User talk:Davey2010/Archive 2016

Archives:

2011

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User refusing to accept that deletion request has been closed as kept. the Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bus in Poundswick Lane, Wythenshawe.jpg request..

My message there crossed your talk page message. I tried to solve this with several polite requests but as you seemed to ignore my concerns I felt that I had no other option than to request another admin to look into the matter and request you to follow the DR procedures. Basvb (talk) 22:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Well least this board isn't like this hell hole!, Anyway thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 00:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Silver coach, 26 July 2012.jpg

The new version may not have uploaded correctly, as it looks identical only the file is twice the size of the original. Peter James (talk) 19:46, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Peter James - If you open up both images my one is slightly brighter although looking at the thumbnail you wouldn't think so, Would you say the new one's better or still worse ?, Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 20:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

After reloading the page I can see the difference. The new version looks better, but I'm not sure why the file size has increased so much. Peter James (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I have a feeling the image was perhaps saved at 70% quality whereas I save everything at 100% so that could be the reason, Either that or it's because I saved it as a PNG and then a JPG (after realizing the actual image was a JPG...) .... or it could be both! ... Anyway thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

It seems to be the quality level - 100% produces a similar size to the new version; at 95% it's a similar size to the original. I think it may be reduced to about 90% when viewed at different sizes. Peter James (talk) 12:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah okay, Well I have no idea to be honest but don't think it should really matter, Anyway thanks for your message & Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 16:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Blocking rationale

Hi! Rationale as follows: 1.) Maybe(!) he'll be back and see the block. First scenario: He get's the point and asks for unblocking. Second scenario: Not getting the point and restarts vandalism. In this case we have another admin will see the first block and act accordingly, most likely with an indefinite block. I don't think it's overhanded - vandals often get blocked for good. Further, since I don't know if and when he's coming back, a 4 week block serves the purpose of getting the message across. Most vandals come back within a short time, so 4 weeks seems a good choice to me. Finally the last scenario: He's not coming back. Then it doesn't matter either way. :-) --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 04:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hedwig in Washington, But blocking over that one edit is punitive ?, Even if it was 3 days he would've gotten the message (hopefully!) and had he not then block him then? .... It just seems silly in blocking someone for an entire month for one vandal edit which wasn't that bad (I saw their eswiki edit and they wasn't even blocked over there and to my understanding what editors do on other projects is no ones concern unless they're site banned), Maybe because I spend most of my time at ENWP where things are obviously different maybe that's why I'm a tad surprised/questionative, Sorry I'm not trying to have a go at you or anything .... I'm just trying to I guess understand it all :), Anyway thanks for explaining it :), –Davey2010^Talk 08:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is a bit silly. There's some crystal ball reading involved, maybe this time I read it wrong. Surely possible. You are right, we usually don't judge what other projects do. Sometimes it is a good indicator, esp. enwiki does a lot of sockpuppet investigations. We use those here as well, it would be a waste of time and manpower to do a checkuser twice. And don't worry, you can question everything I do. It's a wiki! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 02:44, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Hedwig in Washington - I've seen it on EN - Being an admin isn't the easiest of things in the world , Exactly SPI's a pain at EN so sod doing it twice! PSMILEY (Psmiley), Haha okay I'll be here every day to question every edit you make haha , I'm sorry if I seemed like I was butting in or getting involved in stuff that didn't concern me - It's just yeah i was surprised, Anyway it's all the past it's all cool :D, Thanks again for explaining, Have a great week :) –Davey2010^Talk 03:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Again: No problem, I didn't take any offence. Please ask about every edit, I might even answer. Probably not tho. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 03:52, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:Rollback topicon

I noticed Template:Rollback topicon was redlinked on your template so I've created it, thanks for your support. :) Riley Huntley (talk) 02:34, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Riley Huntley :), I noticed it was redlinked when I created it but ended up forgetting to get it created so thanks for that :), Good luck with your RFA :), –Davey2010^Talk 09:26, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Patroller!

---

Counter Vandalism Unit

Hi Davey2010,

You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.

As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.

We could use your help at the Counter Vandalism Unit. For example by patrolling an Anonymous-edits checklist and checking a day-part.

If you have any questions please leave a message on the CVU talkpage or ask for help on IRC in #wikimedia-commons.

-- ~riley (talk) 03:11, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oh wow thanks so much ~riley :), For some reason I never gave it a thought to apply for it but anyway thank you - very much appreciated :), Have a great weekend, –Davey2010^Talk 13:25, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

• I usually either get yelled at for adding rights that users didn't know existed, or thanked for ones they just haven't gotten around to ask for. I'm glad it wasn't the former. ~riley (talk) 18:38, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

• ~riley Woah why would anyone yell at you over it ? .... If the user didn't know it existed then that's their fault not yours :), I was accidentally given autopatrol at EN but as I'm not a content creator it was removed so maybe I assumed it was kinda the same here hence not applying? ... Lord knows PGRIN (Pgrin), Haha I'll moan at you if you like PWINK (Pwink), –Davey2010^Talk 19:07, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Your reverts

What do you mean with "2 spellings"? --Hydro (talk) 18:42, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Hydro - I'm so sorry! - According to Google it can be spelt as "Strandkörbe" and for some bizarre reason I thought you wanted it with the e which is why I declined it, Turns out you only wanted an s on the end , I'm so sorry!, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:00, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

 Done - All moved, Again apologies for the cock up. –Davey2010^Talk 19:04, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for renaming! --Hydro (talk) 19:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome, Happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 19:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Cat move

I don't see any value in the category move. Nothing changes beyond a single word, and there is already a category redirect pointing from that variation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

There's a discussion on it so I'm assuming consensus was to name them with "the" (I've not bothred to read the discussion!) - I'm just moving per the requests. –Davey2010^Talk 02:44, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

• Deletion isn't how you do this. See my talk page. Hit me up when you are ready for step 3. - Jmabel ! talk 02:46, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Moving (renaming) the image of Tilicum (orca)

Regarding this move - do you really think this made the file name better/less meaningless/less ambiguous considering that whole directory is also named "Tilikum (orca)" and also contains files Tilikum Orca.jpg and TilikumOrca.JPG? Also AFAIK "Shamu" wasn't meaningless but denoted nickname of Tilicum for one of shows.--Tatewaki (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tatewaki - Having no knowledge of dolphins etc etc - I checked the description, cats as well as the article usage and all pointed to "Tilikum (orca)", There wasn't one mention of "Shamu" so yes I believe the previous name was meaningless however one can easily add "Shamu" in the description if really wanted, Had I been aware I perhaps would've renamed it as. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 04:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I've moved it too File:Tilikum (orca) (Shamu).jpg although I've just realized most don't include the nickname in the title, Is that better do you think ? :) –Davey2010^Talk 04:25, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Graham Richardson

I realise you've closed that DR (you did jump to the delete button a bit fast there! And no problem on clearing up the mess. Just wanted to add a couple things: He is somewhat problematic, and I would not automatically trust a file in his Flickr photostream to be OK. However, he does attribute when it is someone else's work (example). That makes me trust him, to the extent that he doesn't falsely claim to take photos he hasn't. So if he says its his own work, those should be fine. And yes, Plymothian Transit is his website and he often uses "Didbygraham". On the broader subject - it can be easy to prove someone did not take a photo, but its impossible to prove someone took a photo. You cannot say for certain that a photo uploaded by me from my camera is my own work (I could have handed it to someone else). Ultimately, you have to judge if you can trust the uploader.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:58, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nilfanion, I didn't actually realize he was attributing, I simply assumed the uploaders were putting their names on them and he was simply saving and reuploading without a care in the world (obviously not!),

Upon searching Plymothian Transit I realized that was infact Graham which was the final ice breaker in me withdrawing the mess that was the DR,

That's extremely true you do, I guess really you don't know if these "uploaders" do own the images - It's all about trust!,

Anyway thanks again for pretty much coming to the rescue!, I'll just leave this here - I know I deserve it!,

Anyway thanks again, –Davey2010^Talk 00:23, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Want to be a filemover

Hi! I make lots of file renaming requests every day (most of which are processed by you and none are rejected), so I thought maybe I become a renamer myself. Could you please tell me how can I become one? --Tohaomg (talk) 19:56, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tohaomg, You'll need to go to Commons:Requests_for_rights#Filemover and then follow the instructions in the yellow box :),

You should read COM:FILEMOVER before requesting so you're familiar with it all :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:06, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Photos need renaming back

Apologies for the mess, but I've just reset a couple of renames you've been so kind to effectuate for me. I've probably spent too many hours in front of the computer today: the file names were correct to begin with. Vinguru (talk) 15:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• Hi Vinguru - You're lucky - I was going to moan but seeing as you were so nice to apologize first I'll save the moaning :), Anyway no worries we all make mistakes :), Unfortunately I won't be able to rename them as an admin will have to do it, Thanks for your message :), –Davey2010^Talk 15:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• So do you want the names to be replaced from "Sollerudveien" to "Lilleakerveien" ?, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• No, back to "Sollerudveien". Vinguru (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• Vinguru shit sorry that's what I meant , If you haven't done so I'll put the request up but an admin will have to do it as us non-admins can't move from one file to another and then back again :(, Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 15:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

•  Done - Added the templates so now it's just the waiting game lol, Anyway thanks again, –Davey2010^Talk 15:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• Great. Thanks a lot, and again: sorry for the cock-up. Vinguru (talk) 17:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• No worries, Glad I could help :), Happy editing ... wait uploading .... , Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 17:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

What exactly does that mean?

What exactly does that mean? ... this has had to be created so editors can check his overwrites. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Well it means what it says ? ...... –Davey2010^Talk 22:11, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

But what does it say? this has had to be created. What does that mean? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 22:35, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

It means what it says .... The category was created due to your problematic uploads ? –Davey2010^Talk 22:41, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 22:46, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

See you're confusing me! - I'll try again lol - It means what it says .... The category was created due to your problematic uploads ? –Davey2010^Talk 22:49, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

File:1919vik Sopot, zespół urbanistyczny miasta. Foto Barbara Maliszewska.jpg

The Name is BIG MISTAKE. This is NOT "zespół urbanistyczny miasta/urban complex of the city" - this is "kościół św. Jerzego / Saint George church". I think people like you are here for Help ? 85.176.4.200 21:11, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

• 85.176.4.200 - I originally declined your request because you were removing the authors name from the title which shouldn't really be done however as the title was obviously wrong and the uploader isn't a frequent uploader I've moved it this time - If the uploader's a frequent one then you shouldn't remove the name, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Special:Diff/199758088

Why is it 'sufficiently better' if the year appears in the file name? Are you saying that the hundreds of files in Category:Files of London with bad file names already have perfect names, although they are listed for renaming? The file name doesn't seem to be 'sufficiently better' until the name or number of the road appears in the file name. Whether you can find the correct location or not is irrelevant as other people may be able to find the correct location. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:05, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

No that's not what I'm saying at all - The "new name" isn't perfect whatsoever and I would like to see a better name for it however it's much better than what it was, I agree someone may be able to identify it however it's extremely unlikely it'll be identified as it's impossible to know where it is or even near but as I said you have a better suggestion for a name then please move it, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:27, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind I've found the location, –Davey2010^Talk 23:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Then why did you move it to Commons in the first place? If the location is unknown, then the picture is useless until the location becomes identified. And why are you hiding backlogs by removing the {{Move}} maintenance template? That way, no one will ever find problems. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Stefan2 - Because it was at EN FFD and instead of it being deleted it would serve a purpose here..... and I wasn't aware that I was meant to rename them the moment I moved them ..... But anyway I've found the location and moved it accordingly so there's no problem, Fancy telling me where I've removed the move cats except that image ? .... –Davey2010^Talk 16:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Mount Bunagatake

I don't quite understand why you thought "Mount Bunagatake" is the official name. The mountain is in Japan and thus the official name must be Japanese term 武奈ヶ岳 (Bunagatake in romanised form). Maybe you judged so by the Wikipedia article, but that does not necessarily mean the name is official; on this article about a mountain called Yarigatake, the mountain is correctly translated as Mount Yari, instead of Mount Yarigatake. Yasu (talk) 15:20, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

When I search "Mount Bunagatake" on Google it brings up tons of results, However when I search "Mount Buna" it's bringing up irrelevent results (Even "Mount Bunagatake" on Google Books brings up better results, "Mount Bunagatake" seems to be the most used term for the mountain (whether it's the official name I have no idea but it's certainly the most used), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I personally don't agree with the idea that we should adopt obviously incorrect and inconsistent terms as category names even if they are most used, but thanks anyway for the explanation. Yasu (talk) 15:24, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

If there was an official website or something that supported your suggestion then I'd happily move it but at the moment it's your word against the World Wide Web (IE the other word seems to be the official one), Sorry, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Following your suggestion, I think I am going to reinstate the move request so that I can hear from other filemovers. Regards, and have a nice vacation (if you are away for that). Yasu (talk) 15:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Yasu - That box suggestion is for anything inbetween the "vacation" not before or after but nice try :P (I've just realized I didn't even change it either!), I mean do you have any actual evidence that this is the official name as if you do I'd happily move it myself - It's just moving it to perhaps an unknown name could cause harm more than good, I'll start a discussion on the talkpage anyway as like you I'd rather get others opinions, Haha I wish! - Unfortunately it's a pathetic course!, Thanks for your message and Happy editing :), –Davey2010^Talk 15:43, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Hopefully you've got the ping but if not I've started a discussion here, I've pinged a few renamers which I've found at Special:log so there was no canvassing or anything - Just found the most recent renamers and pinged them, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

File:SMS Prinz Eugen (1862).jpg

Hi. You have declined a rename for this file, with a reason that I am too stupid to understand. So could you please explain to me, which part of renaming guidelines I have run afoul of? There is a repeat renaming request pending - just in case you change your mind. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 16:37, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rsteen, Sorry I should've actually explained on why I declined it, The file-usage was all saying "1862" and I wasn't sure if you were actually correct or not so I figured to be on the safe side I'd decline it but I see Wieralee has done so, I have no idea if the new name is even correct, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:14, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Davey. Well, the date was my own fault from the beginning, but after browsing a couple of books on the subject I realized my mistake. Point is, for the sake of fellow users, it might be a good idea to try and explain in a few more words what the actual problem was, as you have just done. --Rsteen (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

• It was an uploader's request. It is told on Commons:File renaming page: "Unless there is a compelling reason not to, uploader requests should be honored", so I've done it. Wieralee (talk) 18:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

• Hi Rsteen, If declining I do on the most part state why the decline but point taken, That aside I failed to even spot you were the uploader as had I known I would've moved it, Anyway point taken and I apologize for the lack of an explanation when declining, Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 20:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Rename

Why have you renamed File:First Indochina War map 1954 en.svg‎? Its obviously in German.--Kopiersperre (talk) 15:58, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Kopiersperre - I saw Thailand and assumed the uploader got it wrong, Plus the proposed name's taken so I simply assumed they'd got something wrong, I'll rename it File:First Indochina War map 1954 de (2).svg‎. –Davey2010^Talk 16:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind the uploader fucked it all up - I'll get rid of the (2) later. –Davey2010^Talk 16:28, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Done - All has been fixed. –Davey2010^Talk 22:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

File:I've Given Up (22782614986).jpg

File:I've Given Up (22782614986).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

*Note: I uploaded images by a Flickr user & I never got round to checking any of them and this one had the "Public Domain Mark" licence so !voted delete.–Davey2010^Talk 21:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Faro a Colón

Dear Davey2010,

I found 22 beautiful images of the Faro a Colón from 2014. These are in a Category:PLEASE DO NOT Categorize .......... It's been a while ago and would like to add it to the Dominican Republic.

Can and may I transfer them? --Jos1950 (talk) 01:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jos1950, Ofcourse you can :), I planned to do them much sooner but my laptop screen's died so I'm using a tv monitor at the moment and the colour's are weird, If they look okay and then please transfer them :), Thanks for asking it's really appreciated, –Davey2010^Talk 02:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, I've removed the "PLEASE DONT" category to make life easier :), Thanks again, –Davey2010^Talk 02:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I do it if I can quietly watching. --Jos1950 (talk) 00:33, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jos1950- I've just realized you may not be able to see hidden categories ? ... The images you want are at Category:Davey2010/Dominican Republic, July 2014, Is that what you're after ?, Sorry I'm just abit confused with your message, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:09, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Oooohh, there is much more !!!
I'll see what is representative and suitable for general use and put some of that into a Category of the Dominic Republic.
If you want to know what, I can put them in a list that you can control. --Jos1950 (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I like this wan "Playa Morón (14690551085)" (not for the DR). --Jos1950 (talk) 20:03, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Jos1950 - If you install Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot you can then select the files and click "copy" (Please don't move them tho as you'd move them from my album),

I should tell you tho once I get the new laptop screen fitted some files in the Category:Davey2010/Dominican Republic, July 2014 may get deleted,

But yeah if you install the catalot you can copy the files to any category you like :),

Thanks and Happy editing :), –Davey2010^Talk 21:02, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if I moved images. That was certainly the first before I realized that it was a special category.

Good that you report not to move them. I will also assert a message to make it that way. Or is a hidden category enough to protect your images?

Look what I've chosen

I use catalot not so long and do not know exactly how it works. I will first do "Category: Limon" and we can see if it goes well.

Do you remember where "Caballo (14504122729) .jpg" is made? Very nice. With location, I can put them into the Dominican Art.

Renaming work of others

Hello- Before renaming photographs taken by others [1] you may want to consider making some kind of notation or leaving a comment or suggestion on the original author's talk page. It would be courteous to your fellow editors.--Godot13 (talk) 11:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Godot13 - Not happening, By your logic I (and many others) would have to leave a note for every author when a rename comes up, If you're unhappy with the name I suggest you take it up with the person who chose the name in the first place. –Davey2010^Talk 13:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:PLEASE DON'T CATEGORIZE category

Hi, Davey2010, are you angry? why did you create this category? Lotje (talk) 04:33, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Lotje, Nope :), I thought if I done it in caps it would catch peoples eye better ... but apparently not, Please don't categorize the images as I've created this category for a reason, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 12:56, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine by me, then I make sure it will even catch peoples eye better by adding to this category. Lotje (talk) 13:00, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Lotje - Sorry I don't mean to sound like a grump - It's just I've got to sort through alot of images and some will be kept and some will be deleted so It seems silly for you to spend 5 minutes-5hours searching for and finding a category.... only for it to be deleted, It would make you angry and make me feel awful :(, Hahahahaha you can add it to the that category if you want , –Davey2010^Talk 13:06, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Surely this image of the Wallace Monument will not be deleted. Lotje (talk) 15:11, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Hahaha if you're lucky I might save it from its death :P, Pay me £1,00000 or the image gets it –Davey2010^Talk 17:42, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Apfelstrudel at Millie's Restaurant.png

Kopiersperre moved this to User_talk:Kopiersperre#Moved_from_Davey2010s_talkpage but I'd rather keep this incase there's any other issues with this or the requester, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:04, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Why do you rename files of other users? What ist the reason? in the Menu it's called "pancake" and not "Apfelstrudel". Majo statt Senf (talk) 07:39, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

+1. Please undo, even if you think it's an apple strudel.--Kopiersperre (talk) 07:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Majo statt Senf + Kopiersperre - I'm not German (I'm British) so therefore I have no idea what the name was before and have no idea what the name is now .... and nope I don't even know what the picture is either other than it being food of some sort, Us British filemovers simply have to trust the requests are legit and correct, I would suggest both of you take it up with the requester and if that doesn't work then re-request to have it moved back, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:45, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

@Frze: Warum hast du die Umbenennung beauftragt? Bist du dir sicher, dass es ein Apfelstrudel ist?--Kopiersperre (talk) 14:51, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

COM:ANU#EurovisionNim

Hi Davey2010,

I trust you're fine. I hope you're not offended that I collapsed your comment here?. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wikicology, Yep I'm all good thanks and I hope you're okay, I admit it did annoy me a little but I know you did it in good faith, I realize my comment could be seen as poking the bear however that was never the intention, I'm simply agreeing with the block as well as giving some friendly advice to Jan, Thanks, Have a great day, –Davey2010^Talk 18:32, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad to know that you're fine and thanks for your understanding. I sensed it could annoy you, but I know you will understand that I didn't mean to annoy you. I am so sorry. Please don't hesitate leave a note on my talk page anytime I do something silly. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 20:42, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikicology - It's absolutely cool I know you didn't mean too :), You just done something in good faith and unfortunately I disagreed with it so it's all cool :), Will do & same here! :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:44, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Jeez

What's wrong with you?. If you want some personal crappy category with crappy CAPS saying weird things and telling other editors to do whatever, you should probably (at the very least) make of it a hidden one. Read: Commons:Categories. By the way, every photo in Commons might be deleted. It's a risk everyone takes. Regards and thanks for your uploads. Strakhov (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

But then no one can read it can they?!, The entire fucking point to this category is so peoples time isn't wasted categorizing something that could end up deleted ... I have over 6000 images to sort and some will be deleted (by me) .... I'm pretty fucking sure you wouldn't like to categorize over 20 odd images only for half to be deleted ....., I couldn't give a flying shit if my images are deleted as I'll be the one to CSD them anyway......., You're the 5/6th person to remove the category and right now I feel like smashing my face against a brick wall. –Davey2010^Talk 18:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, then take it ...easier, pal. Seriously. Many people are able to see hidden categories. And don't forget you can't delete images by yourself (your are not a sysop), after ..a week? since the upload has passed. By the way I fucking love categorising odd images. A fucking idiot who appreciates you sends you warm and cozy regards, Strakhov (talk) 20:22, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Sorry I meant I'll CSD the rubbish images myself, I can have any image I uploaded deleted and have done in the past if it's of no value here :), I apologize for calling you a fucking idiot which I take back entirely,

I've said this to countless others but picture this - You spend 20-40 minutes categorizing images, I come along 2/3 days later and have the images deleted ... That's over 40 minutes of your life just wasted .... So ofcourse you're going to think "Why the fuck have I just bothered?" ... So to prevent that scenario as well as to stop people wasting their time I created this category,

As I said to other people I'm someone who prefers to sort my own shit out - I've uploaded 6 thousand images and at the moment none are sorted so instead of saying right fuck it you all can sort it I'm someone who prefers to sort the mess out myself,

If you'd left the category and just categorized the image I wouldn't of minded but to just remove it as you can see pretty much pisses me off,

Anyway could rant on for England lol, I apologize for getting so angry and frustrated with you, Hopefully you can kinda understand why but still I shouldn't of gotten so worked up,

Anyway I hope you have a great weekend :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:43, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Nah, no problem, man. I've learnt not to remove the category next time I see it (probably ...never). Take your time to classify the batch (I suffer kind of Diogenes syndrome and thinking of rubbish images being deleted makes me sad). Have a nice weekend you (and your wall :P) too. Strakhov (talk) 22:32, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

If you do see it on your travels I don't mind you categorizing the images but you know it could end up deleted that's all I'm saying :(, Ah sorry but some of the images I've uploaded are literally nothing of value so better off deleted :(, Hahahahaha my wall is now a mess on the floor lol,

Anyway thanks and you have a great weekend too and again I apologize for losing it, Have a great day :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:41, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

VP

Hello, Regarding this question. It is a caching issue, likely the page was missed by jobqueue. The edit by P199 has purged/touched the page. As far i know, the bug is known (unable to find it now, Phabricator search function...). Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Steinsplitter, Thanks so much for replying and answering, I wasn't sure if it was something serious or even known and it's rather frustrating when it just goes unanswered but maybe it wasn't seen who knows, Ahhh right I did wonder if it was a purging issue but obviously wasn't sure, Anyway thanks again for kindly answering my query :), Enjoy the rest of your day/Week :), –Davey2010^Talk 20:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

File:CrownGate Shopping Centre logo.png

File:CrownGate Shopping Centre 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 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!

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

• Moved back to EN. –Davey2010^Talk 15:02, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Volkswagen Jetta (26811929821).jpg

File:Volkswagen Jetta (26811929821).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.

 

OSX (talk • contributions) 13:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

• OSX - You'd think the twat who's reuploading these to Flickr would actually upload these under "All rights reserved" so it saves shit like this from constantly happening! .... I'm unintentionally uploading copyvio images thanks to this dickhead!, Anyway thanks for spotting these and dealing with them accordingly - It's much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sure he does not realise this error. It is not malicious. I agree that it can be a bit annoying, however, it is better to have access to the freely licensed files and have to perform some checks than to not have access to these Creative Commons files. OSX (talk • contributions) 07:44, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi OSX, True, I suppose they're just not thinking about it, In all fairness I should check before uploading but it's easier just to upload everything and then check after, Ah well lol, Thanks for your message, Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 13:47, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Bulk uploads

I am glad to see you must have read what I wrote. The issue is the bulk uploading of unwanted material, the sweeping up of pure dross to no purpose that I can see. Yes it maddens me as explained to you but OK you got there first to make the upload.

But you should make sure you stay with subjects you do identify. I do not now how you can do that and do bulk uploads. Eddaido (talk) 01:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Right, All the images I have uploaded are of quality here, I've gotten rid of well over 5,000 this month or 2 alone!, I have my own standards for images and if they're shit they go - If I believe they are of value to the project they'll stay and I'll categorize them,

I like many of other fucking editors here cannot identify every single vehicle on the fucking planet and if you think we can then you sir are a fucking moron!,

I'm not sure what "dross" you're on about but either way I couldn't give a flying shit - I've never had a complaint inregards to any of the images I've uploaded and that's because they're absolutely fine!,

Now stay the hell off of this talkpage!, Comprende?. –Davey2010^Talk 03:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Image needs renaming - 0941 (27671863990).jpg

File:Image needs renaming - 0941 (27671863990).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.

 

Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones, What was it a copyvio of ?, I'd missed the speedy, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 01:27, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

"Marking as possible copyvio because 2D tiled artwork" Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:59, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Please re-upload the images linked below.

Hello. You need to re-upload the following in order for a license review. Thanks.

• 1. File:2016-07-10 08-10-06 XXX 1 000616 (28382587725) (2).jpg
  2. File:2016-07-10 10-27-28 ILCE-6300 DSC07456 (28279495662) (2).jpg
  3. File:2016-07-10 10-28-57 ILCE-6300 DSC07471 (28350338986) (2).jpg
  4. File:2016-07-10 11-53-12 ILCE-6300 7927 DxO (29714448012).jpg
  5. File:2016-07-10 11-54-58 ILCE-6300 DSC07936 (28111290580).jpg
  6. File:2016-07-10 12-36-45 ILCE-6300 7977 DxO (29534676330).jpg
  7. File:2016-07-10 12-37-36 ILCE-6300 DSC07982 (27778344043).jpg

MCMLXXXIX 17:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi 1989, 1, 3 and 3 have already been uploaded by me however I'll reupload the others again :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:18, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Here are two more you need to re-upload.

• • • File:2016-07-10 13-22-34 ILCE-6300 DSC08112 (28362056936).jpg
    • File:2016-07-10 13-22-56 ILCE-6300 DSC08117 (27779404513).jpg

MCMLXXXIX 17:27, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Haven't forgot - Doing them now, I'll do those 2 too, Thanks again and if you spot anymore you know where I am lol, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:32, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

• Looks like the bot and Amitie took care of the rest. Thank you for your cooperation, and I'll alert you if there's any more that needs to be redone. MCMLXXXIX 19:33, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

  Amitie did quite a few reuploads which helped alot, No worries and thank you :), I'll go through these in about 2 weeks or so - I've uploaded roughly 7 thousand files in 2 days so as you can probably imagine I'm taking a rest from these images but yeah if you spot any corrupt ones let me know & i'll reupload :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

File:2016-07-10 11-48-59 ILCE-6300 DSC07881 (28289360012) (2).jpg

File:2016-07-10 11-48-59 ILCE-6300 DSC07881 (28289360012) (2).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!

The Yeti 18:49, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Objection to state highway marker category moves

Let this be my official objection and request for a reversal of the moves you've made. The templates being added to those categories say that "two weeks is sufficient" for objections, yet they're being moved in just about 24 hours.

As for my objection, it's simple. In many states, they do not have "state routes", and the categories were named to reflect the diversity of the nomenclature involved. In Michigan, we have "state trunkline highways", and in Wisconsin, they're "state trunk highways". To call them "state routes" is flat out wrong.

Please reverse the moves you've already made. We need to have an overarching discussion when 50 or categories are up for renaming in this fashion. Imzadi 1979 → 23:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I see nothing at {{Move}} that states this and as far as I'm aware there is no time limit, That aside if you didn't want these moved you should've removed all of the requests (or rollbacked the editor) and then made your complaints, Instead you've now only objected after I've moved well over 20 categories and a massive chunk of images ....,

If you want them moved then I'm afraid you'll have to A) move them yourself, B) Get the requester to move them (which IMHO would be the correct thing to do as they perhaps should've got consensus first) or C) Go to AN and ask an admin,

If it was a few categories then I would happily move them but I've just spent nearly a whole hour moving these and so I won't be spending another hour moving them back as both of you migh reach a consensus and decide to have them moved anyway, In all fairness I did assume there was consensus somewhere but if there wasn't then I'm afraid the requester will ave to move them back, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

"That aside if you didn't want these moved you should've removed all of the requests (or rollbacked the editor) and then made your complaints, Instead you've now only objected after I've moved well over 20 categories and a massive chunk of images" -> that's a bit ingenious, you jumped the gun and now you're refusing to clean up the mess. Please reconsider. --Rschen7754 04:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Also, please see the filled out template for the 2 week period: [2]. --Rschen7754 04:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Davey, a bunch were already moved before I noticed that they were tagged, because they were moved about a day after tagging. It's a bit hard to object in that set of circumstances, and that's why the template suggests a two-week wait. Imzadi 1979 → 05:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

• Rschen7754 & Imzadi1979 - I've never read the text on that template because it's so tiny, I don't believe it was my fault entirely however I do admit I should've declined these instead of assuming everything was fine or atleast double checked on the consensus side of things, I'll use the bot thingy to move them all back and ofcourse infuture I will be much more careful- As I said above If this was a few cats I would've happily reverted there and then but when you've just spent a whole hour moving these and then someone objects ofcourse you're going to be a bit pissed, But anyway I'll hopefully get everything all moved back, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:52, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

• Rschen7754 & Imzadi1979 (sorry for the pings!) - I've now listed them for the bot [3] so it's just a matter of waiting, Would it be a good idea if I were to remove/rollback the other requests otherwise someone else patrolling may move all of these aswell ?, Anyway I apologize for the unintentional disruption, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 16:21, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I think that would be fine. Thank you for your assistance. --Rschen7754 00:02, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

No worries, Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 00:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

• Imzadi1979, Xnatedawgx & Rschen7754 - I'm so sorry for the annoying pings but just a heads up they've all now been moved back to their original names (Sorry again for the constant pings but I'd rather you all knew that was all), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:31, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Playa Morón, El Limón

Hello Davey,

I moved the files "Playa Morón, El Limón" on Commons to Category:Playa Morón, El Limón for clarity in Samana. --Jos1950 (talk) 17:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jos, You can wat you like with them :), I only removed my category as it was useless :), Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 17:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (15) (27544312250).jpg

File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (15) (27544312250).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!

George Ho (talk) 05:50, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (10) (27787978786).jpg

File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (10) (27787978786).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!

George Ho (talk) 05:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello. The image of messages on the board is deleted. If you disagree, you can contact Jameslwoodward, the person who deleted the image. --George Ho (talk) 23:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi George Ho, I have - Maybe you can explain how text on a board is copyright or even the hearts on it for that matter ? .... I'm genuinely confused as to how a board with writing is considered a copyright violation ? .... Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:23, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

A mere letter or farewell note can be a literary work. Some drawings on the board can be copyrighted, including the heart-shaped ones. Again, ask Jim; he deleted it. --George Ho (talk) 01:23, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

can be ... so basically you have absolutely no idea!, "Again, ask Jim; he deleted it." - Well you nominated the fucking thing so therefore I'm asking you - What makes this image copyright ? ... No one owns the text and no one owns the hearts on that board, What policy did you go by to delete this ?. –Davey2010^Talk 02:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Found the image. Relooking at it, any judge would see it copyrightable. So might a US judge. If that's not enough, how about COM:PCP? If logos like en:File:EDGE magazine (logo).svg are not relevant, we'll relook the image. Sending a heartfelt message to the politician is original enough for copyright, especially the one from "Laila, Palestine". If one is not copyrightable enough, then having a bunch of messages in one board is copyrightable and original enough. Maybe zoom to just one unoriginal message to reflect the memorial? --George Ho (talk) 05:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi George Ho, James reckons it's something do with a clause or something .... I never knew text could be copyright (logos yes but plain words nope) but anyway I think this is one of those things I will never understand, Anyway I apologise for getting irate with you and thank you for remaining calm and civil, Have a great day - Infact have a great christmas :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too. Here's the link to look up passage about text copyright. --George Ho (talk) 13:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

George Ho - Thanks :), Ah brilliant thank you now it kinda makes sense, Sorry to bother you again but would File:Jo Cox MP Memorial 2.jpg, File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (11) (27210286334).jpg, File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (12) (27210283944).jpg and File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (13) (27787968666).jpg, File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (2) (27787999666).jpg, File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (27788003426).jpg also be copyright ?, If they are I'll speedy them myself, Thanks and thanks again for your help - It's much appreciated, –Davey2010^Talk 14:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

My review on the images

• File:Jo Cox MP Memorial 2.jpg ([4])

  I see messages at the maximum size. Full of copyright potential according to law. De minimis does not apply; messages are the central point of the image.

• File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (11) (27210286334).jpg ([5])

  Photos belong to the original authors. So are the letters and messages.

• File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (12) (27210283944).jpg ([6])

  Same about the messages and drawings shown there.

• File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (13) (27787968666).jpg ([7])

  Same.

• File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (2) (27787999666).jpg ([8])

  The poem is a translation of wikisource:The Internationale (Pottier, English). However, the publication of the PD poem may look copyrightable. It contains a line of flags and a drawing on the bottom-right corner. "The Internationale" already exists as free text, yet the latest publication may be non-free.

• File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (27788003426).jpg ([9])

  I see more messages and letters, including the "Tribute to Jo Cox" work.

The link to the brief summary of the law should help for future uses of anything in the UK. --George Ho (talk) 05:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks George Ho for reviewing these - I've speedied 5 and have nominated 1 which wasn't mine, Thanks again for your help, Right I'll stop bothering/pinging you now!, Thanks again, –Davey2010^Talk 13:38, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

You didn't bother me. ;) Thank you for telling me about the images. --George Ho (talk) 14:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh right well I'm glad I haven't :), No worries I went through the category and noticed more so thought it was best I asked :), Anyway thanks :), –Davey2010^Talk 16:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Temporary categories

Hello! I've seen you added Category:Davey2010 temp 4 to one of my images. Just a hint: Please add {{Hiddencat}} to your category. Thank you. --XRay ^talk 05:02, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I've left it unhidden for a reason but but I'll sort the images in the next 2 weeks :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:31, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Smiles

Hi,

I have noticed that you use smiles. Do you have some automated way to place them in text?--Juandev (talk) 09:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Juandev, I use {{smiley|grin}} which produces or {{smiley|tongue}} which produces  :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:33, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Davey2010/Flickr users photostreams subcategories

Hi Davey2010!
Sorry for misusing the Davey2010/RL GNZLZ/juanelo242a album category (the concerned picture should have been categorized in Photographs by order 242, in fact), but this category you made is a bit confusing: it's the only one appearing when searching for RL GNZLZ in Commons and, moreover, it has a link to the Flickr account belonging to RL GNZLZ / juanelo242a / order 242.

• Could a small note explaining that RL GNZLZ / juanelo242a / order 242's imported files should not be related to your category (but to Photographs by order 242) prevent further mistakes?
• What is the purpose of these subcategories in Davey2010/Flickr users photostreams? An ongoing work on files imported from these Flickr albums?

Regards
BarnCas (talk) 16:01, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi BarnCas, The "Category:Davey2010/RL GNZLZ/juanelo242a album" category was incase I uploaded anymore of that users images and wasn't an official category, Have you removed any images from that category ?, Yep I'll add a note now pointing editors to the other category,

The "Category:Davey2010/Flickr users photostreams" category is everything that needs to be sorted which I'll get round to next week and then most of those cats will be deleted (or if their empty it's because I plan to upload more images at somepoint next year when I've got the current lot done),

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanations. No I didn't remove any picture from your category, and you "ejected" the only one I put in it
I think I'll add a note in the Photographs by order 242 category too to inform of the different nicknames of this Flickr user. Or maybe I'll try to "play" with the {{Flickr user category}} template used in it and see if it accepts several nicknames... Bye,
BarnCas (talk) 22:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

BarnCas - No worries, Oh right sorry I never realised you added it :),

Could I ask way the category is called "Photographs by order 242" and not "Photographs by RL GNZLZ" ?, I don't get the "order 242"?, Thanks ,–Davey2010^Talk 22:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done: I just had to change the outdated template that was used into the good one ({{Flickr user}} → {{Flickr user category}}), to add some extra parameters plus the 3 nicknames in the concerned parts of the template, et voilà! Both RL GNZLZ / juanelo242a / order 242's Fickr stream and your category now appear when searching for one of the 3 nicknames

About the category name, you noticed that a link to "order_242 from Chile" in the author part of an imported file leads to the same Flickr user page than one to "RL GNZLZ from Chile". I assume that it was the nickname used by the Flickr user when FAEP created the category in August 2014. Or at least the most used on imported files, as is always the case: there are currently 9,104 files when searching for "Author order 242", 161 pictures for "Author RL GNZLZ" and... none for "Author juanelo242a". Let's be honest, there's 15 pictures (plus your category ) when "photos/juanelo242a" is searched for.
Now the question is: why and when did RL GNZLZ change his nickname? He's certainly the only one who can answer...
Regards,
BarnCas (talk) 00:44, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Cita Dennis Hubbell Branch

Hi! About the decline here, in fact Cita Dennis Hubbell Branch is the correct name. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:29, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Also please see this plaque which shows the current name of the library WhisperToMe (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi WhisperToMe, My apologies I checked the EN article and somehow came to the conclusion the prev was correct ... Not sure how but anywho having looked at the link you provided as well as stuff on Google - The prev name basically points to the new one so apologies for that, Anyway I've now moved it :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Unidentified station - Cardiff Central?

I'm 99% certain that File:TRAIN - NEEDS RENAMING (15399052813).jpg is Cardiff Central - it's clearly a Welsh station as the signs are bilingual, and I don't think there's any other stations with that many platforms that would have trains going to the destinations listed. Optimist on the run (talk) 20:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Optimist on the run - I never looked at the board in that image (had I done so I would've shoved it under a "unidentified Wales train station"), Ofcourse if you're sure it's Cardiff station then categorise under that, Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 22:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (2) (27787999666).jpg

File:London June 21 2016 037 Memorial for Jo Cox at Parliament Square (2) (27787999666).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!

George Ho (talk) 02:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

To make it up with you, here my thoughts in Dutch

	Zalig Kerstfeest	Davey2010, een Zalige Kerst en een bruisend 2017 van een immer struikelende...	Lotje (talk) 16:03, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

• Lotje - Awww thank you so much that's lovely :), I hope you have a lovely Christmas and a lovely New Year :), –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 17:56, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas, Davey2010!
	Hi Davey2010, thank you for all your valuable contributions on Commons. This help fulfill the number 1 goal of Commons: To be a free, educational media repository for everyone. I wish you and your family a merry Christmas and a happy new year.    ★ Poké95 01:13, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks Pokéfan95 & I hope you have a lovely xmas & new year too. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 23:36, 24 December 2016 (UTC)