User talk:AgainErick

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


Category:Trash_bins_by_country[edit]

Category discussion warning

Trash bins by country 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Achim (talk) 19:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.[survey 1] 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. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] 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 project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. 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 to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ↑ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. ↑ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

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

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 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 won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2017 (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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image missing source[edit]

Do you remember File:Tipón Archaeological site - overview.jpg? Can you fill in the source and maybe see if there might be any more. I checked others from the same date and this looks like the only one. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 14:53, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms Lima Miraflores.svg[edit]

File:Coat of arms Lima Miraflores.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Usuarioperuano (talk) 22:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pioneering Spirit (ship, 2014) in Rotterdam[edit]

Don't move images from Pioneering Spirit (ship, 2014), make only copies for your own purposes,see also Category:Ships by name, thanks--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 06:00, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cities_and_villages_in_Peru_by_region[edit]

Category discussion warning

Category:Cities_and_villages_in_Peru_by_region 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Themightyquill (talk) 21:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between jackups and drill ships[edit]

Drill ship
Jackup

Erick, jackups and drill ships are not the same, and as such should not be in the same category. Regards, BoH (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clear, but please move them from the category Drilling ships in Rotterdam to Jackup rigs in Rotterdam ínstead of only removing. --06:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Location of Lima in Peru.svg[edit]

File:Location of Lima in Peru.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Estudiante2018 (talk) 05:52, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lodewijk Pincoffsbrug (Rotterdam)[edit]

Dear AgainErick,

Since you post quite a few Rotterdam related pictures you may prefer to have this conversation in Dutch, but for now I'll continue in English.

When you created Category:Lodewijk Pincoffsbrug (Rotterdam) in 2013‎ you added [[Category:Marja Haring]] to it. I suppose you did that to indicate that she's the architect of this bridge. I have reason to believe that that is not completely true: as you can read in Dutch language article Lodewijk Pincoffsbrug this bridge was built as Stokkenbrug in 1977 across the Zalmhaven, when Marja Haring didn't work for Rotterdam yet (she was employed by Rotterdam municipality only in 1980).

What was your reason for including Category:Marja Haring?

Kind regards, Magere Hein (talk) 07:49, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The reason can be found here [1]. It states a project of three bridges (including the Pincoffsbrug). I am aware of its history but what i could not find was if the bridge had undergone a redsign and if so to what extend the bridge has been modified. So even though in doubt (because of its history) i assumed some form of redesign took place and added the category simply based on the information on the architects page. --ErickAgain 05:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC).
It took me a while to find a picture of the Stokkenbrug in context, but I found one: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPpEvQUX0AEPGKm.jpg. As can be clearly seen, the approaches of the bridge were quite different than those of the Lodewijk Pincoffsbrug. I suppose Marja Haring designed those approaches. If I can be bothered, I'll email her to ask.
Thanks for the reply and with kind regards, Magere Hein (talk) 13:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wish[edit]

Hello. Help improve for [2]. Thanks you. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.214.51.98 (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

part of Bolivian peninsula not shown on a Peruvian-Bolivian border map (map of Yunguyo Province)[edit]

Dag,

er is een probleem met de kaart.

> Error on the Peruvian-Bolivian border map - with the Manco Kapac Province (Bolivia) > See for the detail : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Location_of_the_province_Yunguyo_in_Puno.svg

--AbouMPSI (talk) 18:10, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feyenoord-matches[edit]

Hello AgainErick! My compliments for what you did on making categories for old Feyenoord-matches! I wish every club in the Netherlands had such a devoted Wikipedian in their midst. Anyway, many thanks, and keep up the good work! All the best, Jeff5102 (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi AgainErick,

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) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Synagogue Botersloot (Rotterdam)[edit]

Hi, AgainErick, since you created this category, I noticed the description: Nederlands: Rotterdam, Botersloot 67 - Synagoge - anno 1891 - verwoest tijdens het bombardement op Rotterdam in mei 1940, and the difference with

  1. The date: 7 September 1942 (whereas the synagogue seemed to have been destroyed during the war in May 1940.
  2. House number: 73 instead of 67 as initially indicated.

Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 05:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lotje. Apparently the institute "Nederlands Israëlitische Gemeente" had their office located at the Gedempte Botersloot, a different location from the synagogue at the Boompjes. So different location and different house number. The Synagogue at the Boompjes was destroyed in May 1940.
--ErickAgain 05:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you every so much for the info. I will add this information to the file to clarify. :-) Lotje (talk) 10:59, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, AgainErick only me again. In the meantime I created a Category:Jacob Cohen. Maybe (hopefully) it will be helpful to someone... :-) Lotje (talk) 13:12, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi AgainErick,

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) 15:24, 20 September 2019 (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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, — Racconish 💬 08:46, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi AgainErick,

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) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bagua[edit]

Category discussion warning

Bagua 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

--Kai3952 (talk) 04:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trash bin Peru Lima Chorrillos III.jpg[edit]

File:Trash bin Peru Lima Chorrillos III.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Rujomar (talk) 07:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trash bin Peru Lima Lurigancho Chosica Lima Avenue II.jpg[edit]

File:Trash bin Peru Lima Lurigancho Chosica Lima Avenue II.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Rujomar (talk) 07:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aerial_photographs_of_bridges_in_the_Rotterdam[edit]

Category discussion warning

Aerial photographs of bridges in the Rotterdam 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

JopkeB (talk) 14:07, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sort order for the Anefo photographer groups[edit]

Re [3] (and many others), I note that you're doing a lot of work to change a sort order. This is the wrong way to do it – doing lots of manual changes to argue with a computer is never the right way.

The sort order is generated automatically from {{ANEFO photographer location}}, so any change ought to be done there. But first (because it's used in a lot of places, what should this sort order be? It was sorting originally by P for Photographer, but that's because no-one has ever expressed any other preference. So what should it be? Sorting by ~ puts them all at the end of the category, which is againt our usual practice.

You've also created Category:1980 photographs of Rotterdam by photographer as a child of Category:1980 in Rotterdam. This isn't an ideal name, as it duplicates 1980 at the head. Category:Photographs of Rotterdam by photographer (1980) would be better, but why not simply Category:Photographs by photographer (1980 in Rotterdam), which then allows easy use of the pipe trick Photographs by photographer for in-context linking. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The sort order changes were an attempt to prevent the Anefo template categories from popping up all over the place. I tried to address this before, by suggesting changes to the template, but no change so far. I think the Anefo template should not add any categories by photographer at all in any 'normal' category. Anefo being an association of photographers is intrinsically obsessed with the photographer, whilst most of the wikimedia community is interested in the image/content itself. It would be great to have subcategory trees for photographers sorted in the parent category under space or asterisk (' ' or '*') this sorting is quite common for 'by xxxx' categories, without any further addition. The naming of Category:1980 photographs of Rotterdam by photographer is indeed awkward, I just took one of the many existing schemes used elsewhere on commons. I'm not really attached to that name. I think it would be better to simply use the parent category's name and add ' by photographer ' so e.g. Category:1980 in Rotterdam by photographer. Under this category the Anefo template can subsequently add whatever is desired. Just my two cents. --ErickAgain 13:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC).

File:Peruvian Airlines in-flight meal box-2011.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Peruvian Airlines in-flight meal box-2011.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.)

  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: COM:PACKAGE
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 ∙ +/−

Solomon203 (talk) 12:18, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth 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 (2022) 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 are all 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.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) 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.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:DPRK Museum painting 2.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:DPRK Museum painting 2.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.

  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Photograph of a poster with no indication that it is in the public domain/properly licensed
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 ∙ +/−

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Freedom4U.

And also:

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 08:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:H.H. de Klerk furniture (Rotterdam)[edit]

Hoi AgainErick, hartelijk dank voor al je bijdragen op Commons en de andere Wikipedia projecten. Over Rotterdamse onderwerpen hebben onze bijdragen elkaar meerdere malen gekruist en hier en daar allicht ook doorkruist. Een zo'n punt is de Category:H.H. de Klerk furniture (Rotterdam), die je een "eeuwigheid" geleden aangemaakt hebt.

Met deze categorie heb ik momenteel een zelfde soort probleem als in eerder met de Category:Bank Mees & Hope (Rotterdam) had. Het gaat (of kan gaan) over zowel het gebouw als over de organisatie. In de opzet van de H.H. de Klerk furniture (Rotterdam) - categorie zit dat er ook in. Juist die onbepaaldheid vind ik problematisch. Ik wens juist verder uit te splitsen en te documenteren. En daarvoor is een duidelijke basis nodig.

Dat speelde een half jaar terug ook. Wellicht is het je ook opgevallen dat ik in dit tweede geval een nieuwe categorie heb aangemaakt Category:Blaak 10 (Rotterdam) specifiek over het gebouw, en Category:R. Mees & Zoonen over de organisatie. Dat was al weer een half jaar terug. In dat geval van Mees & Hope is enerzijds met de Category:R. Mees & Zoonen een bredere basis gevormd om de Rotterdamse bank en familie en de documenten daarover weer te geven. En anderzijds is er met de Category:Blaak 10 (Rotterdam) een ingang om documenten rond het architectonische en stedebouwkundige zaken rond het gebouw een plaats te geven.

Nu vraag ik me af of je daar ook mee bezig bent, of daar gedachten over hebt. Of je dat ziet zitten of juist helemaal niet. Ik ben benieuwd. Mvg. Mdd (talk) 02:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Volgens mij begrijp ik je verzoek en i.d.d. ben ik Blaak 10 tegengekomen. Hetzelfde speelt b.v. bij Category:Raad van Arbeid (Rotterdam) voor het gebouw en Category:Raad van Arbeid, Rotterdam voor de organisatie. Dit eigenlijk ingegeven door de categorieën voor andere steden en (Rotterdam) als suffix voor bijna alle individuele gebouwen in Rotterdam. Adressen lijken mij eigenlijk alleen handig als bijkomende onderverdeling en meestal hebben gebouwen ook wel namen. Ik moet hier nog wel een verder beeld over vormen, voordat ik een zinvolle reactie kan geven. Volgt later --ErickAgain 11:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC).

Category:Raad van Arbeid, Rotterdam en Category:Raad van Arbeid (Rotterdam)[edit]

Bedankt @ErickAgain: dat je dit ter sprake brengt. Het blijkt dat ik daar zelf op een cruciaal punt de mist in gegaan was, en dat er in de tussentijd (en wellicht eerder) nog wat zaken scheef zijn gegaan. Daarom heb ik ik dit even afgezonderd hier.

Om te beginnen bleek de documentatie zelf niet te kloppen en was de Hoge Raad van Arbeid, voorloper van de SER, en de Raad van Arbeid opgegaan in 1988 in de Sociale Verzekeringsbank niet duidelijk van elkaar gescheiden. Ik heb dat wel verder gescheiden, en ook wat aangevuld.

Momenteel zijn er nu acht (van de ca. 12) regionale Category:Raad van Arbeid instituten onderscheiden. Hier hebben we nu ook wat vergelijkingsmateriaal hoe organisatie en gebouw normaal wordt onderscheiden:

Het is evident dat er met naamkeuze in Rotterdam een afwijking van de norm is:

Hier zijn gebouw en organisatie vrijwel exact gelijk genoemd, en dat schept altijd verwarring. Bovendien is afgeweken van normale benamingen als Vestia: gebouw Raad van Arbeid of Raad van Arbeid-gebouw en dat schept verbazing. Waarom die keuze? Je eigen argument is ook heel markant:

Dit eigenlijk ingegeven door de categorieën voor andere steden en (Rotterdam) als suffix voor bijna alle individuele gebouwen in Rotterdam...

Nu is dat de moeite waard om te onderzoeken. Blijft dit hier niet bij een geval. Is de naamgeving van gebouwen in het Rotterdamse zoveel verschillend dan de normale naamgeving, of is dit alleen bij jou het geval. Ik zal daar nog eens verder naar kijken. -- Mdd (talk) 13:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Het schept inderdaad verwarring, maar je kunt/wilt niet altijd zomaar alle namen gaan aanpassen. Voor gebouwen in Rotterdam geldt dat in overgrote meerderheid de naam van het gebouw wordt gebruikt. De suffix (Rotterdam) is voor disambiguation en wordt eigenlijk altijd toegepast en moet ook worden toegepast, omdat je nooit weet of er ergens anders niet een gebouw met dezelfde naam bestaat. Als een gebouw geen naam heeft, wordt eigenlijk altijd de naam van de organasatie of de functie van het gebouw gebruikt. Hier zou dan ook het wordt gebouw in verwerkt moeten zijn/worden. Zo kennen we b.v. Category:GEB-gebouw (Rotterdam) en Category:Gebouw Delftse Poort de laatste heeft een naam, maar hier wordt dan weer gebouw toegevoegd, omdat er ook een poort is met dezelfde naam.
Voorstel:
Bijvoorbeeld: Category:Erasmus MC is best een uitdaging dan, want tekst en wikidata zeggen dat het de organisatie is, terwijl bijna alle afbeeldingen over het gebouw gaan en de subcategorieën over organisatie of gebouw gaan.
--ErickAgain 12:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Beste ErickAgain/AgainErick ik heb het idee, dat we langs elkaar heen praten, en dat je in herhaling valt. Nu stel je weer:

  • Voor gebouwen in Rotterdam geldt dat in overgrote meerderheid de naam van het gebouw wordt gebruikt...

Het gaat mij hier echter op de eerste plaats om enkele uitzonderlijke gevallen. Jij hebt een voorstel voor geheel, dat je wil oplossen op basis van je herhaalde stelregel, die volgens mij ook nog niet klopt. In de Category:Gemeentelijke monumenten in Rotterdam is meer dan de helft gewoon op adres.

Ik stel voor dat we nu de Category:Raad van Arbeid (Rotterdam) hernoemen tot Category:Raad van Arbeid-gebouw (Rotterdam). Vervolgens kunnen we naar het geheel kijken of het misschien daarna nog beter Category:Schepenstraat 10 (Rotterdam) moet worden. -- Mdd (talk) 17:15, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi ErickAgain, in je laatste commentaar leg je wellicht uit hoe je al jaren aan het categoriseren bent. Het levert een mengvorm op, die contrasteert met bijv. de methodiek die bij de straten van Amsterdam worden gehanteerd wordt: dat zijn hoofdzakelijk aanduidingen met straatnaam en adres. Met de opzet van een categorie over de Oude Binnenweg ben ik eens nader gaan kijken, hoe dat eigenlijk (voor mezelf) werk. Mijn conclusie was dat de panden dan weliswaar keurig uit elkaar worden gehouden, maar voor mij bleek dat op termijn niet te werken. Ik wist na een tijdje telkens niet waar ik moest zijn. Hieruit heb ik geconcludeerd, dat voor mij een mengvorm wellicht beter zou werken. Maar wellicht meer op een later tijdstip. mvg. -- Mdd (talk) 02:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Locatie[edit]

Bij een aantal door mij geüploade figureren heb je de locatie verwijderd. Het argument hiervoor is dat het geen cameralocatie is. Maar het zijn wel gegevens van de locatie. Als die info niet onder het hoofdje “cameralocatie” mag staan, waar zet moet ik die info dan plaatsen? HJVerhagen (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AgainErick&oldid=847860059"