because such category will be terribly overpopulated and quite a lot of edits must be done in order to have images this way organized. But there you go - for me just addying few words into my commonist window before every upload starts - and you will have a lot of work saved :-) I just want to think if this categories are really nescessary. Aktron 23:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

wrong category

Yarl,

Please don't put my photographies in the category "Photo taken with Canon EOS 10D".

I work only with a Canon G2, a Canon 350D and a Canon 400D. I would appreciate if can change all the wrong mentions that you have put on the category of my images.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT 23:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

wrong category

Ok

Check the history of these images: == Image:Havré 5604.JPG Image:Forest 060106 (15).JPG Image:Forest 060106 (14).JPG Image:Fallais Rv1aJPG.jpg Image:Fallais CH1bJPG b.jpg and Image:01 Tournai Mu2JPG.jpg ==

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT 17:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image:Scleroderma citrinum (4).jpg

Cześć, na pl: wiki jestem Tik, a na commons mam konto Puchatych K., więc jest wszystko w porządku. Puchatech K.

Sternberger Stern

I want to ask, if you could do a polish translation in the chapter History:"Star of Torzym" of this Article? Greetings --Hopfenpflücker 11:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jasna Góra - mosaic 01-removed from the wall.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 {{{3}}}

Image:Viggo Mortenson.jpg

Hello.

I think you have uploaded it with a wrong name. Shouldn't it be Image:Viggo Mortensen.jpg?

-- Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 ^{(Talk: here- es- en)} 18:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Calliopejen 16:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01-removed from the wall.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01-removed from the wall.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Calliopejen 16:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Your AWB edits

Hi Yarl, it would be nice if you had read the exif data before doing changes like this: [1] I know, mistakes happen, but this is not the only one. :-/ Best regards, --Olei 21:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Europa_da_się_lubić_01.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Europa_da_się_lubić_01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Seidenstud 19:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Jasna Góra - mosaic 01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 10:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cygnus-X1.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Cygnus-X1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Mike Peel 15:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:POL voivodships map.svg

Mapka jest niezgodna z zasadami ortografii języka polskiego o czym możesz poczytać tutaj. Wstawiłem ostrzeżenie by tego pliku nie używać z tego właśnie powodu.
Llewelyn MT 23:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token a963e037b0c0aa855b 9f03b89bf68003

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Prośba

Cześć. Czy mógłbyś zrobić (zmodyfikować) swoją grafikę Image:Wikipedia moja encyklopedia.png aby był na niej napis "WIKIPEDYJO" (zamiast "WIKIPEDIA") i na dole "Wolno Yncyklopedyja" (zamiast "moja encyklopedia") - oczywiście taką samą lub bardzo podobną czcionką to pierwszowzoru. Jeśli będzie gotowa to prosiłbym o załadowanie pod nazwę Image:Silesian Wikipedia Banner.png z kategorią zapisaną Category:Silesian Wikipedia. Byłbym wdzięczny. Pozdrawiam. LUCPOL 20:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Niestety nie wiem jaka czcionka jest tam użyta. Nie znam się zbytnio na czcionkach. LUCPOL 13:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Brandenburg Gate Quadriga at Night.jpg

Hi, I don't know how you came to the idea, that my picture was taken with Canon's 10D. I would just like to tell you that this edit was wrong. The image was taken with the 350D instead. This could be seen from the image description page. Cheers, -- אx 10:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Category:Photographs by Sławek Skonieczny

Witaj. Tak się zastanawiam, że jeśli Sławek jest obecny na każdym zdjęciu (a przecież w oryginale jest), to chyba raczej nie jest autorem tych wszystkich fotek, więc nazwa kategorii wprowadza w błąd... Jak uważasz? Pozdrawiam, pjahr @ 17:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Mapa Kwatermistrzostwa 1822-1843.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mapa Kwatermistrzostwa 1822-1843.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Masur (talk) 14:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• przepraszam, czy takich plików jest więcej? Bo jak tak, to wszystkie one zostały błędnie przeniesione na Commons. Brak autora/źrodła uniemożliwia zastosowanie licencji, a tak się składa, że na plwiki Tomasz Pietras wszystkie pliki załadował bez tych danych (nadając kuriozalne licencje jak GFDL np.). Czy mógłbyś wylistować pliki, które przeniosłeś z plwiki, a które nie mają dostatecznej informacji do zastosowania licencji? Masur (talk) 14:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
• ok. dzięki. To w sumie sprzątanie po Pietrasie, ale nie powinieneś przenosić grafik z niepełnymi zdjęciami. Masur (talk) 23:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sprzątanie

Hej, widzę że sprzątasz... generalnie nie wiem co :-)) ale nie chcę Ci przeszkadzać - w związku z tym informuję, że dodałam kategorię miasta Olsztynek do warmińsko-mazurskiego... ale nie wiem czy powinno być wysoko w województwie, czy też niżej w powiecie olsztyńskim. Jakoś nie widzę reguły. Jeśli coś źle zrobiłam - to popraw proszę. Pozdro - Beax 21:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Powiaty

hej, jaka była idea usuwania kat. powiaty woj. warm.-maz.?--Serdelll (talk) 06:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

hej, sorrki że dopiero teraz ale ostatnio nie często zagladałem na commons a Twój wpis na mojej stronie dyskusji jakoś przeoczyłem. Odnosnie wiosek w regionach... uważam, że warto by je tam zostawic gdyż IMHO to właśnie obecne wioski są "świadkami" kultury danego regionu. Masta ulegają unifikacji/glabalizacji/ujednoliceniu, ale wioski w dużej mierze wciąż posiadają wyraźne cechy regionalizmu, co widać na zdjęciacich. Category:Villages in Poland by region traktuję ajko kategorię pomocniczą. Pozdr, Serdelll (talk) 10:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pink Floyd Pig.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Pink Floyd Pig.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 22:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jay-z and beyonce.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Jay-z and beyonce.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Sprzątanie

Hej, mógłbyś co nie dodać tu: pl:Dyskusja Wikipedii:Wakacje z Wikipedią - W wakacyjnym obiektywie. Pozdro Przykuta (talk) 06:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Kategoria:Beskid Wyspowy

Przed tworzeniem nowej kategorii warto przejrzeć kategorię nadrzędną. Zwróć uwagę, że w kategorii Beskid Wyspowy nie ma ani jednej podkategorii, wszytko opisane jest w formie stron (np. Mogielica, Łopień itd. Podkategoria Golców byłaby wyjątkiem i psuła cały układ. Dla Golcowa również utworzyłem stronę Golców. Zalecenia dla commons dopuszczają tworzenie kategorii i/lub stron, ja wybrałem dla Beskidu Wysp. strony, tworzenie teraz kategorii byłoby tylko niepotrzebnym dublowaniem. Zachowałem również kat. nadrzędną Beskid Wyspowy, chodzi o to, by ktoś otwierający link do commons z tego art. widział nie tylko tytuły stron, lecz również galerię miniaturek. Na razie jest to słuszne, gdyż ilość zdjęć nie jest duża (jestem autorem jakichś 90 ich procent). Gdy ilość zdjęć się znacznie zwiększy, trzeba będzie usunąć kat. nadrzędną i utworzyć stronę Beskid Wyspowy z wyborem najlepszych i charakterystycznych zdjęć. Pozdrawiam. Selso (talk) 16:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Sceptycyzm to mało twórcze podejście. Ja uporządkowałem całe Beskidy Wyspowe konsekwentnie jako strony. Nie podoba ci się - to zdubluj uporządkowanie i zrób kategorie (a nawet lepiej - możesz po zrobieniu kategorii usunąć strony i poprawić linki na Wikipedii). Ale nie wystarczy zrobić jedną kategorię, trzeba zrobić wszystko - pełno mamy tak spitolonych przykładów na commons; część jako kat., część jako strony, niektóre i tak i tak... Selso (talk) 22:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

kategorie regionów

Jestem za. A nawet przeciw tworzeniu kategorii dla regionów, które w zasadzie nie mają dobrze określonych granic. Gdzie kończy i zaczyna się dane województwo jest ściśle określone. I tak kategoryzuję kościoły. IMO podkategorie powinny nazywać się np. Category:Churches in Silesian Voivodeship a nie Category:Churches in Silesia. Wtedy bez żadnych wątpliwości wiadomo co ma tam trafiać. Tylko, że takie przenosiny to powinien raczej bot zrobić. --Sfu (talk) 15:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Może po prostu trzeba tam dać na górze tam jakąś informację co tam powinno trafiać. IMHO tylko jakieś mapy regionów, zdjęcia strojów ludowych, itp. żadne miasta, budynki ... Dalej ... cała zawartość Category:Categories in Poland by region, powinna być pozamieniana na by Voivodehship. Wtedy nie będzie wątpliwości. Może jednak takie zmiany wymagają przynajmniej jakiegoś ogłoszenia w kawiarence. Chciałem to zrobić po zrobieniu porządku z kościołami. Ale może lepiej wcześniej. --Sfu (talk) 15:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Warto przy tej okazji poprawić literówkę Category:Lebusz na Category:Lubusz Voivodeship. Aha, na commons faktycznie mało polaków działa i nawet zmian na stronie głównej nie konsultowałem. Więc można to chyba po prostu zrobić. --Sfu (talk) 16:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

racja, mój błąd --Sfu (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, będzie lepiej. --Sfu (talk) 19:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hej. Mógłbyś pozamieniać botem te kategorie: Category:Cities in Pomerania i Category:Cities in West Pomerania? Wtedy wszystko będzie gotowe do przerzucania z Cities in Poland? Bot mógłby też pozmieniać nazwy w kategoriach budynków, a tam tych kategorii jest znacznie więcej. --Sfu (talk) 19:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Ja z kolei po trafieniu na to, zacząłem się zastanawiać, co będzie kiedy liczb art. i kategorii wiosek stanie się nawet w województwach bardzo duża. Wtedy pewnie będzie trzeba przenieść je do powiatów. Pytanie tylko, czy na prawdę na commons będą zdjęcia tak dużej części polskich wsi, i to w takich ilościach, że trzeba dla nich tworzyć kategorie? Jest to trochę wróżenie. Obecnie tak na prawdę to mamy zbiór tylko pewnych wybranych wsi (najczęściej pewnie są to okolice miejc gdzie mieszkają użytkownicy). Niewątpliwie zdjęć będzie coraz więcej. Póki co kategoria, jest raczej zbędna, ale myślę, że w przyszłości będą takie potrzebne. Choć z drugiej strony ludzie raczej nie fotografują nieciekawych wsi, gdzie nie ma nawet kościoła, ani remizy OSP. Więc być może się mylę... --Sfu (talk) 19:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Przy okazji chciałbym napisać jeszcze o pomyśle, który pojawił się w mojej głowie już jakiś czas temu. Myślę, że ludzie nie kategoryzują do gmin dlatego, że brak jest tych kategorii, a nie wiedzą jak je utworzyć. Może warto byłoby jakimś botem utworzyć kategorie dla wszystkich gmin i brakujących powiatów (to ostatnie to koniecznie). Nie wiem co prawda czy to nie spotka, że z jakimś protestem, że tworzy się masę pustych kategorii. Ale przecież, za jakiś czas większość z nich się zapełni.

Druga sprawa to kwestia kategorii, dla wsi. Wiele nosi samą nazwę wsi, choć istnieje czasem i kilka innych wsi o tej samej nazwie. Wygląda na to, że po prostu pierwsza wieś jest lepsza i ma nazwę kategorii bez żadnych nawiasów. Może i niej jest to taki problem, ale zamieszanie i różnica z wikipedią jednak zostają. Pozdrawiam Sfu (talk) 19:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Nie ogłaszam się bo jeszcze będzie jakieś national voting, a tego nie chcę. Zresztą chyba nawet nie potrzebuję. Co do tego hard work to jestem dopiero na "G" ;). --Sfu (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Poznan categories

Hello, thanks for your reaction about Poznan street categories. I greatly diffused the category Poznan. I asked some polish people, but they didn't understand english, I don't understand polish, therefore I followed the decision of User:ClemRutter to stick to polish names until polish users come in to make more adequate cat-names. You may request the move of every Poznan category you want by tagging the category with {{move|new category name|reason}} and an administrator shall make the move. Any category improvement is welcome, I have now reached the limit of my possiblities for Posnan and shall leave it from now on to you and other polish people. Some remaining questions:

• Which Collegium and Academia images/categories may go into the Category:Adam Mickiewicz University? Which castles, palasts and forts may go into a new subcategory?

• Which klastorzs may go into a new subcategory?

• Can you look also to improve the series of church-categories in Poznan which all have polish names. Thanks beforehand.

-- Greetings, Havang(nl) (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC). Lay-out, links and signature fail - why? User:Havang(nl)??? Havang(nl) (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The mess was much, much, much bigger, there were about 350 images in the main category; and a lot of uncategorised images as well. I am pleased you take over a bit. Thanks. Havang(nl) (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I am really pleased seeing your cat's. Havang(nl) (talk) 20:58, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Good job

Hello, since quite some time, I noticed that you are doing an excellent job here in cleaning up and recategorisation of your country. I really appreciate. To make things even faster, can I suggest to place undisputed move request in User_talk:CommonsDelinker/commands in the form {{Move cat|Current_category_name|New_category_name}} (no category prefix needed). Note that with catscan (CSV option), you can get a list of ascii categories that you can cut and paste easily in any editor or excel to make edition much quicker. That way, we can handle the move requests faster with less overhead for you and me. Keep up the good work. --Foroa (talk) 19:00, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Great. No need to put the templates in the categories themselves. If you dont put them, we don't have to remove them. --Foroa (talk) 06:50, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Silesia

Note that renaming the Silesian related categories created quite some problems in Category:Silesia as you can see in User_talk:Siebrand#Problem_with_bot. Could you have a look how to address the co-habitation of Polish and Czech categories ? I know that it will not be easy and need some goodwill from both sides. (and documentation) --Foroa (talk) 07:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Dzięki

Dzięki za poparcie mojej kandydatury. Co z tego na pewno wyniknie, to motywacja do dokończenia tej roboty ;). Sfu (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Aha, już mam wątpliwość, mamy: Category:Koło (województwo wielkopolskie) i Category:Koło. Wydaje mi się, że na commons, powinna to być jednak ta druga nazwa. Ale był chyba wokół tego jakieś wątpliwości. --Sfu (talk) 09:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Racja. Na tej zasadzie Category:Buildings in Poland by voivodeship by type jest do wywalenia. Aha, mamy kogoś trzeciego do pomocy ;) --Sfu (talk) 20:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

move.js

I hope you do not mind this edit I made. The template was including your script in a maintenance category.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Autotranslate {{BadJPEG}}

 Done, thanks for having prepared the subpages :)

-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 08:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Commons:FAQ

Wybacz. Jeśli uznasz, że któreś z fragmentów FAQ przetłumaczyłeś lepiej, śmiało zmień moje tłumaczenie na własne; jeśli doszedłeś do dalszego fragmentu, takoż dodaj swoje tłumaczenie. /odder 20:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Zmiana nazw plików

Mógłbyś zaakceptować do zmiany nazwy pliki z [2]? Chciałem dostosować parę plików do konwencji nazewniczej z Category:Pronunciation, żeby mogły być wyłapane przez automatyczne boty, ale widzę, że szablon {{Rename}} chyba jest jedynie fikcją. Radziłbyś mi, żebym w przyszłości nie używał go, tylko ręcznie ładował ponownie pliki? --Derbeth ^talk 22:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Mogę tak zrobić jeśli nie jestem administratorem? --Derbeth ^talk 02:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Właśnie się okazało, że tak nie pójdzie - delinker tylko poprawia linki, nie ładuje plików pod inną nazwą. --Derbeth ^talk 12:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: adding /pl to Uncat/lang

 Done -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 19:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Autotransalation of templates

{{PD-USGov}}, {{PD-USGov-NASA}}:  Done, and you're welcome, although I'll be unavailable the two next weeks ;)

-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 11:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm back to work, and have done {{Translation possible}} and {{PD-Polish}}. Thanks for having prepared the layout templates and having ported the various lang contents! -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 11:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

{{Personality rights}}:  Done -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 19:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

{{PD-Polishsymbol}}:  Done -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 14:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Dzięki

Dzięki za dodanie zdjęcia z mojej galerii http://www.flickr.com/photos/adamziaja/ :)

File tagging File:Ipod_phone.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Ipod_phone.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Ipod_phone.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

shizhao (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Phishing_chart_PL.png

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Phishing_chart_PL.png, 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:Phishing_chart_PL.png]]). 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!

Kam Solusar (talk) 08:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Category talk:Insignia

Please see discussion there - why did you make this cat hidden? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Dni Morza

Witam! Utworzyłeś kategorię "Dni Morza". Z tymi Dniami to jest ten problem, że odbywają się pod tą samą nazwą m.in. w Szczecinie, Gdańsku, Gdyni, Świnoujściu, Kołobrzegu i czort wie gdzie jeszcze ;). Są to poza tym imprezy lokalne niepołączone z tymi odbywającymi się w innych miastach. Tak więc należałoby utworzyć kategorie z nazwą miasta, której akurat dana impreza dotyczy. Bo inni mogą się obrazić ;). Nie mówiąc już o mogącym powstać zamieszaniu... Electron ^<Talk?> 06:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Co też zrobiłem. Pozdrawiam Electron ^<Talk?> 07:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Sporo zdjęć z tą tematyką leży na Flickr'u (większość tych z wolną licencją zrobił niejaki włodi). Jak będę miał więcej czasu to co lepsze sztuki wrzucę na commons. Pozdrawiam Electron ^<Talk?> 09:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:Jezioro Zygmunta Augusta

Category discussion notification

Category:Jezioro Zygmunta Augusta 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!

--Teofilo (talk) 09:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chorzów - Church of St. Lawrence.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 --George Chernilevsky 20:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Żelazny

Cześć, Yarl. Żelaźni nie są grupą akrobacyjną Sił Powietrznych (jak Orlik czy Biało-Czerwone Iskry), to grupa w pełni cywilna, w ramach Aeroklubu Poznańskiego. Airwolf (talk) 20:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Znalazłem coś takiego: Category:Aviation in Poland Airwolf (talk) 10:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bytom - wzgórze św. Małgorzaty - figura 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 OK --Ianare 06:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bytom - Kolonia Zgorzelec 04.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 I like this one --Mbdortmund 16:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Silesian Central Park - Żyrafa.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 Heh, that is one funky giraffe! Maedin 19:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

File:BMW_AM4_01.jpg

File:BMW_AM4_01.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!

92.227.138.24 05:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

PD-User

Gotowe. Herr Kriss (talk) 18:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

J/w. Herr Kriss (talk) 21:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bytom - Sleeping lion 01.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 --George Chernilevsky 14:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

File tagging File:Eugenia.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Eugenia.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Eugenia.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

–Tryphon^☂ 12:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

User:YarluBot

Congratulations! It has bot status now. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed author

See here. Multichill (talk) 04:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Categorizing /layout templates

Hey, I just wanted to thank you for categorizing all those layout templates that I have created. It's much appreciated. --The Evil IP address (talk) 13:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Removing empty lines

Hi Yarl, may I ask why your bot removes empty lines like in this image and mark it with “multilang fixes”? I think such an edit is not needed. Raymond 07:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

nazwy języków

Dzięki za podlinkowanie tego szablonu. Tego mi brakowało wtedy. To czego mi teraz brakuje to czas. Co do tłumaczenia to jest niewielki problem. Bo w polskim są (przynajmniej) dwa typy nazw języków: kończące się na -ski, oraz po prostu nazwy (np. esperanto, hindi). Jak skonstruować tekst w szablonie assesments, żeby działa i dla obu typów i wszystkich potencjanych projeków (wikipedii, wikinews, itd.)? Oczywiście można szablon language skonstruować pod szablon assesment. Language używany jest też przez potd (np. Template:Potd/2006-12-05 (pl)). Mam nadzieję, że tylko w tych dwóch.

Moja propozycja jest taka: w language nazwy odmienione: niemieckim, perskim, esperano. Tekst w assesments miałby iść mniej więcej: nagrodzony w <nazwa projektu> w języku <odmieniona nazwa języka>. Tekst w potd: to jest tłumacznie opisu grafik dnia w języku <odmieniona nazwa języka>.

O czymś zapomniałem, nie pomyślałem? Pozdrawiam ;) --Sfu (talk) 20:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Template talk:Yearcategory/Languages

 Done -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 13:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Psamathe.gif

In 2006, you claimed http://www.nasa.gov/ as your source. But I also know this image is on Scott Sheppard's website. What do you think the permission rights should be for this image? Did you find this on the NASA site or could you claim "Fair Use"? I have considered uploading a few of Scott Sheppard's other discovered moons but I am not sure what copyright they come under. -- Kheider (talk) 09:38, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Yarl!

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.

BotMultichillT 05:34, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Golf ball.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

{{VN}} and {{VN/title}}

Hello my friend,
Could you create the page pl:Nazwy miejscowe or find me a synonym page ?
(By the way, the term is very used in pl.wikipedia so the page might interest others)
The pupose is to put a link in {{VN/title}} for pl=.
By the way, I only speak french and english.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 09:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Why is your bot adding == {{int:filedesc}} ==

Hi, I have seen by several files that your bot adds an extra line == {{int:filedesc}} ==. Why is this done? Wouter (talk) 19:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

See for example http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AParis_panorama_opera_A.jpg&diff=28918291&oldid=25047484 Your bot adds a heading which is not very relevant in my opinion because it is the same as |Description=. It is all not very important. I was just curious to know why it was done. Regards, Wouter (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Please stop adding unnecessary headings. --Slomox (talk) 20:32, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please stop. Rocket000 (talk) 06:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

File:H4r300f8.jpg

---

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 22:24, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Puchły - Orthodox church 03.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. -- Smial 01:26, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Słuczanka - Ciconia ciconia.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 --Lipedia 20:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Czeremcha-Wieś - Church of St. Kosma and Damian 03.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. --AFBorchert 20:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Czyże - Church of St. Kosma and Damian edit.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 Nice image. 99of9 00:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sokółka - Town hall.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 Lovely. --Airwolf 23:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Belarus-Poland border 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 Clean shot. --Eusebius 21:51, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sokółka - Chapel 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 Ok for me. --Cayambe 10:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nowa Wola - Church of John the Baptist 03.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 very good --George Chernilevsky 07:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bohoniki - Mosque 05.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 well done --George Chernilevsky 07:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bohoniki - Domesticated goose 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 good --George Chernilevsky 07:11, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Minkowce - Windmill 03.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 Composition and colors good. --Daniel Case 06:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kuzawa - Cross 01.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 OK --Pudelek 22:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Retouched

Hi, Thanks again for editing File:Sokól bunker Jastarnia Poland July2009.jpg. Do you mind still adding a Retouched tag to the image page describing the exact edits since I think some other things were also removed from the beach - not just the shadow? Thanks, --MattiPaavola (talk) 13:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Puchły - Grave 01.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 Bij a patrz, czy równo puchnie :) Airwolf 00:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bytom - Victims of communism monument 01.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 Nice. ZooFari 20:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)