User talk:Oxyman/Archive 3

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
File:Gloucester Road station art May 06.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!

LGA talkedits 10:34, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Odeon West End - Leicester Square, London (4040025234).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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Odeon West End - Leicester Square, London (4040006342).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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Odeon West End - Leicester Square, London (4039996300).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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Odeon West End - Leicester Square, London (4039996300).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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 22:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Odeon West End - Leicester Square, London (4040025234).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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 22:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:HVPU.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

 Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Year on X[edit]

Just wondering, but we have 2010 on the London Underground and 2013 on the Docklands Light Railway - why no definite article for 2010 on Sheffield Supertram etc? -mattbuck (Talk) 20:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say that I can't really answer that, other then that's how I instinctively would phrase it, you might have to consult someone who is more knowledgeable about these things then me, it's just that that's how I would have expected it to be done. If I am found to be in error it could always be changed Oxyman (talk) 21:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your enquiry had me pondering so I asked a someone else about this, they were no experts but knew a bit more than me, they said the following: If what you are referring to is a named thing which would be written with a capital letter such as a brand mane, then there is no need for the definite article because the fact that you are talking about something that has been named is sufficient identification. An example they gave is 'XXXX on Concorde' if however you were talking about something not named such as the road between town X and town Y you would need the definite article. So I asked about XXXX on the London Underground and XXXX on the Docklands Light Railway, they said that: these are more tricky as the brand name could also be used as descriptive words in speech. Another example given was the United Kingdom where you would need to specify that what you were talking about was the United Kingdom that commonly went by that name rather then any other kingdoms that had been united. they said for the London Underground the definite article was appropriate to distinguish it from other things that were underneath London, they were not so convinced about the Docklands Light Railway and said that context may be the deciding factor here and that it could go either way. Now I'm not so sure if that cleared anything up or was helpful in any way! Oxyman (talk) 14:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think a case-by-case basis is probably the best way - people certainly talk of "the London Underground" or "the DLR", but you wouldn't ever hear "the Nottingham Express Transit". -mattbuck (Talk) 00:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, -mattbuck (Talk) 11:10, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Civil parishes in London 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!


Nilfanion (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Post offices in England[edit]

You need a hand sorting the category, or are you OK with it? Have noticed it coming down dramatically while I was sorting Category:Post offices in the United Kingdom. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:19, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have finished my work with that category now, those left I was unsure about for various reasons and so left them. It may be that you will find them easier to sort then me and I would welcome you doing so, funny we should both decide to sort the same thing at the same time! Oxyman (talk) 18:25, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No probs, will have a go at it later tonight. Between us we've shifted over a thousand files down into their county categories, so think we can feel pretty pleased with ourselves, if not smug even. I think there was only one I couldn't identify in the United Kingdom category, and that was one from World War I. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File:British Railways 308152 & 315844 (2321743813).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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 12:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't notice that change when I reversed the IP vandalism. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:47, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok, just an oversight Oxyman (talk) 14:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File:Residents of Drumgrew - geograph.org.uk - 49339.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!

Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Garfunkels - Argyll Street near Oxford Circus, London (4076623222).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!

Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 20:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArchiveBot[edit]

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A question of identity[edit]

Are you the same person as User:Panhard? I ask because you have similar ways of formatting uploads, and both UK rail buffs. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was me, for some reason I was having difficulty using this account with one of the upload tools, so I opened another account to upload many images. I have not used that account for some time now and would willingly close or merge it, others have also noticed that it's me especially sine the Geograph upload duplicated much of the content that I already uploaded with that account. Oxyman (talk) 16:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, account merger is probably not possible, but the link should certainly be disclosed. I suggest you redirect the Panhard user/talk pages to the Oxyman equivalents, and then post at Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard (with both accounts) to request that all Panhard images be reattributed to Oxyman. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:35, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you can confirm that User:Panhard is your account, i will do the reattributation (using a bot) , Regards --Steinsplitter (talk) 22:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Category Barnstar
This is a small recognition for all the excellent categorisation work you do that lights up my watchlist almost every day! Keep up the good work Thryduulf (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Thankyou for the recognition Oxyman (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Buildings on the Thames[edit]

Category:Buildings on the north bank of the River Thames in London is a nice category, and I was once thinking of making something like that but never got around to it. However I wonder if it should be separated into boroughs, e.g., Category:Buildings on the Thames riverfront in the City of London. --ghouston (talk) 01:25, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to such a category structure, bear in mind that the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames has both banks of the Thames within its borders Oxyman (talk) 09:57, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File:The National Gallery - Trafalgar Square, London - lantern with real flame (6427118585).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!

Jim Derby (talk) 23:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

on a Viking ship[edit]

Hello. You uploaded this image:

File:A square sail (4912615962) (2).jpg

to Wiki Commons. What kind of Viking ship is this? Is it a Snekke perhaps? Do you know the name of this ship and where it is from?

Thank you for a great picture.

RhinoMind (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Sorry but I know nothing about this ship apart from the information in the file, that being it was in Cardiff Bay on the 14th of August 2010 Oxyman (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Barclays Cycle Hire key.jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.

čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  ไทย  日本語  Tiếng Việt  中文  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

KTo288 (talk) 18:26, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thanks[edit]

Cheers!, Rept0n1x (talk) 14:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Pete F (talk) 22:50, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Photo use[edit]

[1] -mattbuck (Talk) 12:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the interesting link, The magazine has credited the image to me, however I was not responsible for taking File:Stnstn.jpg. I simply transferred the image from en.wikipedia to commons. The photograph is by Avocet , I'm not sure what if anything should be done about this Oxyman (talk) 12:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll send them an email. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Oxyman (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for spotting that Matt, we’ve updated this.

Most of our photos come via Paul Bigland, Alvey & Towers and one or two others, but Wikimedia Commons is a great resource, and we’re keen to ensure proper credit whether photos are public domain or Creative Commons licensed.

Kind regards

Adam Hewitt

Editor

FYI. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for sorting that Oxyman (talk) 13:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Photo[edit]

Hi I used one of you photos here. If you want me to remove it or something, leave a message on my wikipedia talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Staglit

Thanks for the notification, I'm glad you find my photo useful and have absolutely no issue with this use of it. Oxyman (talk) 13:46, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Panhard Dyna Z Tigre vs. Panhard PL17 Tigre[edit]

Hello !

Some pictures of Panhard automobiles you uploaded some years ago have a wrong name: they show a Panhard Dyna Z with a Tigre engine, but are named "Panhard PL17 Tigre". I thing it would be better to rename them with the accurate model of the car.
Do you agree with that? If so, do you mind if I ask for renaming the files? Or do you prefer do it yourself?

The files are:
File:Panhard PL17 Tigre (1).jpg
File:Panhard PL17 Tigre (2).jpg
File:Panhard PL17 Tigre (3).jpg
File:Panhard PL17 Tigre.jpg

Regards,
BarnCas (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for taking the trouble with these images, no problem, I suspect I just took the source information at face value when naming these files, I have renamed these images following the information you gave me. IMHO these are very good looking automobiles. If you find any more misnamed files I have uploaded please don't hesitate to suggest an alternative name Oxyman (talk) 15:12, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the changes. If you like the Dyna Z, you should also like the "Turbotraction" (fr) from Franquin in Spirou et Fantasio Clin
Regards,
BarnCas (talk) 22:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chevrolet vs. Bedford[edit]

Hello again!

I smiled when I read the name of the uploader
Once again, the source information was wrong. But to its credit it took me some times and a whole bunch of researches to properly ID this truck. First, it was quite tricky to find that the truck is a Bedford, ans second, WP is not that clear about the Bedford TA and TD models, so I didn't know at first which one it was exactly. And I did not automatically trust previous ID of other people, since a lot of people seem to mix up the two models (and some TJ and O series were "lost" in the Bedford A category...).

Anyway, the key point is that I found enough pictures to correct the name and the category of your picture, so I wanted to thank you for the upload of this picture : from now on and thanks to you, I know another truck which can muddle the identification of the Advance Design trucks
(for the record, the other "Chevrolet AD inspired" trucks are the "siblings" Chevrolet Brasil 3100 and Chevrolet Brasil 6500)
Regards
BarnCas (talk) 11:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


--  Gazebo (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wellcome Images Barnstar[edit]

Wellcome Images volunteer barnstar
Thank you for helping to categorise the Wellcome Image library uploads. You are in our project hall of fame for your work! :-) -- (talk) 00:08, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Oxyman (talk) 14:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File:Newsagent in Melbourne Central (260073942).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!

ColonialGrid (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, there is a discussion going on here Commons:Categories for discussion/2014/12/Category:Streets by country that you might want to give your opinion in. Thank you. Gryffindor (talk) 14:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lindt Gold Bunny.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!

Smial (talk) 08:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Croxley rail link.1.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!

Cnbrb (talk) 17:24, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

London category maintenance 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!


Alan Liefting (talk) 00:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steam on Cynghordy Viaduct (2192087007).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!

  An optimist on the run! 06:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to agree how a warehouses in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames category can rightfully include this architectural wonder, which was a multi-floor depository which was never a simple warehouse. Due to its name, nobody is going to forget the building's conversion, I wonder why we have to re-cast the building as having industrial use? Are we to imply once London's buildings have had their first established use such former buildings should be visible when viewing current examples? I can think of several courts and police stations which would no longer property described as such and do not see why the Depository should be distinguished. PS I don't live there but would like to! Probably wouldn't we all in our heart of hearts? Adam37 (talk) 15:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you were to write an essay on warehouses in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames there is a likelihood you would want to include this building, would seem odd to omit it. Category:Warehouses in London is not a subcat of Category:Industrial buildings in London but Category:Storage buildings in London. In the borough categories I do include buildings by their former use if there is not so many of them to justify a separate former use category for that borough. Oxyman (talk) 16:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
File:Britains 1975 Unimog and Britains Land Rover.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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 21:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clockwork Bird Toy.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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 22:46, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Matchbox Foden Concrete Truck by Lesney No. 21.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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chapeaux.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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:24, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tri-ang RAF 1083 Crane.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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tri-ang R752 Battle Space Turbo Car (1).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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:42, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tri-ang R752 Battle Space Turbo Car (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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:42, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tri-ang R752 Battle Space Turbo Car (3).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:43, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tri-ang R752 Battle Space Turbo Car.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!

Vikiçizer (talk) 15:43, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:The extremely modern Four Seasons Hotel London @ Canary Wharf - England United Kingdom - May 2010 - Supremely luxurious, courteous and elegant, wonderful is the word! Enjoy! ) (4580248507).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!

Zenwort (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:The extremely modern Four Seasons Hotel London @ Canary Wharf - England United Kingdom - May 2010 - Supremely luxurious, courteous and elegant, wonderful is the word! Enjoy! ) (4580879416).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!

Zenwort (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion just now[edit]

Hi, are you aware that not all of those images in Category:Container City are from London? I've removed the ones from Mexico, but I don't know about the others. Thanks, EChastain (talk) 17:29, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I thought those edits were a bit odd, sorry misunderstanding, Best put the London ones in a separate subcat or something, Do yopu want to sort it out or shall I? Oxyman (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh just fuck right off. It's Bold, Revert, Discuss, not wah-wah-wah-edit war because you're so bloody superior. Fuck you, fuck this project. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What, can I have an explanation? Oxyman (talk) 18:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PS - fix your fucking upload dates too. The metadata for image creation is not the date you ripped it off Flickr and stuck it here. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sans_Pareil_at_Rainhill.jpg

Ok that can be fixed, seems that date was filled in automatically, do you know what the correct date is? Oxyman (talk) 18:11, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eh I fixed it the date entered was when the image was uploaded to flickr Oxyman (talk) 18:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have warned Andy Dingley. If I see further incivility like the above from him, directed at anyone but me, I will request administrative sanction. I'm old school, meatball:DefendEachOther.
Dingely might be correct, in theory, but how he is telling you is not. Don't take it personally, it seems he's that way with others, too. I think he's referring to file metadata showing the actual image creation date, which would not be the date uploaded to Flikr.
However, the photo was on film, not digital. The file has no metadata other than scan resolution. You have supplied a creation date, I assume it is the date for Rocket 150? Flikr actually says, "Taken on December 5, 2011," but that can't be right. Maybe that is the file upload date. I don't know that it matters, the image has been released regardless of when it was made. I'm really a Commons newcomer, just here to handle some Wikiversity business, for the most part. But then I see things.
Nice photo. --Abd (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
First of thank you very much for your involvement. As for the date issue, stopping to pause and think about it I came to the conclusion it would most likely be when the image was digitised, the metadata being added by a scanner or some such device, I have left the metadata date present and then gave the date for Rocket 150 afterwards. The frustrating thing about the Date field is that it has always been acceptable to enter an upload date and the guidance does (or did) encourage this in preference to leaving the field blank, inevitably this leads to allot of confusion. When dealing with pre-digital photography unless the photographer made an effort to record the date of photographing, the exact date is likely lost. As you imply all this is probably not that important. Thanks again Oxyman (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, -mattbuck (Talk) 19:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Automobile Association (6530603443).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!

Andy Mabbett (talk) 13:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Sealle (talk) 04:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bots[edit]


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

File:The Wellington and Lyceum Theatre - Wellington Street, London - The Lion King (6447083465).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!

Judithcomm (talk) 09:22, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Electrification of the Hastings to Tonbridge Railway. April 1986.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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eurostar Ticket.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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:19, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hex yp ticket.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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Metrolink Saver ticket (5573649151).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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Metrolink ticket (7422025804).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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:PLk tckt99.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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rail Settlement Plan single.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!

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:28, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tickets[edit]

FYI, two more Hastings Line tickets have also been nominated for deletion, details at my talk. Mjroots (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I Have argued a case on some files regarding this matter, but I can not possibly cover every ticket there are too many of them. hopefully a satisfactory conclusion can be reached on one file then linked to on the other files Oxyman (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you ask me, mass nominating a large number of tickets and not following the mass nomination process is disruptive to say the least. As is the constant attempts to bully objectors by a wall of text. Mjroots (talk) 17:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do find myself agreeing with your statement, however it'll need someone more familiar with the processes here to deal with it then me, I also find ad hominem posts that are unhelpful in dealing with the issues raised Oxyman (talk) 18:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked for advice over at en-Wiki from two admins I trust and respect. Mjroots (talk) 18:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Oxyman (talk) 20:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Issue raised at COM:AN. Mjroots (talk) 21:12, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Music venues in London[edit]

If a music venue is in London, it's in a London borough. There is no "hard to categorize". — Scott talk 21:23, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for posting on my talk page. I personally find that it's not always easy to categorise files if you are not familiar with the location, I get many files uploaded (often just placed in Category:London) where the only information available is "London". I draw your attention to Category:Unidentified locations in London and its subcats. It goes without saying the 400+ files currently in that category would benefit from better categorisation. Often in order to catogorise a file as best I can I have to rely on more general categories then those at borough level Oxyman (talk) 21:39, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm at it, thanks for your work on these categories, please don't think I am attacking you Oxyman (talk) 21:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, and thanks, that's appreciated. Also, sorry for being scratchy, I've not been on here for a while and seeing a revert notification took me by surprise. I appreciate your point about general building photographs being hard to identify and categorize sometimes. Music venues are a lot easier to deal with, though. — Scott talk 21:51, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, JCP (a.k.a. John Carlo Pagcaliwagan) 22:39, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OgreBot and your userspace[edit]

I wonder if OgreBot's been making errors with your User:Oxyman/London/2014 October 1-10 page, because one of the images it included was File:44444 post office.jpg, an image of a US post office that has nothing to do with London whatsoever. No objection, of course; I'm just curious and mildly confused. Nyttend (talk)

I discontinued use of OgreBot for this very reason. it adds anything uploaded under a specified category tree. Looking back choosing the Category "London" was a mistake as it had too many subcats linking to all sorts of other categories Oxyman (talk) 04:21, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Heads-up[edit]

Hi, as an active colleague on upload projects, I thought I'd drop you a personal heads-up for my request for adminship, today being the last day for views. RFA's tend to only have a small proportion of the community taking part, so it can be difficult to judge if this is representative. :-) -- (talk) 13:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reinsberg - Blick zum Schloss - geograph.org.uk - 8526.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!

Reneman (talk) 21:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team![edit]

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3wl7zNEQdp6z9Vb

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Dumbarton Bridge - geograph.org.uk - 375427.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Dumbarton Bridge - geograph.org.uk - 375427.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Dumbarton Bridge - geograph.org.uk - 375427.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:01, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Buildings in London numbered 10 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 category, 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.

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!

Rcbutcher (talk) 00:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Ravi Toll Plaza.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Highest pillared bridge in asia M2 Pak.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 10:36, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:M2 kalarkahar 3.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 11:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:M2 kalarkahar 1.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 11:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:M2 lilla.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 11:27, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:M2 near Salt Ranges.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 11:30, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:M2 Salt ranges.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 11:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:M2 near Bhera.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Gunnex (talk) 11:38, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted content[edit]

Template:Autotranslate And also:

Yours sincerely, Alan (talk) 11:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Could you stop adding more drama? Actually this nomination at this time IS trolling. We need people finding solutions, not putting oil on the fire. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:33, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was a deletion request, on a file that has no perceivable use. How is that trolling? is not the usual solution to a file that is out of scope to delete it? Oxyman (talk) 10:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016[edit]

Hello, this diff. Please clarify which is a sub-category of Category:Shopping in London as I checked (prior) and couldn't find anything. Or in that category's sub-categories. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shopping in London > Category:Shops in London > Category:Supermarkets in London > Category:Sainsbury's supermarkets in London > Category:Sainsbury's Local supermarkets in London . I hope you understand that high level Categories like Category:Shopping in London quickly become flooded with files if the subcats are not used. I also added Category:Supermarkets in the London Borough of Croydon Oxyman (talk) 00:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying it. As to your rather condescending comment, of course I understand that. That's why I looked but couldn't find anything...and that's also why I asked. Eagleash (talk) 00:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise if I came across condescending, this was not my intention, I do appreciate you uploading and categorising images. It's hard sometimes to say what you intend in a concise way. Oxyman (talk) 01:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No problem; it's often quite difficult to find the right cats on Commons. I have tried several times to find something more specific for File:CroydonNorthEnd.jpg but can't. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 01:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

year at xxxxx London stations[edit]

I started with the `year at Clapham Junction station` as a usefull subcategory of the `year in rail transport in London` categories. Stratford was my next station to add. However I want to limit these kind of categories to stations with a lot of pictures to prevent overcategorisation. Maybe East Croydon, Willesden Junction, but to leave it at that.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree with that plan of action Oxyman (talk) 12:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where?[edit]

I cant remember where I took the picture.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:40, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lewisham station, This image is the closest I can find to the same location, station has been modernised between the two photographs with new tactile paving, but you can see similar layout and the background buildings can be seen in both images Oxyman (talk) 12:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I uploaded a special one for you File:Stratford to Bishop´s Stortford.jpg so you can add a 2016 category.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

#invoke:Autotranslate 1.23.39.77 15:01, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Autotranslate OSX (talkcontributions) 10:19, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]