User talk:Skim

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Skim!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

Please don't blank pages

Hi Skim,
Thank you for your contributions to Commons. I noticed you blanked Category:Auguste Gräfin von Harrach on Commons. I asume you meant for the page to be deleted, but blanking the page is not the right way to do this. I'd like to strongly recommend to use {{speedy| type reason here }} and add it on top of the page you would like to have deleted; This way it will be placed on a special list that administrators check regularly for deletion. Without this it might take a long time before it's noticed.

PS: I've deleted Category:Auguste Gräfin von Harrach now. No need to tag it, since I'm here now anyway. Just keep the above in mind next time, Thanks again. –Krinkle^talk 20:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks Skim (talk) 20:46, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

House of Páni

Zdravím. Nezdají se mi názvy kategorií typu Category:House of Páni z Hradce, tedy ten způsob mixování angličtiny s češtinou. Pokud se používá anglický obrat "house of", tak by zřejmě mělo být standardně přeloženo i "Lords of". Nejsem si ani jistý, jestli souběh obou těchto označení není pleonasmem - pokud jako označení rodu použijeme ono "páni" nebo "lords", tak už pak je asi zbytečné doplňovat ještě i "house of". Pak by asi stačil název Category:Páni z Hradce nebo Category:Lords of Hradec. Já jsem na to narazil náhodou a víc se tím asi zabývat nebudu, ale zkuste se nad tím zamyslet, popřípadě to probrat s někým, kdo má zkušenosti s anglojazyčnou literaturou o české šlechtě. --ŠJů (talk) 00:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Zdravím. Mě se to také moc nelíbí, ale nevím co s tím. Snažím se trošku pohnout z celou tou sekci Category:Nobility of Bohemia a hlavně ze Category:Coats of arms of families of the Czech Republic. Když jsem to vytvořil a pospojoval s existujícími skupinami, tak se najednou objeví problémy s názvy. Myslím si, že je rozumné skupiny rodin nazývat „House of _RODINA_“ nebo „_RODINA_ family“. (Category:Nobility families of Poland). Už jenom kvůli odlišení rodin a ostatních významů. Zatím je to tak půl na půl. Navíc se vyskytůjí jěště názvy jako „_RODINA_ (Adelsfamilie)“, „_RODINA_ (family)“ a „_RODINA_“. Pak nastávají ty problémy, které zmiňujete. Překládat vše do angličtiny? Nebude to zmatečné? Pěkně to jde vidět na výše zmiňované sekci polských rodin. Pak by se ty jména měly překládat. --Skim (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Coats of arms of ...

Hi Skim, any cleanup of categories is always wellcome and I don't want to interfere with you. Still I I think your categorizing of coats of arms of families under the name Coats of arm of... is not very helpfull. Coats of arms of ... can pertain to a family, a town or village, or to a later territory. Most of the time the coats of arms I have an eye on pertain to noble families. I think it is important to keep the categories of their coats of arms to their families and not let them be corrupted by municipal or other coats of arms. That will happen very soon, if you keep up your naming scheme, which does not allow for differentiation between families or towns or whatever. --Wuselig (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Just to show you, what could happen: Category:Coats of arms of Cappel. --Wuselig (talk) 13:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I understand your opinions. We need a discussion about this. We need a naming scheme for this. Ideally universal. But, i am not a native English speaker and there is a problem for me. What can i do for it? Skim (talk) 13:41, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Simply, i can change Cappel family CoA to Category:Coats of arms of Cappel family, but this problem is bigger. Skim (talk) 13:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

With this addition I could live. The problem could get bigger when people can't distinguish between the coats of arm of a ruler and the territory he or she ruled. In all territories ruled by a ruling family this distiction is made even today, as the term Her Majesty's Government shows for example. But where do you want to discuss this? --Wuselig (talk) 22:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

You are doing a hell of a job at the moment and I can' keep up looking after all of your changes. But I would like to ask you to be more dilligent. If there is a family called Zollern-Schalksburg and we have a category named such, it i not helpful to put all of these coats of arms in to the category "Zollern-family", even though they might look alike. They should rightly belong into the category Zollern-Schalksburg-family. This category you can than put as a suncategory of the Zollern-family, which of course is a subcategory of the Hohenzollern-family. And please have a lookout, that there is a Swabian and a Franconian Branch of the Zollern-family. It would not be helpfull, if we had to sort these peas and carrots out of this common dish you are creating in places. --Wuselig (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

So.. I move all CoA with historical name Zollern to Category:Coats of arms of Zollern family. It is right? Skim (talk) 18:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

No, this is what I observed you doing with those coats of arms that I had on my observation list. You moved images that were in a differentiated category into the less specific Category:Coats of arms of Zollern family. Are you so familiar with the Hohenzollern-Genealogy that you can place all the coats of arms into the correct category. If not use the existing categorization unlesss you relly know better. It would be a shame if your well meant effort destroys information we already had. The listing you made below shows very well the point I made above. The evolution from coats of arms of families to dynatic coats of arms to territorial coats of arms to coats of arms of states to coats of arms of municipalities to coats of arms of modern counties which only mirror the historical background of this county. --Wuselig (talk) 21:28, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Is this Category:Coats of arms of Reischach family right? Skim (talk) 12:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I am creating User:Skim/CoA naming scheme page as concept. Skim (talk) 12:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Category:Coats of arms of Reischach family looks right. But that one was easy. The Zollern/Hohenzollern will be tougher. Shall I ask some experts on genealogy in the German Wikipedia to look over your list? Are you done so far, or are you looking for further examples? --Wuselig (talk) 09:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

As i said above, we need one CoA "naming scheme". I am looking for examples (for bad examples and for good examples). A page User:Skim/CoA naming scheme need more, more work. And Zollern/Hohenzoller is complicated example of this. I will need a help with it, but for now it begins. Skim (talk) 09:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I like your scheme with the derivatives. I think you are on a good way with this. I tried to secure some help from some experts on German Wikipedia, but they don't feel competent enough with the English language. Tell me when you need specific help and I see what I can do.--Wuselig (talk) 12:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

ok :-) Skim (talk) 12:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Coats of arms of Zollern and Hohenzollern

User:Skim/CoA of Zollern and Hohenzollern

Coats of arms of Lüttich

Coats of arms of a bishop of Liège. Not the bishopric, but possible of the family of the bishop. Or: it is an errot of Siebmacher ~~kooij~~

Thanks Skim (talk) 06:27, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Coats of arms of Wolkenstein family

Hi, the names Category:Coats of arms of Wolkenstein family (I) and Category:Coats of arms of Wolkenstein family (II) are not very descriptive or self-explanatory. If there is a need to split the category, they should better be named Wolkenstein-Trostburg and Wolkenstein-Rodenegg after the two main branches of that family. Cheers --FordPrefect42 (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I know, that isn't very descriptive :-(. I create page Skim/Coats of arms of Wolkenstein to resolve this problem. But, i haven't got a result in this time. Skim (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, COA's that you have analysing are not enough.The

http://members.yline.com/~viktoria.auer/familien/wolkenstein.htm

is showing only previous COA's of Freyherrn Wolckensteins.

According the http://www.wappenbuch.com/A026.htm Graven Wolkenstein COA is very different including hog, rose and large coronet. This statement is proving by means of Russian Graven Wolkenstein COA which also including hog, rose

http://gerbovnik.ru/arms/879.html

With respect S.S. Wolkenstein (server55@mail.ru)

Hi. Interesting opinion. Thanks for link to gerbovnik.ru. Skim (talk) 14:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, once more in turn: http://www.wappenbuch.com/B040.htm -- noblemen Vilanders COA; http://www.wappenbuch.com/A026.htm -- Freyherrn Wolckenstein not as you wrote Graven Wolckenstein COA; http://www.wappenbuch.com/G012.htm -- Graven Wolckenstein COA indeed; further, in Russian link [Волькенштейн] if you'll be careful you can notice that this family name in Russian is written in original document as Волкенштейн without soft mark. Soft mark now in Russian way of writing in our area belong to Jewish family which appeared in Taganrog town probably in the middle of XIX century I don't know from where. This mistake is generaly extended.

With respect S.S. Wolkenstein.

Dík!

Taky mě to mohlo napadnout, komu ty znaky patřej.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:15, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Není zač. Skim (talk) 12:44, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Coats of arms

Hello, Perhaps you could recognize some of these arms and categorize the file further: File:Codex-148-armorial-quinzieme-siecle.jpeg. Regards. --Fhmann (talk) 09:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I don't know these arms. I found this:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  Maybe

--Skim (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, good work, thanks. I'm somewhat confused, I suppose not all of them are connected to the Ordre de la Toison d'Or. Feel free to modify and categorize the file. Regards. --Fhmann (talk) 15:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

This is problematic work without better scans and context. --Skim (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

File:WolfVonStammheimEpitaph.jpg

Hi Skim,

why [File:WolfVonStammheimEpitaph.jpg this]? With your friendly help, the file does have the category Coats of arms of Stammheim family, hence it is classified? Why did you add Coats of arms of Germany to be classified afterwards?

Cheers from Stuttgart --Mussklprozz (talk) 14:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

On right is another Coat of arms, isn't it? Skim (talk) 15:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Integrace šablony popisu souboru

Zdravím. Dovoluji si upozornit, že není omyl, ale záměr, že mnozí uživatelé umisťují údaje o licenci do k tomu určené kolonky šablony {{Information}}, popřípadě že specifikaci vyfoceného místa umisťují do kolonky pro popis, s nímž tvoří logický celek, a nikoliv až kamsi za údaje o autorství a licenci, s nimiž nemá žádnou logickou souvislost. Zatímco v počátcích Commons byl obsah stránky souboru primárně členěn pomocí nadpisů do oddílů, od vynalezení šablony {{Information}} je možno všechny základní informace o souboru umístit organizovaně a logicky do této šablony, jejíž kolonky jsou ve většině případů schopny nahradit původní členění informací na oddíly. Je sice fakt, že některé nástroje dosud ještě nebyly tomuto vývoji plně přizpůsobeny a někteří uživatelé preferují alespoň částečné zachování původního uspořádání, ale považoval bych za slušnost preferovat z možných účelných variant to uspořádání, které volí uploader příslušného souboru.

Abych to vysvětlil. Striktně se řídím principem nejmenší složitosti.

• Licence. Vzhledem k tomu, že šablony licence jsou strašně velké, nemyslím si, že je vhodné je umisťovat do {{Information}} šablony v této podobě. Zesložiťuje to pohled na stránku. Chápal jsem to tak, že se tam píše nějaké upřesnění. Pokud by to tam mělo být, viděl bych smysl ve změně {{Information}} šablony tak, aby to bylo na konci a to tak, aby to takovým způsobem nezasahovalo do celkového vzhledu té šablony a stránky jako celku.
• Další změna, kterou občas provedu je přesunutí GPS souřadnic za {{Information}}, protože to vypadá dost blbě. = tabulka v tabulce. Místo za {{Information}} šablonou vypadá jako místo, kde to zapadá. Říkáte, že se to více hodí k popisu. Já souhlasím, poté by bylo dobré to zahrnout přímo do {{Information}} a zařadit přímo za popis.

Poznámka:

1. Chtělo by to vidět záznam o tom, jak se to má dělat. Jinak to celé nemá smysl.
2. Každopádně lze říct, že přispívat do tohoto systému můžu jedině v případě, že mi to dává smysl.

(Je pravda, že celý tento systém smysl nedává, ale ...) Pokud bych se měl řídit přesně tím, co říkáte, bez vylepšení daných věcí, nebudu zasahovat do daného vůbec. Což je možnost.

Skim (talk) 09:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Že jsou některé šablony licencí neúměrně a neprakticky velké je fakt, ovšem není dobrým řešením, když v tabulce je sice pro tento údaj vyhrazeno místo, ale odtamtud je uživatel odkazován zase kamsi jinam anebo je informace o licenci zbytečně zdvojována. Ostatně třeba popis souboru může také být v některých případech rozsáhlejší a také to není důvodem k tomu, aby byl vykazován mimo tabulku. Každopádně je nutno vzít na vědomí, že existuje určitá skupina uživatelů, kteří mají snahu některé věci z tabulky systematicky vyhazovat ven, a zase jiná skupina uživatelů, kteří se je snaží začleňovat dovnitř (kdysi jsem narazil na kohosi, kdo se snažil dovnitř tabulky dávat i "original upload log" u přesunutých souborů). Za této situace je standardním a slušným řešením, že každý u souborů, které sám nahrává, se snaží volit to uspořádání, které považuje za nejlepší, ale u souborů, které nahrál někdo jiný, se nebude zbytečně přetahovat s těmi, kdo preferují jiné řešení. Já to také dělám tak, že jakmile u některého z kolegů vidím něco, co dělá lépe a užitečněji, tak to od něj převezmu a začnu to dělat také tak. Čili, pokud nějaká změna je konsensuální a nekotroverzní, tak ji u cizích souborů bez obav provádím, ale pokud o něčem vím, že je to dlouhodobě předmětem sporů, tak je dobré vzít na vědomí obě používané varianty. Vylepšovat věci je užitečná práce, ale pokud jsou různé názory na to, co je lepší, tak je užitečné se vyhnout zbytečnému přetahování. Co se týče úprav stránek cizích souborů, přesun licence do tabulky Information považuji v současné době za vcelku neproblematický krok, který se nesetkává s větším odporem a obvykle výrazně zpřehlední i zdrojový kód (všiml jsem si hodně lidí, kteří to takhle dělají, a ty jsi v poslední době první případ, kdo to vrací naopak), zatímco umístění šablony "location" považuji za spornou záležitost, a tedy zpravidla respektuji umístění zvolené uploaderem, pokud je zřejmé, že ho zvolil záměrně. Určitá pluralita názorů a dynamika řešení do jisté míry patří k povaze projektů, které neřídí jeden člověk. Má to nevýhody (občas v něčem nejednotnost), ale i výhody (dobré nápady se uchytí rychle a "samy"). --ŠJů (talk) 22:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Požadavek na integraci souřadnic do šablony Information, a to logicky k těm údajům, s nimiž souvisí, už byl v diskusích párkrát vznesen, a troufám si říct i podpořen. Vycházím z toho, že přehledné logické uspořádání má na stránce souboru vyšší prioritu než prvotní estetický dojem. Pokud tedy volím mezi tím, jestli něco "vypadá blbě" z hlediska toho, jak zařezávají barvičky ve sloupečkách, anebo jestli něco "vypadá blbě" proto, že jsou informace nelogicky rozházené a související informace nejsou sdružené dohromady, tak volím radši to první "blbé vypadání" než to druhé. Pokud to graficky blbě vypadá, tak řešením je upravit grafiku šablony location tak, aby byla kompatibilní s oběma užívanými umístěními, popřípadě konečně dořešit tu přímou integraci do šablony Information, nikoliv tu šablonu stěhovat na místo, kde sice možná na první pohled hezky vypadá, ale kam obsahem nepatří. Jako čtenář-uživatel chci mít údaje o tom, co je vidět na fotce, pěkně pohromadě a ne je lovit z různých koutů stránky, a jako pro uploadera je pro mě také praktičtější mít související údaje pohromadě.

A ještě jednu poznámku: ne vždy je vhodné zakládat kategorii už pro jeden obrázek. Pokud nemáš nějaké echo, že by se někdo chtěl věnovat focení kanálových poklopů speciálně v Pardubicích, a pokud dokonce ani onen poklop na té jediné fotce není ničím specificky pardubický, tak snad by bývalo bylo vhodnější tu fotku zatím nechat v nadřazené kategorii poklopů v České republice. Není to vyloženě chyba, ale obecně je vhodné, aby kategorie nebyly zakládány pro příliš malé počty souborů, pokud k tomu není zvláštní důvod. --ŠJů (talk) 04:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Snažím se toto respektovat. Až na občasné výjimky jako lidi a věci jako ty poklopy. Většinou tehdy, pokud je předpoklad, že jich bude více nebo pro přílišnou složitost nadřízené kategorie. Ohledně Brna mám třeba některé ve fotkách a rád bych to řešil. Je pravdou, že Pardubice jsou z ruky :-)Skim (talk) 09:16, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Je fakt, že tohle všechno je trochu věcí citu a pravidly to těžko postihnout. Já taky někdy zakládám kategorii i pro jednu fotku, a těžko vysvětlovat, proč někdy ano a jindy ne. Ale obecně je dobré si uvědomit, že když pro některá města je užitečné vytvořit v rámci nějakého tématu podkategorie, tak to ještě nemusí nutně znamenat, že je třeba vytvořit podkategorii pro každou obec, ze které je třeba jen jedna fotka. Ber moji připomínku prostě jen jako zpětnou vazbu, že v případě pardubických kanálů mi to přišlo už divné či zbytečné. Ale respektuju, že tvůj dojem může být jiný - každopádně, dokonce i kdybys změnil názor, tak teď už nemá smysl tu kategorii zase mazat. Obecně vzato, kategorie pro jednu fotku je přijatelnější tehdy, je-li určena pro jeden subjekt (jednoho člověka, jednu obec, jednu železniční stanici), zatímco předčasná bývá v případě kategorie kombinující více kritérií (např. co-kde, typu "patníky v Horní Dolní" nebo (když to přeženu) "Modré autobusy Mercedes-Benz O441 firmy Icom Transport v Dolní Kracli". --ŠJů (talk) 22:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Blason évêque be Harpigny 2.svg and File:Blason évêque be Himmer (ornements externes).svg

Hello,

As you can read on the offical website of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Tournai, the tradition is that, like an archbishop, there arms have ten tassels, but the cross is single, that means there are bishops :
Le chapeau d'un évêque comporte normalement deux fois trois rangs de houppes vertes, mais la tradition du siège épiscopal de Tournai, qui remonte à plusieurs siècles, est d'y mettre deux fois quatre rangs, comme pour un archevêque. C'est la croix au-dessus du blason qui indique sans ambiguïté qu'il s'agit d'un évêque. (source : site officiel du diocèse de Tournai).
--Jmh2o (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Interesting. Sorry for my changes.Skim (talk) 10:35, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Archbishop hc.png Skim (talk) 13:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

the right one for archbishop is this File:ArcbishopCoA PioM.svg (with patriarchal cross) ; and this for a bischop File:BishopCoA PioM.svg. The old tradition of the Diocese of Tournai (diocese created in the 7th century) is a single cross but ten tassels. --Jmh2o (talk) 14:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

First, I understand, what do you say.

Ad "Right one" - See German Wikipedia. Kirchliche_Heraldik -> Übersicht. I see three types of Archbishop CoA.

I revert my changes, because i haven't better information. But, i don't think, that's ok.

Skim (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Polish coats of arms

Category:Coats of arms of Biberstein family is actually not really correct, since in Poland, not families have a distinct coat of arms, but one coat of arms can be shared by many families (see e. g. w:de:Wappengemeinschaft or w:en:Polish heraldry). Hence, I think we need a different category naming system for Polish coats of arms. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 12:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Really, we have problem with 'family' name generally. For example: (Category:Coats of arms of Skene family. One CoA is family CoA in Austria/Czech Republic. Other is Scotish Clan.) (English Barons above more families) (More noble titles above one real family)

Noble family isn't same as family. Noble family has a "nobility list" in one "nobility system" (=Germany, =Holy Roman Empire etc.).

I prefer for now:

• Same CoAs in separate categories (Commons).
• Get information about nobility systems (dates from-to, state/s).
• Get information about nobility lists (who, title, years from-to, nobility system). (For example this unsourced list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_counts_of_Austria-Hungary)
• Add CoA from free books to Commons.
• Sources for everything.
• I call for naming scheme of CoA categories. :-) (with examples)

BTW: We have Biberstein in http://www.wappenbuch.com/B032.htm .

Skim (talk) 14:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Heraldry is so complicated (and different in each country) that a simple category system will never be able to give all the information we want. Hence, we should stick to categories we can handle... The Biberstein is an especially complicated example. The Polish Biberstein CoA derived from the German/Swiss Biberstein (or often Bieberstein) family's CoA. Maybe we should rename the category to "Category:Biberstein coat of arms (Poland)" and make that a subcategory of "Coats of arms of Bieberstein family" (or link to each other). --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 16:04, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Ad Bieberstein: That's ok for me. Maybe we can use derivative of "Coats of arms of Bieberstein family". Skim (talk) 03:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry)

Zdravím. Teprve teď koukám, že jsi taky založil některé z těch kategorií a zabýváš se znaky a zapomněl jsem ti sem vlepit pozvánku do diskuse. Hlavní protagonisté tam ještě nedorazili, možná že to vyzní do ztracena.

Category discussion notification

Many subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry) have been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which they should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created some of those categories, please note that the fact that they have 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. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--ŠJů (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. Skim (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Quedlinburg

Coats of arms of Quedlinburg 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!

Quedel (talk) 16:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Request to vote in administrator request

I requested for administration. Please vote in my request.Please give your view about me. If you oppose no problem But please vote in this. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators/Requests/sridhar1000 --P. Sridhar Babu (talk) 07:33, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

podkategorie znaků obcí

Dobrý den, při doplňování znaků jsem zjisti, že pro znaky některých obcí zkládáte další podkategorie. Například Category:Coats of arms of municipalities of Uherské Hradiště District obsahuje podkategorie Category:Coats of arms of Bojkovice a Category:Coats of arms of Velehrad‎. Vzhledem k tomu, že lze předpokládat, že v uvedených podkategoriích již nic nového nebude, přijde mi to jako zbytečné členění a soubory bych přesunul do Category:Coats of arms of municipalities of Uherské Hradiště District a podkategorie (případně duplicitní soubory) zrušil. Nechci to ale udělat hned, pokud jste to zakládal cíleně s nějakou vizí. děkuji -kloin- (talk) 06:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Dobrý den. V uvedených podkategoriích něco přibývat může. Třeba historické reprodukce daného znaku, případně fotky znaku v daném místě. Hezký příklad je např. Category:Coat of arms of Brno-Řečkovice a Mokrá Hora. Skim (talk) 08:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Děkuji, myslím, že i tak je to zbytečné, a postačovalo by zařazení jen do obrázků obce, ale kategorizace není má nejsilnější stránka a jsem rád, že se ji jiní věnují systematicky. Do vámi vytvořeného dělení tedy nebudu zasahovat a děkuji za rychlou odpověď.-kloin- (talk) 08:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Já osobně jsem pro vytváření kategorií na Wikipedii tehdy, pokud do ní spadá více než jeden objekt. Pokud bych to tak nedělal, tak se v tom ztratím. Praktická subjektivní zkušenost. U kategorií znaků bych to dělal určitě, protože reálně hrozí poměrně dost obrázků. Viz třeba mé rodné město, které jsem prošel a mám desítky znaků. Potom se lze do dané kategorie koukat a třeba porovnávat ty znaky. Skim (talk) 09:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Rupperswil

Coats of arms of Rupperswil 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!

Perhelion (talk) 11:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:Siebmacher - Staedte - isolated armors

Hello Skim,

an en:armor is not the same as a coat of the arms. This means that the name of this category created by you is wrong. Please create a new category with the correct name and move the files to this category. The wrongly named category can be deleted then. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 20:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

okSkim (talk) 20:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Franciscus,_Pope_-_bad

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Franciscus,_Pope_-_bad 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!

Lemmens, Tom (talk) 20:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Rotthal_family

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Rotthal_family 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!

Hannes 24 (talk) 13:41, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Weißenburg_priority

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Weißenburg_priority 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!

AndreasPraefcke (talk) 19:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Books in the Czech Republic by year

Zdravím. Mohu se zeptat, jaký smysl má tato kategorizace? Ze současných 32 podkategorií je všech 32 zcela anachronických - to by se dalo vyřešit vytvořením příslušných vhodných kategorií (Category:Books in Czechoslovakia by year, Category:Books in Austria-Hungary by the year atd.) ale ... má to smysl? Neviděl jsem, že by se někde v citacích uváděl stát vydání (leda pro rozlišení od jiného stejnojmenného místa, např. Oxford (USA), ani že by se někde tímto způsobem knihy kategorizovaly nebo katalogizovaly. --Shlomo (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@Shlomo: To co jsem dosud dělal je to, že jsem zařadil do stávajících kategorii ty knihy, které jsem na Commons našel (Books -> Works, tříděny podle roku, dekad, apod.). Problém je to, že jsou to knihy vydané v České republice a ta tehdy neexistovala. Takže jsem to chtěl teď předělat tak, aby ty knihy co byly vydány za Rakouska-Uherska šly do Category:Books in Austria-Hungary. No a co je rozumné, tak nějak z toho vydělit ty knihy, které jsou česky. Takže buď lze knihu dát do kategorie books in Bohemia a zároveň do Austria-Hungary (pokud jsou z té doby). Nebo to udělat, jak to dělám teď. Ono těch knih bude mraky, takže si nemyslím, že by to bylo úplně mimo. Já to dodělám alespoň na ty knihy (tzn. vyhodím ty works kategorie) a uvidíme. Skim (talk) 19:38, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Ehm, když Česká republika tehdy neexistovala, tak v ní těžko mohly být vydávány knihy... byly vydávány buď v Rakousku, v Československu, v Protektorátě nebo v Německé říši. A dost často se to bude těžko určovat (např. u knihy vydané v r. 1918...)

@Shlomo: Ano. Skim (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Geopolitická kategorizace vám s vyčleněním knih podle jazyka nepomůže. Knihy v češtině vycházely i na Moravě, ve Vídni, v USA; naopak v Čechách vycházelo mnoho knih v němčině (nejen za Rakouska, ale v trochu menší míře i za Československa). O sbornících, kde byla půlka článků česky a půlka německy ani nemluvě. Chcete-li kategorizovat podle jazyka, tak je asi potřeba vytvořit kategorie podle jazyka, a případně je zkombinovat s kategoriemi zeměpisnými (Category:Books in Czech from Austria-Hungary, Category:Books in Czech from Czechoslovakia, atd.)--Shlomo (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Já tohle všechno chápu. Podle jazyka je to jednoduché, to je zatříděno. Teda až na řešení třeba staré čestiny vs novodobé češtiny. A to řešit teď nemíním. Jinak v těch současných kategoriích je skutečně třeba německy psaná kniha vydaná na Moravě zařazena v knihách u nas. Skim (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Books in Russian by country Skim (talk) 20:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

most-perfect magic square

Thanks for your magic square image assignment. I would like the 12 x 12 image of the most-perfect magic squares added to the 12 x 12 magic square category.

@Knecht03: Hi. I categorized magic squares, but only "normal magic squares". Other magic squares i move to Category:Number squares. That's bad. I think, that we need these categories (in category line by order):

• Category:Magic squares of order 12
  • Category:Normal magic squares of order 12
    • Category:Most-perfect magic squares of order 12

Right? Skim (talk) 15:51, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your classification ideas. In the order 12 examples one of the magic squares is a pandiagonal magic square. The other category I would consider including would be associative magic squares. So there would be three subcategories ... associative, pandiagonal and most-perfect. If the square meets the magic square criteria it should be under the main heading of a magic square. I am not sure what to do with the semi-magic squares. The semimagic square does not require the diagonals to have the magic sum. Harry White on his website has a program that takes the input for a square and automatically gives a classification of its magic properties. He is probably the wisest person who has given a tool to categorize these squares.

The information below is from the description of Harry White's "Get Type" free program that evaluates a unknown square.

Checks the type of each square as: not magic, normal semimagic, other semimagic, normal magic, other magic. If the type is normal magic, checks other properties : adjacent corner, adjacent side, associative, concentric, bordered, bordering, symlateral, pandiagonal, compact, complete, bent diagonal, Franklin, zigzag, self-complement, bimagic, trimagic. If the type is normal semimagic also checks appropriate properties in the list. See notes. Results are written to <in file name>TypeDetail[_n].txt.

Category:1896_books_in_Bohemia_(1867-1918)

Category:1896_books_in_Bohemia_(1867-1918) 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!

Zoupan (talk) 16:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Austria-Hungary_by_land

Category:Austria-Hungary_by_land 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!

Zoupan (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Books_in_Bohemia_(1867-1918)

Category:Books_in_Bohemia_(1867-1918) 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!

Zoupan (talk) 01:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Presentations_mentioned_EPUB

Category:Presentations_mentioned_EPUB 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 07:42, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Reminder: Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2016 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2016 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Skim,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2016 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eleventh edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2016) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 20 April 2017, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
--Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 08:43, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Coats of arms of Příbor II

Zdravím,

můžu se zeptat, co tato kategorie, respektive nutnost mít víc než "Coats of arms of Příbor", má za smysl? Příbor I má podkategorii ve které je stejně Příbor II. Přišlo mi to jako nějaký pozůstatek něčeho nerealizovaného, tak jsem to neřešil, ale když jste přesunul znak z obecné do Příbor II nedalo mi to se nezeptat...--TFerenczy (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

@TFerenczy: Zdravím. Pokud má historicky dané město více verzí znaků, tak jsem založil více kategorií. Už jenom z té podstaty, že v dané kategorii mají být stejné věci. V téhle dáné kategorii je znak z věže kostela. Bohužel nemám lepší foták na vyfocení lepší verze. Je jich po Příboře více, více je v knize Kamenné svědectví minulosti. Heraldické památky Novojičínska. No a ta novější je derivátem te první, znak byl polepšen o vinařské nože Dietrichsteinů. Možná je lepší to lépe pojmenovávat, jako např. u Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Olomouc. Je to pochopitelné? Skim (talk) 14:24, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Maria bez poškvrny počatá - Radslavice - 2.jpg

---

Hello, Skim!

Tip: Add categories to your files

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

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

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

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

Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:15, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

lol. Zapomněl jsem tam přidat kategorii. Dík za upozornění. Skim (talk) 19:18, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Sophie_Friederike_Karoline_Luise_von_Sachsen-Coburg-Saalfeld

Sophie Friederike Karoline Luise von Sachsen-Coburg-Saalfeld 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 09:10, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

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

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

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

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

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Categories

Hi, Skim, is there a specific reason you think, why there is a Category:Josef Jedlička (1828–1896) and a Category:Josef Jedlička? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 05:41, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Lotje, there are two different people, then we need two categories. Skim (talk) 13:42, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I know Skim, but the question is, why in one category it makes the link to the other and vice versa. This does not seem to be the case for other people with the same name I came across. Is that somethinkg that wikidata does you think? Lotje (talk) 13:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Lotje I don't know what is best pracice on Commons. We can remove it. Skim (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I guess we better leave it as it is, I could try to find out in the meantime. Thnks. Lotje (talk) 15:36, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Meta categories

Hello, Skim. Thanks for your work here. When you create a metacategory, please be sure to include the required first parameter that specifies the sort criterion. I changed Category:1853 advertisements by country to give an example of what is needed. If you have any questiins, feel free to ask. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Auntof6: Hi, thanks for it. Skim (talk) 06:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. Thanks for adding the parameter to some of them. In case you lose track of which ones still need the parameter, you can find them at Category:Metacats with no criterion parameter. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Auntof6: Ha, thanks.. Fixed. Skim (talk) 17:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Skim,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Skim,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Skim,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at Wikimedia Commons.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Přihlaste své fotky do Czech Wiki Photo 2020!

Czech Wiki Photo

Milí fotografové a editoři projektů Wikimedia,

každý rok společně nahrajete na Commons tisíce svobodných fotografií. Chceme vám všem poděkovat a také vás ocenit. Vyberte ty nejlepší z vašich fotek a přihlaste je do 30. 10. 2020 do soutěže Czech Wiki Photo 2020! Soutěž je otevřená i úplným nováčkům. Autoři tří nejlepších fotek si odnesou vouchery do Foto Škoda a speciální wiki-odznaky. Přihlášené fotky bude hodnotit i Honza Rybář, držitel Czech Press Photo.

Baví vás focení pro Commons i mimo soutěže? Staňte se fotografem Wikimedie, půjčujeme fototechniku a proplácíme cesty - více na Fotíme Česko.

Těšíme se na vaše snímky!
Za spolek Wikimedia Česká republika
Jakub Holzer
jakub.holzer@wikimedia.cz -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Category:ThinkPad_X201i

ThinkPad X201i 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!

ThisIsNotABetter (talk) 15:36, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

File:Rudý den na mostě Legií v Praze.jpg

File:Rudý den na mostě Legií v Praze.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!

Albert Horáček (talk) 17:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:ThinkPad_X220s

Category:ThinkPad_X220s 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!

ThisIsNotABetter (talk) 11:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:KTurtle_Logo_dialect_by_language

KTurtle Logo dialect by language 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!

DustDFG (talk) 09:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Category:Christian Johan Frederik Ahlefeldt-Laurvig

Category:Christian Johan Frederik Ahlefeldt-Laurvig is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD C2 (unuseful empty category) If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Palosirkka (talk) 09:34, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Template:Location estimated

Hi Skim - I revised the wording of Template:Location estimated/en to make it more appropriate. Could you revise your wording of the Czech version Template:Location estimated/cs to match, please? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 23:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@MPF: Thanks, updated. Skim (talk) 06:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks! - MPF (talk) 06:47, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with fc1.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with fc1.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 08:51, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with fc2.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with fc2.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with fc3.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with fc3.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with inv0.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with inv0.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with inv1.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with inv1.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with prikl st.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with prikl st.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with prodkonz.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with prodkonz.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with test.pes model.png

File:PESIM in Dosbox with Windows 3.1 opened with test.pes model.png 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.

 

--Артём 13327 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Famille_Stephan

Famille Stephan 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!

GerritR (talk) 20:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_families_of_the_Luxembourg

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_families_of_the_Luxembourg 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!

109.78.231.191 18:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Pferffzdorff_family

Coats of arms of Pferffzdorff family 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!

GerritR (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)