User talk:Ein Dahmer/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Copyright status: File:20220204 Mumbai Bild4.jpg

Copyright status: File:20220204 Mumbai Bild4.jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:20220204 Mumbai Bild4.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 07:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Massenbeseitigung von Objekten in der Category Wenningstedt-Braderunp

Hallo,
Scheinbar ist mit dem Cat-a-lot etwas schiefgegangen. Bei einer Vielzahl von Bildern, die zweifelsfrei Objekte aus Wenningstedt oder Braderup zeigen, wurde die Category entfernt. Dies hat dazu geführt, dass z.B. File:20170409 xl P1100624-Weltkugel-in-Wenningenstedt.jpg völlig ohne Category blieb. Bitte stellen Sie die alte Kategorisierung wieder her. ---- Gruß Hans G. Oberlack (talk) 19:50, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Danke für die Nachricht und Obacht. Da habe ich dem Tool Check over-categorization vertraut und entsprechend gehandelt, es waren wirklich einige Dateien überkategorisiert. Gruß --Ein Dahmer (talk) 19:59, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:Bollingerfähr Schleusen-Brücke Nr. 189

Moin, wo hast du die offiziellen Namen für die Brücken wie im obigen Beispiel her? Wie kommt es zu der Nummerierung? Gruß, -- Ies (talk) 15:44, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Moin Ies, die Brückenbezeichnungen findet man in den Inland ENC der WSV (einfach reinzoomen) und überwiegend stehen sie auch unter den Brücken. Zur Nummerierung: Bei den westdeutschen Kanälen werden alle Querungsbauwerke durchnummeriert. Und die nicht gestellte Frage will ich auch gleich beantworten: Auf diese Brückenkategorie bin ich im Rahmen meiner Törnplanung gestoßen, weil ich im Sommer mal wieder mit meinem Boot auf dem DEK unterwegs sein will. Gruß von der Küste --Ein Dahmer (talk) 16:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Cherokee (CGR).jpg

Copyright status: File:Cherokee (CGR).jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Cherokee (CGR).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 20:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Kategorien

Moin Ein Dahmer, bitte erkläre es mir. Warum hat er es rückgängig [1] + [2] gemacht? Das Schiffshebewerk Nord wollte ich nach Jahr der Aufnahme sortieren damit diese Bilderflut aus der Hauptcat Schiffshebewerk Niederfinow verschwindet. Gruß -- Biberbaer (talk) 07:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Moin Biberbaer, User:Tm arbeitet viel mit Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot und dabei hat er diese Datei wohl zuviel angewählt. Momentan sieht er seinen Fehler nicht ein (als Portugiese hat er ja auch keine Ortskenntnis), aber warten wir mal ab. Grüße an die Havel --Ein Dahmer (talk) 16:23, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Moin Ein Dahmer, er hat ja sehr viel umkategorisiert [3]. Ich werde auf seiner Diskseite etwas schreiben. Mit diesem Tool, ich habe es versucht, komme ich leider nicht zurecht. Gruß -- Biberbaer (talk) 16:34, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Wähle in der Kopfleiste unter Einstellungen das Menü Helferlein, scrolle zu Kategoriehelferlein und aktiviere Cat-a-lot. Danach erscheint am unteren Bildschirm eine entsprechende Schaltfläche. Hier noch mal die Erklärungsseite. Viel Spaß mit dieser hilfreichen Funktion wünscht dir --Ein Dahmer (talk) 16:47, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Ja danke, soweit war ich schon. Irgendwie war mir das nicht geheuer. Wenn ich etwas mehr Zeit habe werde ich versuchen das zu kapieren. Gruß -- Biberbaer (talk) 17:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Ja, genau das ehrt dich: Du hast eben Respekt bei dieser Funktion, leider ist das nicht bei allen Kollegen so. Gruß --Ein Dahmer (talk) 17:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Lukas Beck (talk) 12:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Lukas Beck (talk) 13:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

beantragte Löschungen

Moin, das ist ehemals Geoprofi Lars [4]. Sehr merkwürdig. Gruß -- Biberbaer (talk) 17:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Jepp, sehr merkwürdig, allein schon wegen der Anzahl! Da bleibt nur Gelassenheit. Grüße an die Havel --Ein Dahmer (talk) 17:13, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

What ship category naming policy?

Which ship category naming policy did you refer to in https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Hornelen_(ship,_2016)&diff=prev&oldid=701844912&diffmode=source ? Do you have a link? Hjart (talk) 17:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I have: See How to name the category. Only ship, submarine or tugboat, nothing else. --Ein Dahmer (talk) 19:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Exactly where on that page is that stated? I don't see anything suggesting that I can't use ferry. Hjart (talk) 19:49, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Please klick on B. How to name the category and scroll! -- Ein Dahmer (talk) 20:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Hej Hjart, hvorfor ingen hilsen og venglished på diskussion? Vi skulle gerne os tænke højt på. Med venlig hilsen --Ein Dahmer (talk) 20:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Link-Befehl in Wikidata-Infobox

Hallo Ein Dahmer, ich wurde neulich kritisiert, Daten in Wikidata Infoboxen zu löschen und aufgefordert, Boxen mit 'Link' zu verschmelzen. Das habe ich wohl mehrmals falsch gemacht, wenn keine Verbindung zwischen INO-Kategorie und Schiffsname besteht, bzw. beim Schiffsbame keine Wikimedia-Kategorie spezifiziert wurde. Ein Beispiel, wo ich dies machen würde, ist unter: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Baltic_Star_(ship,_1963) zu finden, wo eigentlich eine Wikimedia-Kategorie erscheinen sollte. Meine Frage ist nun, wie funktioniert das 'Linken' z.B. hier? Ich habe versucht, erklärungen zu lesen, aber nur Bahnhof verstanden. Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 09:27, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Moin Wolfgang, die Frage habe ich zunächst nicht verstanden und deshalb erstmal deine Diskussionsseite durchgelesen. Soweit ich das jetzt überschaue, liegt es an der Datensatzstruktur bei Wikidata. Bei Schiffen mit IMO-Nr./ENI ist der Hauptdatensatz immer mit der Commons-Schiffsnummerkategorie verlinkt. Die Schiffsnamenkategorien sind dann lediglich Unterdatensätze (Wikimedia-Kategorien). Wenn man eine Wikimedia-Kategorie angelegt hat und weiter editiert erscheint als nächstes Fenster „Kategorie verbindet die Themen“. Dort gibt man zuerst „Schiffsname“ ein und dann mit „Wert hinzufügen“ den Titel des Hauptdatensatzes. Ich hoffe, ich habe die Frage richtig verstanden und konnte dir helfen. Beste Grüße --Ein Dahmer (talk) 18:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, EinDahmer, ich habe 'Link' und 'Merge' durcheinandergebracht. Die Kritik sagte, dass ich die falsch eingegebenen WikiData-Boxen beim Schiffsnamen nicht löschen soll (um eine neue Wikimedia-Kategorie anzulegen), sondern die vorhandenen WikiData-Boxen beim Schiffsnamen und bei der IMO-Nummer mit dem Befehl 'merge' verschmelzen soll - damit keine Daten verloren gehen. Ich hatte das tatsächlich mehrfach gelöscht, aber immer nur die WikiData-Box mit wenigen Daten.
Allerdings habe ich nichts Sinnvolles gefunden, was mir hilft, wie man 'merge' hier anwendet. Als Beispiel habe ich die Kategorie der BALTIC STAR genannt, die eigentlich eine Wikimedia-Kategorie sein müsste, da übergeordnet unter der IMO-Nummer eine weitere WikiData-Box besteht. Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 21:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Moin Wolfgang, da kann ich dir leider nicht helfen. Ich habe es mal im Glossar versucht und nichts gefunden. Ich mache es in solchen Fällen immer so, dass ich nur die falschen Verlinkungen überschreibe, so bleiben die Daten erhalten, nur eben unter einer anderen Kategorie. Beste Grüße --Ein Dahmer (talk) 15:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Vielen Dank. Die Vorgehensweise übernehme ich. Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 08:35, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Hallo EinDahmer, die obige Vorgehensweise ist bei der Wappen von Köln (ship, 1967), von der es bereits einen Wikidata-Eintrag gab, völlig schief gelaufen. Mir ist es nicht gelungen, diesen in eine Wikimedia-Kategorie mit Link auf ENI 04200230 umzuwandeln, weil dort noch eine andere Seite von dem Schiff existiert, auf die immer wieder gesprungen wird. Vielleicht gelingt es Dir besser. Ein Gutes Neues Jahr! Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 10:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Moin Wolfgang, ich habe da noch eine Verknüpfung zur Schiffsnamenkategorie gefunden und überschrieben, sollte jetzt richtig sein. Dir wünsche ich auch ein gutes Neues Jahr und auf diesem Wege auch mal ganz großen Dank für deine vielen Bilder und Beiträge. Bleib gesund! --Ein Dahmer (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Viking Mimir (ship, 2015) - removal of IMO category

Hello Ein Dahmer:

Would be interested in knowing why you felt it was necessary to remove this ship’s IMO category from its images? I am not aware that Commons categorization is limited to what is displayed on the hull of the ship (if so, please cite rule).

As ship's names often change over time, a Ship name category should be linked as a sub-category under one or more primary ship identification numbers such as IMO#, ENI#, MMSI#, Call Sign in that order of preference. While ENI# is good (used in Europe but not universal), the IMO# assigned to the ship’s hull when built and never changed over the life of the ship is considered a better primary identification number as being unique, never changing and universal.

Best, Gordon GRDN711 (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello GRDN711, hot agree with your statement about IMO numbers. However, either official ITU nor Marinetraffic or VesselFinder have results for IMO 8352198! The only confirmed ship number is the ENI 07002025, already with shipyard and year, what you mentioned above. Greetings --Ein Dahmer (talk) 21:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
FleetMon has it, as does shipspotting, as does Lloyd's Register (LR 8352198). Carl Lindberg (talk) 23:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, the vessel is classified as an inland waterway vessel and has the ENI number 07002025 on the stern. Please take a look at the pictures[5]. Greetings -- Biberbaer (talk) 16:18, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Carl, please have a look to the Asset details. The official number is 07002025 and 8352198 is the Lloyd registration number only, unfortunately with the prefix IMO. Greetings --Ein Dahmer (talk) 16:52, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
LR numbers *are* IMO numbers. The IMO took over the ownership of them in the 1990s, but it's the same incrementing sequence that Lloyd's started in 1963. The ship already had that LR number at the time IMO started (that number means it was issued in 1983, at the time of building contract). Official numbers are per-country, and it looks like Switzerland just uses the ENI number for those, rather than having their own separate scheme. It's possible for vessels to have both IMO and ENI numbers, if the ship's usage changed over time (or it happened to use LR as a register earlier in its career). I've seen examples of both. If a ship has an IMO number first, the ENI is supposed to be a 9 followed by the IMO number, but in this case the ship already had a Rhine navigation number as well, which were used for the initial ENI numbers in the early 2000s. In this case, it pretty clearly has both numbers assigned to the hull. I don't see the harm in noting both, even if IMO registration under today's rules would not have been necessary. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Ein Dahmer Carl Lindberg Biberbaer

Hello Everyone:

I never expected this much discussion when I was doing a little image clean up and assigned an IMO category for a ship image I supported for a Commons Quality Image rating. Here is my position and rationale.

Per Wikipedia IMO topic, a Lloyd’s Registry number and an IMO number for a ship are the same and have been for decades (see IMO resolutions (1987-2017)).

There are many ways to identify a ship but the Viking Mimir, a river cruise boat serving an international market, is blessed with all 4 of the primary ship identification numbers applied for by its owner(s).

  • IMO 8352198
  • ENI 07002025
  • MMSI 269057518
  • Call Sign: DMBK

As I have previously stated, a ship’s name can (and often does) change over its useful life. For that reason, Commons links the Category:Ship-by-name under a parent category of one or more of the 4 primary identification numbers. IMO # is best as being unique, permanent and universally accepted worldwide. ENI# is good, being unique, permanent and in heavy use in the inland waterways and rivers of Europe but is not in great use in other parts of the world. MMSI# and Call Sign, while unique and usually retained by a ship through different names, will change if the flag state/country of registry of the ship is changed.

This is my understanding for the rational in Commons recommendations in on “How to create a category for a ship”. In following Part C “Useful elements to add to the category description”, it states that, after establishing a category for Ship-by-name for grouping of images of the a given ship with that name, it is recommended that the Category:Ship-by-name be linked to the ship’s IMO # (create parent category if IMO number exists) and ENI # (create parent category if ENI number exists).

Please note that I am not trying to get rid of the ENI number category for this ship, I am only trying to add an IMO number category to the Ship-by-name images as the ship's IMO number does exist. The Ship-by-name should also be linked to an ENI# parent category if the owners have applied for that identificaton as well, and it may be the more commonly used ID number depending on where the ship operates.

Ein Dahmer, what I would like to do here is revert your removal of the IMO # parent category in a day or so after you have had time to think about this further and comment. I am not trying to impose anything new here, just follow the Commons guidelines for Ship-by-name images as best I know them. --GRDN711 (talk) 21:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, in principle what you said is correct, but the ship is registered in Europe and will certainly not sail outside Europe. Consequently, according to the European standard, it must have the ENI number clearly visible. Why should it be listed differently on Commons? (Sorry for my simple English) -- Biberbaer (talk) 16:39, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello together! Since all ships are operated in inland navigation and none of the ships are listed with official organisations with IMO numbers, I can only assume a temporary use of an IMO number in this case. The Viking Longships travelled by sea from the building yard to the fitting-out yard and required an AIS with class A transceiver for the sea leg of the transfer journey. At the time, we have permits for each of the ships for the transfer with their conditions and requirements. Unfortunately, after years, the papers have long since ended up in the paper shredder of our office. All the best, --SteKrueBe (talk) 17:28, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Yes, that's it! The IMO number was assigned for the transit only. That explains also, that the vessel is not longer classified (see Asset details). A tip for GRDN711: Please avoid obsolete sources for future edits, e.g. DMBK was the c/s for the transit under German flag, the present c/s under Swiss flag is HE7518! Conclusion: The IMO number was only temporary assigned and the ENI is the official ship identifier (as for all Viking Longships). Greetings --Ein Dahmer (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Well, I think it's a matter of perspective. Unlike the call signs often reused for transfer journeys, the IMO number only ever exists once. Therefore, the IMO number is also likely to appear again in the AIS transceiver on a subsequent transfer voyage over sea. In this respect, you can also use the number for categorisation if you want it to be particularly complete - but then you have to live with the fact that some users also react confused to it. Have a nice evening together, --SteKrueBe (talk) 21:14, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Good morning GRDN711, I think the sailors SteKrueBe and Ein Dahmer have summed it up in an understandable way. Thanks to those involved and greetings. -- Biberbaer (talk) 08:32, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
The LR/IMO number wasn't temporarily assigned (no such thing) -- the ship does and will always have that IMO number, since it is associated to the hull. It of course also has an ENI number, and always will. There is no rule here to only show one or the other -- if it has both, we should note both. I have seen several ships on here which started out as inland river cargo ships, and were later modified to be coastal ships, and gained an IMO number then. And vice versa. If ships have both numbers, I have always marked them with both. It should not be an either/or, regardless of which one the current use demands be displayed on the hull. We have categories for call signs and MMSI numbers too, which don't have to be displayed on the hull (well sometimes call signs do). If the ship has an IMO number, it should be part of Category:Ships by IMO number. Same with ENI -- if it has that number, we should note it, even if now a coastal ship. Ship categories are for the hull's entire lifetime anyways, not only what they happen to be at the moment. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:51, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Carl Lindberg has given a good explanation of how I understand IMO and ENI numbers are used with ship images in Commons.
The issue is not about whether an IMO# or ENI# is the better ship identification system (both are equal in their localities). Nor is the AIS transceiver identification of the ship in transit the use case here. It is about how Commons groups ship images so that they can be found and used for illustration in other wikis and outside sources.
It is a reasonable approach to group all images of a given ship into a single Ship-by-name category. However, as given ship can have many names over its useful life, Commons in Category:Ships - “How to create a category for a ship” - Part C, recommends the Ship-by-name category be linked as a sub-category under a parent IMO# (if existing) and/or an ENI# (if existing) category.
It is the association of the ship’s name with an IMO and/or ENI primary ID number that ensures that all images of a ship-by-name will be uniquely grouped together and not be a mixture of all ships of that same name. --GRDN711 (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hello. You always have to add the deletion request to the deletion request log when you nominate a page for deletion. Please remember that next time. Jonteemil (talk) 15:24, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

About Category:Gauging stations in Germany

Category:Gauging stations in Germany is about buildings. You reversed my edits for this category and put in it Category:Stream gauges in Germany‎ and Category:Tide gauges in Germany as subcaategories. But those subcategories and their files are not all about buildings, but mainly only about gauges (Messgeräte). That is why I put only gauging stations in this new category. Would you please reverse your edits so that the new category is only for the buildings? JopkeB (talk) 04:20, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but this wasn't obvious with this naming. In the comparable Category:Gauging stations in the United Kingdom are also gauges without buildings! Perhaps the category should be renamed to “Gauging buildings in Germany”, but it makes, by my point of view, no sense. --Ein Dahmer (talk) 17:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Italicisation of ship names

Excuse me for asking. I'm surprised that your doing this in ship titles, it’s a style change, and unless your going to do all the ships on the project, I don’t think you should be doing it without global consensus. Its non sequitur, m8. Not to mention an extra layer of complication for new users, if it were to become a standard. Your Thoughts? Broichmore (talk) 09:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

The Template:Italic title is the general usage for ship names. Have you also asked others users, e.g. Clindberg? Times are changing! Ein Dahmer (talk) 14:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Italicization of ship names has been part of the ship naming and style guidelines since at least 2012 -- see Commons:Categories/editintro/ships, under section D, which is linked in Category:Ships and Category:Ships by name. It's also done on en-wiki; see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships). As mentioned, the {{Italic title}} template is much easier than using DISPLAYTITLE directly. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:40, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
@Broichmore: Any acknowledgement, perhaps even thanks? Ein Dahmer (talk) 14:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, my internet's slow, and too busy to notice.
Do you think I'm your enemy or something? I just noticed it, thats all.
I just did a sample look through, and its only a small percentage (10 or less maybe) of the 200,000+ (probably well short of the actual number) ships we have, that are showing this. Do you have a statistic for it? It's the first I noticed it. Which is a worry, if you looked at my output.
I appreciate that its enshrined in guidelines, fair enough. But then so are a number of other stupid things, concocted by a few here, at a time when there were few if any pragmatists involved. Just because its written here, doesn't make it sensible or desireable to follow. Example HMS Flighty (ship, ?) I.E. Ship mentioned twice in the same name.
A bot could do this trivial and needless work. As far as Italicization is concerned, I actually though it was only done in descriptive text. Thanks for pointing the error of my ways. The work I do is far too complex already, to bolt on this...
I'm curious what you mean by Times are changing!? Changing to what? Best regards. --Broichmore (talk) 14:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Could you assist me with creating Wikidata pages for ships/IMO pages?

Hello, I was wondering if you can assist me with creating Wikidata pages for the IMO categories on Commons. My main question is that what source are you using to get the data such as the shipbuilder, and if it is paid access. There are several IMO categories for some Tropical Shipping ships I have created that are needing a Wikidata page. Thank you, CutlassCiera 18:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cutlass, sorry for being somewhat late for my reply. All ships of Tropical Shipping are classified by Bureau Veritas and yon can find the ships details under BV Fleet. Greeting --Ein Dahmer (talk) 09:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ein_Dahmer/Archive_2&oldid=856495068"