User talk:Morio

Archive[edit]

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:

File:James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) passport National Motor Museum, Beaulieu.jpg

And also:

File:James Bond-Arlington Beech (Daniel Craig) passport National Motor Museum, Beaulieu.jpg

Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2008_All-Star_Game_Statues_on_Parade[edit]

Category:2008_All-Star_Game_Statues_on_Parade 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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 ∙ +/−

George Ho (talk) 07:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canon_EOS_5Ds_R[edit]

Category:Canon_EOS_5Ds_R 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 ∙ +/−

Maksim Sidorov 20:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canon_EOS_5Ds[edit]

Category:Canon_EOS_5Ds 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 ∙ +/−

Maksim Sidorov 20:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category[edit]

Español - Estimado Morio:

¿Por qué quitas esta categoría? Category:Maps of racing circuits in Argentina.

Gracias

Spanish - Dear Morio:

Why did you remove this category? Category: Maps of racing circuits in Argentina.

Thank You

Girardelli G.Escucho 21:39, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your query. I guess you mention about my edits to remove the images from the Category:Maps of racing circuits in Argentina. The edits are according to commons' category policy to avoid "over-categorization". Please refer to the following instruction page: Commons:Categories#Over-categorization / Commons:Categorías#Estructura_de_categor.C3.ADas. I moved the files to appropriate categories under the Category:Maps of racing circuits in Argentina. Thank you for your understanding in advance. --Morio (talk) 12:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mobile_phones_by_brand[edit]

Mobile phones by brand 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 ∙ +/−

5.44.40.221 10:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicles vs cars[edit]

Hello. Can I ask why you moved Category:Cars at Thinktank, Birmingham to Category:Automobiles in Thinktank, Birmingham please? Automobile is a US word that isn't too common in the UK, which is where these vehicles are located. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

>Automobile is a US word that isn't too common in the UK

You're right. But the Wikimedia Commons have a policy to use the term "automobile" instead of "car" for the categories' names to keep consistency.

This category uses the term "automobile", instead of the term "car", for reasons of consistency and precision within Commons.
Unless a category uses the term "car" as part of a compound word or a proper name, such as in Car of the Year, please avoid creating categories using “car".

My edit was based on the Wikimedia Commons' policy. Thank you for your understanding in advance. --Morio (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's not a policy, that's a notice (maybe a guideline) on a category page. Do you know where the discussion about this took place, please? From my point of view, it doesn't make sense to use "automobiles" rather than "cars" in a category on a British topic... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

>Do you know where the discussion about this took place, please?

I am sorry, but I don't know. If you want to discuss it or know the circumstances of the 'guideline' of the category name, I guess it is better to use Commons:Requests for comment. thanks,--Morio (talk) 13:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Using your images[edit]

Hi,

I was wondering if your images were available for sub-licensing, and if so what attribution would you require.

Kind Regards Paul

Thank you for your coomment. You can use my pictures without my permission. Thanks,--Morio (talk) 15:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cricklewood Bentleys[edit]

Hi, why did you change part of the structure of the categories for these cars? Mind if I change them back so they are logical? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 07:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. I could not specify which edit you mention (I guess Category:Bentley Speed Six in competition...). Please let me know it. Thank you in advance.--Morio (talk) 15:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2010 Malaysian GP opening lap.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality -- Spurzem 12:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mikhail Grachev 2015 TCR Int Malaysia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality but a bit dark. -- Spurzem 17:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rene Munnich 2015 TCR Int Malaysia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 17:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Igor Skuz 2015 TCR Int Malaysia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. Perhaps the image should be a bit brighter. -- Spurzem 17:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2015 Malaysian GP opening lap.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Weak support A few small --Livioandronico2013 19:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Safety Car side 2015 Malaysia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 17:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Michael Schumacher 2010 Malaysia 2nd Free Practice.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fernando Alonso 2010 Malaysia 2nd Free Practice.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rubens Barrichello 2010 Malaysia 1st Free Practice.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Toshiarai wtcc.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality -- Spurzem 19:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porshe919hybrid 20141012.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very good quality -- Spurzem 19:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! JoseMaríaLopez wtcc20141025.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Vengolis 17:52, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jules Bianchi 2014 Singapore FP3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality.--ArildV 13:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jules Bianchi 2014 Singapore FP1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments ok --A.Savin 10:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Auto Union Typ D.jpg[edit]

File:Auto Union Typ D.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 ∙ +/−

Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 07:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think I have been unfair to Eddaido?[edit]

Morio,

I have recently had a disagreement with Eddaido regarding categorization on Commons, specifically the relationship of Category:Alvis 12/75 in the ZeitHaus to Category:Alvis 12/75. From my perspective, the matter in dispute appears to be a simple case of properly applying the Commons:OVERCAT policy. Because of your experience regarding automobile-related categorization, I greatly value your perspective and (in this situation) your neutrality. In your opinion, do you think that I have either been unfair to Eddaido in this discussion or am in the wrong regarding my interpretation of Commons policy? Thanks so much for considering my request. All the best!

Michael Barera (talk) 00:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stefano Comini 2015 TCR Int Malaysia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 08:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lorenzo Veglia 2015 TCR Int Malaysia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 08:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Tall ships by type[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Tall ships by type 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 project page, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

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

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 ∙ +/−

Hi Morio, as another category is more fitting, I hope you don't mind getting rid of this (less aptly named) one... If not, please be welcome to the deletion discussion... Ibn Battuta (talk) 16:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Air_disasters_by_year[edit]

Air disasters by year 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 ∙ +/−

Apalsola ^{t • c} 17:30, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2007_Raliul_Clujului[edit]

Category:2007_Raliul_Clujului 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 ∙ +/−

T.seppelt (talk) 07:47, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Daimler Twelve 20 March 2016[edit]

Please do not re-categorise like this again. Thank you, Eddaido (talk) 11:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. OK, I keep in mind not to edit them as long as possible though I would like to suggest to create the Category:Daimler Company automobiles under the Category:Daimler Company vehicles and re-categorize them.--Morio (talk) 11:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And your other plans are?
Eddaido (talk) 03:38, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your effort. I have no plan about the Daimler categories for now.--Morio (talk) 13:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the correct date format[edit]

Hi Morio,

Thank you for your contributions to Commons. I noticed you mentioned a date on File:Zhuge Shang 2016 Temple of Marquis Wu (Chengdu).jpg. Please know that in order for dates to be automatically detected and translated into other languages it needs to be in the YYYY-MM-DD format (ie. 2024-01 for January 2024 or 2024-04-30 for 30 April 2024). Also, for other (less specific) dates use {{Other date}} for centuries, ranges, 'circa' etc. like this: {{other date|between|1899|1903}} for "between 1899 and 1903

". This way the dates will be translated internally into the user's language preference. See for example the result in English: here. Thanks again.

--DAJF (talk) 23:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Photographs_of_men_of_Japan_by_name[edit]

Photographs of men of Japan by name 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 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

State of Japan categories[edit]

Have you discussed the mass creation of State of Japan categories (for example Category:Relations of Ecuador and the State of Japan)? I think this is worth a thought from many experienced editors. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. It is not difficult to undo the edits. If they are not necessary, I would revert them.--Morio (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tom_Hanks_by_year[edit]

Tom Hanks by year 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 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...[edit]

... for categorizing some of my recent photographs of Beijing. I am still in the process of uploading and categorizing images, but your edits are very helpful. -Another Believer (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I keep updating User:Another Believer/Beijing based on your re-categorizing, so thanks again. Feel free to scan the gallery to see if you can identify any of the caption-less images. I do appreciate your help so much. -Another Believer (talk) 18:20, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Switzerland_by_day[edit]

Switzerland by day 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 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Days_by_day[edit]

Days by day 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 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 03:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why?[edit]

Category:National Diet Building (1890) without de:Ludwig Richard Seel.

Source: "Von 1886 leitete er den Bau des Parlamentsgebäudes und des Justizministeriums in Tokio" (Source: Gudrun Haberberger in Wuppertaler Künstlerverzeichnis, Wuppertal, Von-der-Heydt-Museum, 2000, ISBN 3-89202-042-6 S. 368) --Atamari (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. Before the edit, I refered the Japanese wikipedia pages (ja:国会議事堂 {National Diet Building} and ja:リヒャルト・ゼール {Richard Seel}) and Japanese sources[1][2]. Acording to them, Richard Seel in the firm "Böckmann and Ende" (en:Wilhelm Böckmann, en:Hermann Ende) had designed the architecture once, but it was cancelled (It is also mentioned by the National Diet official website[3]). And, the old National Diet Buildings were finally designed by Adolph Stegmueller (1890), Oscar Tietze (1891), and Shigenori Yoshii (1890/1891). Then, I removed the category. However, the sources or my understanding may be incorrect. So, if you have a sure source, please correct my edits.--Morio (talk) 16:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no knowledge in Japanese. My source refers to his place of birth; The "Wuppertaler Künstlerverzeichnis" is a scientifically compiled collection of biographies (in german). --Atamari (talk) 17:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The source which you wrote is certainly correct (it's certain that Richard Seel designed the building once), but I guess it may be lacked the fact of cancellation of the project. The cancellation of the project is also written in the English wikipedia pages of en:Wilhelm Böckmann and en:Hermann Ende (who sent Seel to Japan). Richard Seel designed many buildings for the Japanese government, but some of those, including the new National Diet Building[4], were not realized due to badget reason. Then, only his design plans remain. So, I think it is appropriate to add the Category:Ludwig Richard Seel to such design plans' images when uploaded..--Morio (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CP+[edit]

Hello Morio ! Can you take a photo of Canon EOS M5 in CP+ 2017 ? It's usefull to illustrate Wikipedia in French, English, Deutsch, Tiếng Việt and 中文 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q26900407#sitelinks-wikipedia). A.BourgeoisP (talk) 21:27, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. Yes, I plan to go to the event in this month, and will take pictures of the EOS M5 and other cameras.--Morio (talk) 00:36, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fine ! Thanks ! A.BourgeoisP (talk) 14:14, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Taken_with_Canon_EOS_7D_and_Canon_EF_100-400mm_F4.5-5.6L_IS_USM[edit]

Taken with Canon EOS 7D and Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS USM 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 ∙ +/−

grendel|khan 21:59, 17 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:

File:Toyota Kumakichi 2014 Super Formula Motegi.jpg

Yours sincerely, G I Chandor (talk) 00:46, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:DJI_radio_controlled_model_quadrotors[edit]

Category:DJI_radio_controlled_model_quadrotors 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 ∙ +/−

Capricorn4049 (talk) 15:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Automobile light trails on Westminster Bridge[edit]

I don't think this should be in Category:Big Ben at night. While many such pictures will feature Big Ben, they don't have to. We may get photos that feature only the Houses of Parliament, or facing the other side of the water, or just featuring vehicles and the bridge. I think you should put back the "Big Ben at night" category to those images e.g. File:Big Ben at sunset - 2014-10-27 17-30.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 17:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. --Morio (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar

Hi Morio,

I wish to use your photo: 2010_Malaysian_GP_opening_lap in wikicommon for my country textbook. I understand this photo is under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, therefore, I wish to ask for your goodwill to let me use this photo in the book for academic purpose. I shall credits you in the Acknowledgement page. It will be very kind of you if you can grant me permission and drop me an email. Thank you very much.

simplelife06@gmail.com Jouehuey (talk) 04:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your message and request. There is no problem to use my pictures without my permission in any media. I am honored if the picture will be used in your book. thanks,--Morio (talk) 07:02, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging copyright violations[edit]

When tagging files for deletion, please always remember to inform the uploader. You can have this done automatically for you if you enable and use the Quick Delete gadget in your preferences. In this case, you tagged three files, but failed to inform Keroro123456. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 14:46, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for advise. I activated the Quick Delete function.--Morio (talk) 14:49, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the correct date format[edit]

Hi Morio,

Thank you for your contributions to Commons. I noticed you mentioned a date on File:Steam Locomotive No. 1 Bisai Railways front-right 2014 Museum Meiji Mura.jpg. Please know that in order for dates to be automatically detected and translated into other languages it needs to be in the YYYY-MM-DD format (ie. 2024-01 for January 2024 or 2024-04-30 for 30 April 2024). Also, for other (less specific) dates use {{Other date}} for centuries, ranges, 'circa' etc. like this: {{other date|between|1899|1903}} for "between 1899 and 1903

". This way the dates will be translated internally into the user's language preference. See for example the result in English: here. Thanks again.

--DAJF (talk) 04:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reasonable advice. I will correct other files' templates, too.--Morio (talk) 09:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Day, by year categories[edit]

Hi, Morio. I noticed that you created a lot of these categories recently. An example is Category:10 April, by year. Many of them are empty: will you be populating them soon? We normally don't create categories until there's something to put into them. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:37, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When I created the Template:YMDcat, I wrote about it in it. The YYYY-MM-DD categories (in the Category:Days by day) will be added to each category automatically. If the template does not reflect soon, I will activate it manually.--Morio (talk) 03:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cat needed[edit]

I see you are prolific and knowledgeable at making Cats on here. I wanted to ask you if you would mind making a Cat of Category:World War II tank destroyers of Japan. There are at least three AFV that would need to be placed therein: Category:Type 1 Ho-Ni I, Category:Type 1 Ho-Ni II, Category:Type 3 Ho-Ni III. Cheers, --Kierzek (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Acteur[reply]

Thank you for request. I made the category Category:World War II tank destroyers of Japan.--Morio (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you taking the time to do it. Thanks, --Kierzek (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Event_venues_by_city[edit]

Event venues by city 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 ∙ +/−

E4024 (talk) 07:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Conference project[edit]

Hello Morio,

I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around, but since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year. If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.

Cheers,

--MB-one (talk) 19:14, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Williams FW15C rear wing Donington Grand Prix Collection.jpg[edit]

File:Williams FW15C rear wing Donington Grand Prix Collection.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 ∙ +/−

Sw0 (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A110 vs A110 Berlinette[edit]

Hello. You have created Category:Alpine A110 Berlinette, so maybe you can answer at this question because I don't see the difference: A110 / A110 Berlinette. Thank you by advance. --Cjp24 (talk) 02:44, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment, I think it's a reasonable question. At that time, the Category:Renault Alpine A110 was overflown with images. Then, I created the categories to distinguish the original A110 (1100, Category:Alpine A110 Berlinette) from other models (Category:Alpine A110 1300 series and Category:Alpine A110 1600 series). But, I reconsider about it, the current name (Category:Alpine A110 Berlinette) may be inappropriate (confusing) and the "Alpine A110 1100" or something may be more appropriate as the its category name.--Morio (talk) 05:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Statues_of_Peace_by_Kim_Un-seong_and_Kim_Seo-gyeong[edit]

Category:Statues_of_Peace_by_Kim_Un-seong_and_Kim_Seo-gyeong 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 ∙ +/−

-- ChongDae (talk) 00:37, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bugatti Type 41 Royale Esders Coupé replica in the Musée National de l'Automobile[edit]

Hi Morio, the name of the category you created is not correct. This car is a roadster, not a coupé. Can you please change the category accordingly. Thank you. --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment and pointing it out. I moved the category.--Morio (talk) 11:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tucker automobiles[edit]

Hi Morio. Would you mind explaining to me why you have removed this category which I created. Eddaido (talk) 00:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I have moved the category to simplify the category tree because Tucker Corporation didn't manufacture a car other than Tucker 48. Even if we leave the "Category:Tucker automobiles", I think it will contain only the "Category:Tucker 48" and it is a bit nonsense. But I don't intend to stick to the edit. So, I will fix it if it would cause problems.--Morio (talk) 01:30, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your opinion. True the solitary main product model is distinctive. But your edit creates inconsistency. It is my understanding that the trees of the motor vehicle manufacturers should specify which group they belong to and these vehicles are automobiles. I would be grateful if you would revert it and would not be unhappy about doing so. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 01:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the categories. Please check them.--Morio (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Things_named_after_Avalon[edit]

Things named after Avalon 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 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 05:36, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks named after Avalon[edit]

Please don't move categories that are being discussed. It messes up the discussion page. I have moved the page back because of this, and because I'm not sure that the way you renamed it takes care of the problem. Please comment on the discussion page about how you'd like to rename the category. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:42, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Cat request[edit]

Morio: you helped me once in the past and I would request, when you have time, make a new cat for: IJA World War II Type 1 Ho-Ha halftrack. There are two photos. --Kierzek (talk) 17:06, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kierzek Done: Category:Type 1 Ho-Ha. Thanks for your request.--Morio (talk) 21:15, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the work done. --Kierzek (talk) 22:04, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Type 97 Chi-Ni[edit]

Morio: I have another favor to ask and that is: as to this IJA prototype tank, there are now three photos of it here on Wikimedia Commons and a fourth photo of this tank on Wikipedia. Do you know how to transfer the photo of this tank from Wikipedia [5] to here (it was uploaded there back in Feb. 2013). And I would ask that you work your magic and make a Cat for the photos of this experimental IJA tank here on Wikimedia Commons. Cheers, --Kierzek (talk) 15:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kierzek Done: Category:Type 97 Chi-Ni. Thanks for your requests. For your information, with using the CommonsHelper tool[6], it is not difficult to move the files from Wikipedia to commons. I usually use this in such editing--Morio (talk) 08:35, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir. --Kierzek (talk) 14:01, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Type 89 I-Go[edit]

Have another one for you. The Japanese medium tank, there were two versions of this tank, which overall is known as (Type 89 I-Go or Type 89 Yi-Go):

Type 89A I-Go Kō (version 1) and Type 89B I-Go Otsu (the second version, sometimes known as Type 89 Chi-Ro). They are not separated correctly herein. The most problematic section is the first sub-section: "Category:Type 89 Chi-I"; the Chi-I was the first prototype IJA tank (Type 87 Chi-I); not used for the Type 89. At least this first one should be changed to: Type 89A I-Go Kō or Type 89 Ko or Type 89A Ko. --Kierzek (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kierzek Thanks for your comment again. As you mentioned, the categories are already created.

Category:Type 89 Chi-I - Type 89 I-Gō Kō
Category:Type 89 Chi-Ro - Type 89 I-Gō Otsu

Your comment have a point and the tanks are (more) often called "Kō" and "Otsu" for separately, however, the current category names are based on the Imperial Japanese Army's tank code names and it is to keep consistency with other IJA tank categories' names. Therefore, I think it is better to keep current category names, although both, old and new, are correct.

The IJA's tank code was first used at around the Type 97 completion. So, there are other IJA interwar tank categories with similar points to be considered, such as the Category:Type 95 Ha-Go. According to the IJA's code, the name of the Type 95 light tank could be changed to Type 95 "Ke-I" ("Ke" is light tank, "I" is the first designed vehicle {based on "Iroha"}), but the tank was not renamed so officially, unlike the Type 89 (the reason for this difference is easily guessed by thinking in Japanese: "Ke-I" is very confusing because general light tank is called "Kei sensha" in Japanese). If the Type 89 was not renamed officially, I think the Type 89's categories were necessary to be renamed as you say. Thanks for your understanding.--Morio (talk) 05:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But, the Type 89 was never known in IJA's tank code as Chi-I, that is wrong. The Chi-I stands for: Medium I, for the (Type 87) Chi-I (Experimental tank No.1). So, that one should be changed, as it is misleading. Zaloga just calls the first version the Type 89A. General (ret.) Tomio Hara states the first tank after the Chi-I was the Prototype No. 2, leading to the designation Type 89 when standardized. Then he calls the second version the Type89B Chi-Ro. --Kierzek (talk) 22:57, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kierzek Done. OK, I tried to changed the names of the categories.--Morio (talk) 07:54, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Kierzek (talk) 13:30, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1:18_scale_models_of_automobiles[edit]

1:18 scale models of automobiles 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 ∙ +/−

Jebulon (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Renault Kangoo being eponymous for Kangaroo[edit]

Is the Renault Kangoo being named after fabulous Australian mammal Kangaroo? Should I put into Category:Things named after mammals‎? Allo002 (talk) 11:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MP4/4 photos[edit]

Thank you for uploading your excellent photos of the McLaren MP4/4. I have been trying to update the MP4/4 page and chassis history. Do you have photos that show the chassis plaques of the cars? I saw you mention the show car (MP4/4/SSC/10). I found a photo on flickr I linked, but I was curious if you have a better one. I also think the Prost MP4/4 you saw at Beaulieu was chassis #6 based on wear and tear of the plaque I could see from that distance in your photo, but I'm not 100%. Thanks again for all the work! 350z33 (talk) 02:00, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vehicles of heads of state[edit]

I may not have used the correct procedure but I though I would tell you I want to discuss some of the categories feeding into this category, not the category itself

Category:Vehicles of heads of state[edit]

Vehicles of heads of state 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 ∙ +/−

--Eddaido (talk) 10:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Porsche 962-122[edit]

Hi Morio, I have a problem. It seems that 122 is affixed to two chassis - one is the wrecked original and one is the replacement chassis. See here, for instance. Any clue how we go about labelling these two cars? Both are available on Commons. Best, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 20:41, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're famous[edit]

Bonjour Morio, I just want, from France, to inform you that this picture was published, with the good information license ;) in a specialised magazine about vintage cars (Autoplus Classiques) to illustrate the "inboard brake technology". cobra bubbles (talk) 15:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cat cat?[edit]

Are you sure of this? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 01:11, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your commet. ...Yes, I was also dubious of it. But, Mitsubishi talking about its origin that the name was after an Argentina cat, "Pajero cat".[7]--Morio (talk) 06:08, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's very interesting, I didn’t know it. Thank you! -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category Garmin eTrex 30[edit]

Bonjour Hello
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Garmin_eTrex_30&diff=215688953&oldid=205568866
Garmin eTrex 30 est un GPS et/ou GLONASS, Garmin eTrex 30 is a GPS and/or GLONASS
Amicalement Regards --F1jmm (talk) 09:33, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Photographer's Barnstar

Hello Morio,

first, I would like to say THANK YOU very, very much for your great Formula 1 pictures over the last years. The pictures are in great, high quality! :)

I got one important question for you: can I please use your Formula 1 pictures for YouTube videos? I LOVE the F1-sport and I would like to make videos about the history, future and the present of the F1. The videos would be like some small, history documentations.

I will off course give you credit after the CC-BY license (attribution with name and all links) but I can NOT put the entire videos under the CC-BY-SA license, because I am also using other material like music and animations in the videos. So I just could use your pictures under the CC-BY license.

I would be so happy, if you could say it is okay, to use your pictures in the videos just under CC BY 2.0, 3.0 or 4.0 license without the SA (share alike) license.

If you want, you can also give me your E-Mail and we can discuss over mail.

Thank you!

Greetings Patrick

PatrickF1Fan (talk) 12:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

>can I please use your Formula 1 pictures for YouTube videos?

Thanks for you comment, and, of course, it's no problem at all for me. Good luck!--Morio (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sauber C19 front suspension 2013 Malaysia.jpg[edit]

Hi Morio! Thanks for your Formula One pictures! But is this really a Sauber C19 (from 2000) in the photo? I'm wondering, because you took the image at the Malaysian Grand Prix 2013. Chaddy (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

C19 (left) and C20 (right) in Hangar-7, which I took last year.

Thanks for your comment. Yes, the picture is the C19 (I checked it before uploading and rechecked now), and I took it at the 2013 Malaysian GP where there was an exhibition of the Petronas-sponsored Sauber cars. Then, a bit unfortunately, their liveries were off by one year each (The C19 was in the 2001 livery for show car use). So, I uploaded only a picture of the part of 'Twin-keel' mount which seems to be useful for Wikipedia articles, and didn't upload the pictures of entire images of the cars to avoid confusion. The cars after the C20 also have 'Twin-keel', but its mount shape of the C19 was different (shorter) from later models. So, I think you can also distinguish from it :-) --Morio (talk) 06:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank your for your answer! I was a bit confused, but now I can be sure, that this is a C19. So I will use your picture in the German article about this car. :) Chaddy (talk) 06:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Customized_aircraft[edit]

Customized aircraft 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 ∙ +/−

Josh (talk) 18:10, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Politicians_meeting_foreign_leaders_by_name[edit]

Politicians meeting foreign leaders by name 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) 22:04, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rolls-Royce Phantom III (Goldfinger)[edit]

Hello. On that category there are 3 pics of this car. They don't have the same colour. Do you know why ? --Io Herodotus (talk) 02:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Io Herodotus Thanks for your comment. Though I didn't care very much about the colour and put a category "black and white automobiles" to the category (Category:Rolls-Royce Phantom III (Goldfinger)) wrongly, the car (in the film) was "black and yellow" actually. The exhibitions were very dark, and I guess it causing an illusion of colours between 'light yellow' and 'white'; unobtrusive lighting makes exhibitions cool, but also bit difficult to take a good picture (enough to distinguish colours) without flash or tripod. I found I have took pictures of the same car at Beaulieu, 6 years ago. Then, I may upload it.--Morio (talk) 12:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Racecar drivers[edit]

Excuse me, what's this sh*t? In your opinion one has to dig through the seasons to find the team one raced for? -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 16:58, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment to my old edit. I had thought such opinion would come out much earlier.

> In your opinion one has to dig through the seasons to find the team one raced for?

Yes. I also considered another way which you think it better, but had choiced current way because of 2 reasons:

It is easy to access the files by who reach from the "Formula One drivers of ----" categories. In case of put the "Formula One drivers of ----" category on root category of each driver, it may be difficult to find an appropriate category. Perhaps the very famous drivers, such as Michael Schumacher, have a less problem, but Commons viewers are not only manias. They probably don't know which year the drivers were at that team, in many cases. I thought it is unfriendly to force them to find the each year category.

* I considered this problem may be possible to be solved by editing each driver's "page" on root category, such as "Michael Schumacher" page. But this is not a light burden for editors.

Because the number of the Formula One drivers is small, there may be no risk of overflow of "Formula One drivers of ----" categories (for the next few decades) even if include drivers year-by-year categories.

Though I thought it better, I will not stick to this. It may be also good to change. In my opinion, regarding this, it may be safer to gather other editors' opinions before edit because they have accepted the current category tree for several years. thanks,--Morio (talk) 12:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop[edit]

@Morio: Please stop changing my categorisation. Add yours if you must but do NOT ruin Mine. Eddaido (talk) 13:09, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddaido: Thank you for your comment. Your latest edits such as this[8] is simply 'overcat' which requested to avoid. Please see: Commons:Categories#Over-categorization. Based on the Commons' guidelines, if there is any explanation, please inform to me. thanks--Morio (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Morio: No thanks to you for creating this mess. At least I have your attention. Why are you doing this to me? Have I suddenly offended you. This matter should be brought out and properly discussed. It has become a war. Eddaido (talk) 13:20, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You get the point don't you You are creating the over-categorisation and removing information. Eddaido (talk) 13:24, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have joined the team of obscurantists. Eddaido (talk) 13:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddaido: Thanks for your comments. Though I'm somewhat confused about your point to my very usual categorization edits, it is no problem to discuss about the Wikimedia Commons' guidelines with other editors. --Morio (talk) 13:29, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Morio: Do not pretend innocence/ naiveté, it does not suit you. Eddaido (talk) 13:32, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddaido: To make sure, I created a talk at village pump, Commons:Village_pump#Policy_about_over-categorization. If it is not too much trouble for you, please comment. thanks,--Morio (talk) 13:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddaido: Not sure what happened at that village pump conversation, but creating pages like Category:Checker Model A4 in the National Auto And Truck Museum is not helpful. We do not need to squirrel away photos in needlessly deep subcategories, it obscures what is available. I will revert this and I request that you stop habitually creating separate categories for every car in every museum in the world. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 15:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ever go to that page.(Commons:Village_pump#Policy_about_over-categorization) From here it looked to me as if there'd be no progress there. Eddaido (talk) 00:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment and edits. While there is no problem to remove the Category:Checker Model A4 in the National Auto And Truck Museum, I think there is no official policy about tolerance of deep categorization and it is a problem. In case of automobile museum categories, overflows occur easily. And, without such deep categories, files tend to lose categories (for example, the Checker A4 taxi files lost Category:Automobiles in the National Auto And Truck Museum due to your edits and they are lacks everyone makes), I think we should consider how to solve them, and the Commons:Categories (Commons:Categories#Over-categorization) is a policy to solve them. Of course, it may not be the perfect solution. If you think a change is needed for the official policy, I think it is good to discuss including other editors on Commons talk:Categories or any other appropriate talk page. I will follow the change of the policy.--Morio (talk) 16:28, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They weren't in it when I edited it, I just added all the categories to the pictures. I think often it can be useful (like when there are forty pictures of a car in the Zeithaus), but for the Checker A4 there are only two photos and two crops - in this case the subcategory really does obscure things and require needless clicks. Maybe a "Category:Checker automobiles in the National Auto And Truck Museum" would be a good intermediate category. For the same reason I dislike thesupermat's unique categories for half the cars he photographs, such as this one. Anyhow, I think there is a balance to be found. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 00:55, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lunar_New_Year_by_year[edit]

Lunar New Year by year 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 ∙ +/−

Roy17 (talk) 19:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Saoutchik automobile bodies[edit]

@Morio: There really cannot be a category using a non-existent word *Coachworked*. We need to discuss the other changes you have made. Please may we do that? Eddaido (talk) 12:09, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. It is OK to replace with the proper word. I don't edit or create a category before determining an appropriate category name.--Morio (talk) 12:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing categorizations[edit]

What are these separated categories supposed to distinguish? Is one meant for simply designs, built by others, and one for cars with PF coachwork? The distinction is very unclear and it will confuse every editor who uploads photos. It won't take long before these two are hopelessly intermingled unless you propose to spend the rest of your life maintaining them.

Automobiles designed by Pininfarina

Pininfarina automobile bodies

mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 15:25, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. Though I found same problem and started to work to solve it, have stopped working due to category name issues above.--Morio (talk) 16:30, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Mr C you have guessed? correctly. He had a large practice designing bodywork for mass manufacturers but not building them himself. So these two separate categories are essential. Eddaido (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue for Bertone, where time has given us choices of "Bertone vehicles" vs "Vehicles designed by Bertone", "Concept automobiles designed by Bertone" vs "Bertone concept automobiles". Sometimes a "car" is a "vehicle", sometimes an "automobile". :-) Ketil3 (talk) 07:04, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a conventional structure where automobiles (the same with trucks and tractors and tanks and locomotives and military stuff and bicycles etc) feed into vehicles which feeds into the manufacturer. In many cases they still need to be regularised - to fit with those conventions. That explains Automobiles And vehicles. I think Category:Bertone concept automobiles should be kept because then the name Bertone comes up first in the tiny search box and not Concept and therefore Category:Concept automobiles designed by Bertone should be merged and become disused. Similarly as well as Category:Bertone automobiles we need Category:Bertone designed automobiles in place of Category:Vehicles designed by Bertone.

See, its easy, they call me "Eddaido ace problem solver". Eddaido (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.choppers: I read your comment at User talk:Eddaido#Needless categories, and, sorry, but I finally understood your wishes. So, I will not edit/create automobile/museum categories any more from now on. While I have intended to have edited according to the Commons' policy until now, at the same time, I also do not want to hinder editing by other editors. thanks,--Morio (talk) 15:31, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Morio, I do not think that these categories are all bad, they are often useful. And please do not think I am condemning all of your work, without your categorizing efforts the Commons would be a much worse place. Thank you, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 16:44, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Swindle, not Bumblebee[edit]

Back in May 2017, you moved this image into Category:Cosplay of Bumblebee (Transformers). This is in fact Swindle, one of the Combaticons, an evil Decepticon who transforms into a jeep. I moved it to a more correct category. JIP (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the ongoing disbanding of all interwar and post-WW2 categories of AFVs etc.[edit]

Note that two users recently reached a "consensus" to disband the top-level category Military vehicles of the interwar period and decided that it gives them a right to disband all the subcategories without further discussion, and moreover to disband categories like Post-World War II tanks of the Soviet Union. You may state your opinion on that at COM:ANU#CfD scope? (Military vehicles of the interwar period) and COM:Categories for discussion/2020/01/Category:Interwar tanks in museums. Ain92 (talk) 14:23, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:DTM_(race_series)[edit]

DTM (race series) 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 ∙ +/−

Estopedist1 (talk) 12:51, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Russian_letters_by_letter[edit]

Russian letters by letter 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 ∙ +/−

1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for the great Formula 1 pictures. I am using several of them in an upcoming book, 'The Best Japanese Formula 1 Driver Of All Time', which will be on Amazon shortly. It is English language, but I hope to add a Japanese edition a little later. Of course I will add in an attribution for each picture. xania82 Xania82 (talk) 14:21, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Magazines_about_sports[edit]

Magazines about sports 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 ∙ +/−

E4024 (talk) 14:07, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Relations_of_Brazil_and_Japan[edit]

Relations of Brazil and Japan 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 ∙ +/−

E4024 (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RA302E[edit]

You claim that photo as your own work. Are you saying that Honda used the same number on that Formula 2 engine that they used on the Formula 1 air-cooled V8 that was in the RA302 car that crashed in 1968 killing its driver in her magnesium fire? It seems extremely unlikely.Jackhammer111 (talk) 23:15, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Photos_taken_with_thermal_imaging_cameras[edit]

Photos taken with thermal imaging cameras 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 ∙ +/−

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beijing by month[edit]

I started a CFD at Commons:Categories for discussion/2022/12/Category:Months in Beijing which relates to Category:Beijing by month that you created. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ayush ji[edit]

Ayush tum bahut garami ho 2409:4063:4A93:EA89:0:0:8D0A:1D12 13:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1970_in_Palestine[edit]

1970 in Palestine 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 ∙ +/−

Ricky81682 (talk) 00:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You created both this and Category:1970 in the State of Palestine. Was there a difference in your mind or can they be merged now? Ricky81682 (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Professional_sumo_by_year[edit]

Professional sumo by year 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 ∙ +/−

Zenwort (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:20030702 2 July 2003 Tokyo Cathedorale door Tange Kenzou Sekiguchi Tokyo Japan.jpg[edit]

Hello, Your photo is amazing! I’ve used it for the 478th ArchiGuesser! Thank you very much for the quality of your work! Flibust1er (talk) 21:25, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Amazon_Studios_products[edit]

Amazon Studios products 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 ∙ +/−

Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello netan ji[edit]

hello netan ji 2401:4900:3132:1986:0:19:7B2E:8601 03:13, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Motor_racing[edit]

Motor racing 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 ∙ +/−

-- Deadstar (msg) 10:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Things named after soldiers[edit]

Hi, can you explain to me the difference between Category:Things named after soldiers and Category:Things named after military people, both of which you created? Thanks, DGtal (talk) 13:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for comment. When I created those categories, I had the same question (for a moment).

The categories which I created were based on the higher-level categories already existed: "Category:Monuments and memorials to soldiers" and "Category:Military people" - "Category:Military people in art"; they were overflowing...

Literally, "soldier" is included in military people, but "military person" doesn't necessarily mean only soldier. For example, a general is a military person, but not a soldier. That's how I understood the idea of the higher-level categories.

Thank you for your understanding in advance. --Morio (talk) 14:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]