User talk:Tm

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ +/−

Edifício da Empresa Pública de Abastecimento de Cereais (EPAC)[edit]

Caro Tm, importa-se que lhe deixe uma sugestão alternativa para o problema do edifício da EPAC em Viana do Castelo? Simplesmente renomear a categoria para Mercado Municipal de Viana do Castelo. Do meu ponto de vista, isto tem várias vantagens: primeiro, independentemente do proprietário e das funções originais, é como mercado municipal que é conhecido e utilizado hoje em dia. Em segundo lugar, chamá-lo de edifício da EPAC já está um pouco desactualizado, considerando que a empresa desapareceu em 1999. Em terceiro lugar, ajudava a distinguir esta categoria das outras que já existem e das que eventualmente irão ser criadas dentro da categoria-mãe da EPAC - Empresa para Agroalimentação e Cereais. FInalmente, concordo com o Tuvalkin, "Edifício da Empresa Pública de Abastecimento de Cereais" é um pouco vago, considerando que a empresa teve pelo menos 31 complexos de silos e centenas de armazéns em território nacional... Obrigado desde já pela sua atenção e melhores cumprimentos, -- Ajpvalente (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

O edifício tem este nome. O Mercado Municipal com as suas bancas, lojas, lotes e lotas (no interior do mesmo edifício) pode ser aqui ou ser em qualquer outro sítio passado ou futuro, onde outros prédios estiveram. Cumprimentos. Tm (talk) 16:00, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caro Tm, obrigado pela sua resposta. Caso algum dia as instalações mudarem de sítio, então a categoria poderá ser renomeada para "antigo mercado de Viana do Castelo" ou algo de semelhante. Penso que os nomes das categorias têm de ter alguma lógica comum, com a aplicação de bom senso. Eu não resido em Viana do Castelo, mas duvido que quando algum habitante se refira ao edifício do mercado como Edifício da Empresa Pública de Abastecimento de Cereais. Por exemplo, tenho grandes dúvidas que digam "amanhã vou ao Edifício da Empresa Pública de Abastecimento de Cereais", muito provavelmente dirão que vão ao "mercado" ou no máximo ao "mercado municipal". Cá em Lagos o Mercado do Levante é conhecido como Mercado da Reforma Agrária, e o antigo edifício da Alfândega como Mercado de Escravos, apesar das feiras de escravos serem muito anteriores à sua construção... Onde eu quero chegar é que temos de ter em conta a situação e o contexto quando estamos a nomear as categorias, basearmo-nos numa regra inflexível de se colocar o mesmo nome da ficha da SIPA não me parece muito certo. E por favor, tenha sempre algo em conta: os autores do SIPA não são perfeitos. Eles seguem regras e orientações próprias, e cometem erros, algo que já sucedeu.

E sinceramente, Tm, quer entrar numa guerra de edições com o @Tuvalkin por causa de uma situação tão pequena? A solução dele é melhor, embora prefira o nome de Mercado Municipal de Viana do Castelo, por estar na ficha do SIPA, e pelos motivos expostos acima. Melhores cumprimentos, -- Ajpvalente (talk) 17:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Os autores do SIPA não são perfeitos, como ficou exposto recentemente no facto de duas fichas do SIPA terem as coordenadas erradas, mas que foram corrigidas no Wikidata.

O mercado não ocupa todo o edifício, o mesmo está de mudança ou seja o mercado não é o edifício.

Já dei as explicações acima do nome, mas que fique registado que porque me recuso a discutir, neste momento, com senhor Tuvalkin. Se recentemente era possível ter uma discussão minimamente civilizada com este senhor, recentemente o mesmo voltou aos seus modos antigos de tratamentos informais indesejados e comentários insultuosos com todos os outros que discordam do mesmo senhor.

O mesmo, após comentários insultuosos a vários utlizadores do Commons, ou não tivesse dito que "isto é uma cambada de nabos que mal sabe usar o MS Word e/ou uns limitados mentais agarrados a um smartphone que nunca viram um computador e/ou pseudo-tecnófilos com ela entalada no Wikidata q ñ querem saber de caraterização e/ou uns pavões que só querem o Commons para mostrar as lindas fotos que tiram e nada mais", pelo que, diante destes "elogios" já na altura me recusei inicialmente a responder.

O mesmo senhor, no seu habitual modo, começou este novo episódio com os seus "edificantes" comentários do tipo"se os tipos do IPPAR são tontinhos". E desinformados ou não fosse o SIPA outro serviço e descendente de outros (como a DGEMN ou IHRU) que não o IPPAR e seus descendentes (IGESPAR e DGPC).

Registe-se ainda que este não perdeu o mau hábito de tratar toda as pessoas que desconhece, como eu, pelo informal e íntimo tu, mesmo quando ao mesmo foi reiteradamente pedido para parar com esse tratamento de compinchas de escola. Tm (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caro Tm, obrigado pela sua resposta, mas não compreendo o que quer dizer com "o mercado não é o edifício". Essa não é e realidade que vejo através do Google Maps. Pelo que percebo, o antigo complexo da EPAC era um só prédio e talvez um conjunto de armazéns anexos, ambos ocupados por dependências do mercado.

Honestamente, custo a compreender esse apego tão forte aos nomes utilizados pelo SIPA. A Wikipédia não é o DGPC, nem vice-versa. As organizações são distintas, com regras diferentes, e formas diferenciadas de ver as situações. O Portal do Arqueólogo, o SIPA e as fichas próprias do DGPC são forçados a utilizar nomenclaturas dentro das suas próprias orientações, mas nós, os colaboradores do Commons, não somos obrigados a utilizar os mesmos nomes. Claro que existem vantagens óbvias em ter nomes semelhantes, como uma maior organização e facilidade de associação. Porém, ao utilizarmos as mesmas denominações será sempre por voluntarismo, não por obrigação. Penso que nos (felizmente, poucos) casos em que exista necessidade de ter distinção entre os nomes, como este que estamos a discutir, estes motivos podem e devem ser secundarizados em favorecimento da clareza. A EPAC morreu há 23 anos atrás, e é mais do que certo que não volta. O edifício é presentemente ocupado pelo mercado municipal. A situação é, penso eu, bastante óbvia. E neste caso, nem nos estaríamos a afastar tanto assim da nomenclatura oficial, uma vez que a própria ficha do SIPA tem como um dos seus nomes "Mercado Municipal de Viana do Castelo". Melhores cumprimentos, -- Ajpvalente (talk) 21:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Marcha de apoio à candidatura presidencial de Lula (52435234050).jpg[edit]

File:Marcha de apoio à candidatura presidencial de Lula (52435234050).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:42, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Marcha de apoio à candidatura presidencial de Lula (52435298858).jpg[edit]

File:Marcha de apoio à candidatura presidencial de Lula (52435298858).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:42, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:SE CONMEMORÓ 68 ANIVERSARIO DEL “DÍA DEL SOLDADO DE LA PAZ” (27259232082).jpg[edit]

File:SE CONMEMORÓ 68 ANIVERSARIO DEL “DÍA DEL SOLDADO DE LA PAZ” (27259232082).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:48, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Resist the Greenscare march -08- (50282658437).png[edit]

File:Resist the Greenscare march -08- (50282658437).png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

71.71.108.213 23:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverts in my copyright revisions of files[edit]

Dear @Tm, good evening. I am writing to you because I have noticed that you have reverted several of my recent file license checks. However, there are some where I've spent a lot of time making sure that the criteria dictating the licenses I've added, and the details (author, publication, etc.) of those files matched. However, it seems to me that since I started reviewing some of the files uploaded by user Ser.Silv. and its (apparent) puppet António F.123456, you have started undoing my changes. Yes, I have noticed that, in some of them, I did not spend much time checking for publication before 1927 and did not present enough evidence to prove it, but that does not indicate that all my contributions are harmful enough to undo them. I have spent approximately three months reviewing Commons files, verifying that their licenses fit correctly, and notifying them to delete those that I have found that do not fit their licenses. Therefore, I ask that, if you see any inconvenience or disagree with any of my changes, notify me so that I can review and/or correct it if necessary, but do not simply undo my edits. If you have any problem, please let me know again. Best regards and thanks. 83.61.243.178 23:56, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have you go to the portuguese presidency of the republic museum archive to say that File:Presidente António José de Almeida.jpg, a picture of António José de Almeida (president of Portugal from 1919 to 1923) ((dated circa 1920) is the same as PT/MPR/AAJA/CX682/0070 dated circa 1922, by the same museum? Just because part of the authorship (Fotografia Brasil) is the same does not mean that this is the same photo. Tm (talk) 00:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I had done a circa 2 hours' research with various terms of the photo. First, I added the photographer's name, with time period between "1900" and "1930" (before and after Almeida's election as presidemt and after his death). I didn't found anything with that criteria. Later, I tried with the photo company cited in the Museu da Presidença (Fotografia Brasil), and the only result compatible with the photograph was "PT/MPR/AAJA/CX682/0070". 83.61.243.178 00:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you now what means "Informação não tratada arquivisticamente."? It means that info is incomplete and is not treated with archivist criteria.

In 30 seconds PT/MPR/AAJA/CX686/0030 (dated 1919 with doubts), PT/MPR/AAJA/CX686/0030 (dated 1919 with doubts), PT/MPR/AAJA/CX682/0023 (dated 1920 with doubts) and PT/MPR/AAJA/CX682/0001 (dated 1920 with doubts). So to a photo dated to 1919 and two to 1920. Tm (talk) 00:11, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm based with the original caption in the Museu: O Presidente da República António José de Almeida. c. 1920

Lisboa

Autor: Joaquim da Silva Nogueira / Fotografia Brasil // © Museu da Presidência da República. As I said before, I tryed with some keywords to treat to find the correct file. With the photographer's name I didn't found anything, so later I tryed with the company's name and with that I found one coincidence. With this other file, which I'd reviewed few month ago, when my address was different because my conection changed automatically, I did the same procedure. 83.61.243.178 00:16, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the Einstein's photograph, I had based in the original claims in existence. If you have doubts about the real copyright status, it's better to niminate the file for deletion directly instead of revert my revision, because, as I said before, I'm basing in the original claims, which, under your reasoning, doesn't have evidence for pre-1927 publication. Thanks. 83.61.243.178 00:20, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tm: Can you justify this this remove. When I added in July this source, the photograph view was alvailable in the Archive and was the same as that exhibited in the Museum. Please don't remove that to derogate my arguments. 83.61.243.178 00:27, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And the producer of that photo you linked (PT/MPR/CDN/CD011/0019) is clearly marked as Diário de Notícias, not Fotografia Vasques. You work based in tinly assumptions and speculations, not based in solid proofs. Tm (talk) 00:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "Fotografia Vasques" was added not based in tinly assumptions and speculations, but from the basis of the original complete photograph in the Hemeroteca Digital from Lisbon. For that photograph, in the moment I checked it for the first time, I used both the Museum's Archive data and some information from the Hemeroteca Digital's version. In that time I'd performed my due diligence. 83.61.243.178 01:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you know that there was a reforma Ortográfica de 1911? Do you know what regime made that reform? What was the political pendor of Ilustração Portuguesa? And that many persons continued to use the previous ortography for many decades? Tm (talk) 00:51, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photographia, instead of Fotografia, just as an example. Tm (talk) 00:53, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I'd said, I'm not a native Portuguese, and not also a good expert in its procedure, but my investigation of July was based in the documents from the sources I cited to verify that (apparently) this file fit correctly the cited criteria in the license tags. 83.61.243.178 00:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tm, Ok. As for you, my due diligence both in my July and current revisions are not ok for you and, for you "are tinly assumptions and speculations", and that I'm not an expert in Portuguese Copyright, I decided to leave those files to you. Do the most relevant and valid procedure you cand do or think is the most appropiate to verify the copyright status for those files, I'm a little bit tired. If I can be helpful in the future you can have my help. Best regards and thanks. 83.61.243.178 00:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This photos were uploaded from the museum of portuguese presidency of the republic, with dates and authorship.

Making links to archivist descriptions of photos in the same museum, just because they match some criteria, but not others of the original source (like dates, producers) is not due diligence. You made links to archival descriptions of photos that do not have a digital copy of that photo and do not match elemnts like dates, producers, etc.

This photographic companies produced enormous quantities of photos, not single photo. (Photografia Marques has 130 000 copies of photos in just one the portuguese national arquives, as an example) Tm (talk) 01:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Info

: "You made links to archival descriptions of photos that do not have a digital copy of that photo and do not match elemnts like dates, producers, etc." In my July investigation, when I originally added the Archive's source, the photograph was visible alongside that description. For that reason I'd added it. And there are a lot of cases in which some agences and institutions which takes photographs from other companies and later gives different credits to them (for example, outside Portugal, we have in the Europe various cases: 1) The Netherlands claims in its National Archives that the creator of this photograph of the late Queen Elizabeth II of the UK with her baby the current Charles III is unknown, when in the British National Portrait Gallery and Royal Collection claims that the creator is Cecil Beaton. Those diligences were necessary to verify the real copyright status of a photograph. And note that the Royal Collection's data (which doesn't include a view of the photograph), was also used.

As that diligence was made for check the copyright status of that photo, mine's was also useful to verify the copyright status of Canto e Castro's photo, according with that which the Portuguese's PD tags says which is considered PD in that country. 83.61.243.178 01:20, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just as an example the first photo of page 482 of Ilustração Portuguesa nº 669 of 16 Dezember 1918 and this photo PT/MPR/CAMLSB-AF/CD009/0009 probably are not the same photo.

Albeit this were taken in the same date and event and depict two of the same persons (President of the Republic, Sidónio Pais and then Secretary of State for the Navy João do Canto e Castro), because the one PT/MPR/CAMLSB-AF/CD009/0009 is described as "passando revista ao grupo de marinheiros em parada". Without the last element of troops in parade is possible that you could make the same kind of mistake with this photos. Tm (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with you in your last comment, it's possible that I could be made a mistake in that case. 83.61.243.178 01:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, the correct link to Ilustração Portuguesa is this. Tm (talk) 01:29, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Again, I'm agree with you, it could be the possibility that both data documents doesn't refer to the same file, something whith which I fear may have made possible misattributions in my July due diligence. 83.61.243.178 02:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tm: In the case of this file, I tried to do another research outside the Museu da Presidença's website to treat to find some evidence for the publication history, and I'd found it in two links of two different copies from the Brazilian magazine Revista da Semana, where this photogrpah, framed inside an illustration, appears in its edition number 36, published in Rio de Janeiro on September 2, 1922: [1] + [2]. So, in conclussion, it's currently plausible assume that it was published before 1927, with this new evidence. Also, this evidence makes me think that it is also possible that the document described in the Museu da Presidença Archive's website, which I originally added, refers to this photograph too. Yes, you said prior that the dates didn't match, because the original Museu's source gives c.1920 as date, but this "1922" fact in the archive could not refer to creation date, but the original publication date (according with Revista da Semana, in early September "1922"). I added that information to the respective file (with a claim of presumbaly, because the Museum Archive's catalaogue doesn't have any view alvailable of the document depicted, but with some data which match both with the original Museu's page and the publication record. If you need something else please notify me. Best regards. 83.61.243.178 14:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories[edit]

I see that you have reverted a lot of my country category edits. Images should not be in the country category. They are best to be uncategorised and then placed in the cossrect category. Alan Liefting (talk) 21:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What you call "my country category edits" was simply the removal of thousands of images from proper categories. And, no, they are not "best to be uncategorised and then placed in the cossrect category", but left in a valid category and then, with time, users will move to more specific categories. Tm (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The top level country category is not the correct category. The files that i have removed the categories from ned to be categorised correctly. They are best as uncategorised and then added to the correct category. I don't know a bout you but I don't like wasting my time here and we should both stop this until we get an opinion from the community. Alan Liefting (talk) 23:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tm: Here I have to agree with Alan Liefting: "The top level country category is not the correct category", neither are other main categories. Do you realize that, by adding main categories like "Videos" to your files, you qualify yourself as either "someone who is not familiar with categorizing" or "someone who just parks files in a main category for a while, to better categorize them later"? I hope you belong to the second group, because of your long record on Commons of uploading and categorizing your files. Otherwise you and your uploads are part of a big problem on Commons. --JopkeB (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, why didn't you notify me about this instead of just reverting? Alan Liefting (talk) 23:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd have to agree here that they shouldn't have all their categories removed. Those categories (AFAICS) were correct, they just weren't useful – they were too broad. But the fix for that, even a temporary fix, should be to make things better, not worse. They could have been moved to more specific cats (you can't say they were a problem in their old cats, or hadn't been there a long time already, so urgency to remove them isn't credible.). Or they could have been left and tagged to produce some sort of worklist, even if that's a new tag. But throwing them back into the "completely uncategorised" pile, when that's something we already had a massive excess workload on, and when they really are unusable whilst in there – that's no improvement. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:57, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HEllo Andy. You still here? I gave up editing years ago. Too much bullshit and too many unresolved systemic problems. Anyway, I don't agree with you. It is better to have files uncategorised than cluttering up high level cats forever and a day. The huge number of uncatergorised files is problematic and it is an issue that can possibly be resolved with some decent policies. User:Tm is also readding categories that are redundant to the remaining ones. Alan Liefting (talk) 00:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have already been warned about this at User_talk:Tm/Archive_11#Over-categorization. Alan Liefting (talk) 23:59, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That was a friendly warning, better than be blocked for "removal useful categories from pages after multiple warnings" like happened to you Tm (talk) 13:26, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good on you for the research. Yep, some rouge editors drove me off with their wikilawyering about my valid edits. I am one of a number of editors driven off WP. There are far too many editors there (and here) who would rather instigate punitive actions rather than build the resource. Alan Liefting (talk) 19:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This discussion continued on Commons:Village pump#Alan Liefting removed many categories from thousands of files. Please join there. --JopkeB (talk) 10:18, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Take care with your edits[edit]

This edit [3] should not have been reverted. User talk pages do not belong in those sort of categories. Alan Liefting (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are also often re-adding high level cats to files that are already correctly categorised. See [4] for example. Alan Liefting (talk) 00:32, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When you have a shotgun approach to categorization (i.e. remove usefull categories of thousands of files, reverting your buckshot like edits to do some proper restoration is bound to make some errors. Commons:Village_pump#Alan_Liefting_removed_many_categories_from_thousands_of_files is pretty clear in who is wrong. Tm (talk) 13:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, there are some "errors" (if you can call being uncategorised an error) but on the whole I consider what I have done to be an improvement. Otherwise I would not have done it. Commons is too valuable a resource to do substandard editing. And I will reiterate (since you did not address the comment) you have been warned about overcategorisation. Anyway, I out of here. Too much bullshit, too many bad editors, etc. Alan Liefting (talk) 19:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"That was a friendly warning" was the answer and those minor problems were solved by myself, but you seem to ignore anything that is not in your favour, here or in Commons:Village_pump#Alan_Liefting_removed_many_categories_from_thousands_of_files.

You remove thousand of files from generic but proper categories and so uncategorize them, so you are only adding to the bad backlog. Per your own words "You lot can do all the work, of which there is a lot", correcting the previously uncategorized files and the thousands that almost ended up in the same pile because of the mess you made. Again, by your own words, "It is such a shame that an important resource is being fucked up by the editors." that wont lift a finger to do proper categorization. Tm (talk) 19:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HEre some of your ha bad edits:

[5] - a redlinked cat with a bad name
[6] - uploading files with malformed category name and if corrected should not be in a file in Commons namespace.
[7] - adding a Commons namespace category (and a high level one at that) onto a user talk page. This goes against policy and in my opinion is a VERY BAD THING TO DO.

There may be more but I am finally going. Alan Liefting (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You really like to say the things by wrong way.

Claim 1: "redlinked cat with a bad name", you claim that Category:Kherson is Ukraine is a bad name, but you forgot to mention that the image shows a t-shirt with the motto "Kherson is Ukraine", the same kind of mottos like Russian warship, go fuck yourself with Category:Russian warship, go fuck yourself. Given, in case you also dont know, that ukrainians liberated Kherson yesterday, your reasoning is odd.

Claim 2: "uploading files with malformed category name and if corrected should not be in a file in Commons namespace", you forgot or dont care to say that this was an upload of 36 images of birds, with dozens different species. You link to one example but, as always, forgot to mention that this file was properly categorized, as as well as the other 35 files as the Category:Birds_of_Portugal_to_check was just was a temporary placeholder to files of dozens different species.

Claim 3: As explained above, your shotgun approach is far worse, as it was you that removed thousands of files from proper categories.

So, next time, do a proper check before you come here again with tenous claims. Tm (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Візит першої леді України Олени Зеленської до Польщі 01.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 07:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Rural Alberta Advantage St. Paul - Amsterdam (48069825633).jpg[edit]

File:Rural Alberta Advantage St. Paul - Amsterdam (48069825633).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Gbawden (talk) 05:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Deputy Secretary Neal Wolin visits UPS consolidation hub (8519248182).jpg[edit]

File:Deputy Secretary Neal Wolin visits UPS consolidation hub (8519248182).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Deputy Secretary Wolin visits UPS consolidation hub on trip to Chicago (8519248230).jpg[edit]

File:Deputy Secretary Wolin visits UPS consolidation hub on trip to Chicago (8519248230).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Refugees_from_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine_in_Canada[edit]

Refugees from the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine in Canada 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 ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Zenwort (talk) 10:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Manifestação CGTP.jpg[edit]

File:Manifestação CGTP.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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 08:18, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Don_Quijote,_(1894?)[edit]

Don Quijote, (1894?) 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 ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don Quijote[edit]

We have verified that the images were published in the 1905 edition.

See discussion here: https://es.wikisource.org/wiki/%C3%8Dndice_Discusi%C3%B3n:El_Ingenioso_Hidalgo_Don_Quijote_de_La_Mancha_(1905,_vol_1).djvu

and pub here: https://bvpb.mcu.es/cervantes/es/consulta/registro.do?id=463832

and here: https://www.cervantesvirtual.com/portales/quijote_banco_imagenes_qbi/imagenes/?edicion=78

But I see you undid all my changes and returned them to 1894?

So what would you like to do? Should I duplicate the images for a 1905 version, or will you undo your changes? What?

In the Cervantes Virtual library there is no version with 1894 with those images. In flicker the name says "1894?" but that question has been resolved, again, you may see the discussion in Wikisource. https://www.cervantesvirtual.com/portales/quijote_banco_imagenes_qbi/imagenes/?edicion=78

--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I´ve seen it. Sorry to say this but in there you present only your speculations and zero proofs and deny any proof that does not support your speculation of single publication date of 1905. See the discussion you opened up and you will see that there are at least to printed versions of Don Quixote by Luis Tass, not just one. Tm (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you try to explain this to me again because I really don't understand what you are saying.

Is there an 1894 version with these images? Where?

Is there not a 1905 version with these images? There is a 1905 version with these images. So why did you remove them from the 1905 category?

The two links are authorities on the matter:

#1 https://bvpb.mcu.es/cervantes/es/consulta/registro.do?id=463832

#2 https://www.cervantesvirtual.com/portales/quijote_banco_imagenes_qbi/imagenes/?edicion=78

You are basing your 1894 version on the image name in flickr. All images in the flickr site say "...1894?"

--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the category discussion you opened yourself. Tm (talk) 01:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photographs by Justin Higuchi to check[edit]

Hi, I stumbled upon this category today and started adding proper Categories.. looks like you don't want me to do that? Did I mess something up? // sikander { talk } 🦖 01:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not remove this category as it is meant to myself organize the proper categories. Tm (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah ok, sorry about that. Appending "do not remove" is a good idea :) // sikander { talk } 🦖 01:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, no problem. It is just that it is a "red" category i thought that it would not be found. Cheers. Tm (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Red box Serpentine Gallery (5127844545).jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 14:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:"Our revenge will be the laughter of our children" Bobby Sands Republican Mural, Sevastopol Street, West Belfast (42111867161).jpg[edit]

File:"Our revenge will be the laughter of our children" Bobby Sands Republican Mural, Sevastopol Street, West Belfast (42111867161).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 07:37, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2021 storming of the United States Capitol DSC09407-2 (50814762042).jpg[edit]

File:2021 storming of the United States Capitol DSC09407-2 (50814762042).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:15, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unexplained reverts[edit]

Don't place an item into a category and its parent. For example, a black and white photo of the Eiffel Tower should be placed in Black and white photographs of the Eiffel Tower. It should not be placed in both that category and the Paris category at the same time.

Hello,

I realize you are reverting many edits that were merely merging duplicate categories. In the process, you are reinstating a number of discrepancies and obvious mistakes in the category structure.

May I kindly ask you what is the spirit of your edits? Place Clichy 20:57, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When you move files that like File:Kaptur meets with visitors from Ukraine at UMA Cleveland (36131374213).jpg from Category:Ukrainians in the United States to Category:Ukrainian diaspora in the United States what do you expect? Or that portuguese-americans and similars (i.e. dual citizens or naturals) by some miracle become portuguese diaspora in the USA. Did you know that many portuguese in the USA are not also americans because of either chance or choice. You mistake ethinicity, nationality, citizenship, culture and migration status and make a mess of imperfect but much better then your solution of mixing everithing up. Tm (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am just trying to bring a little bit of consistency in what is indeed, sometimes, a mess. The advantadge of diaspora categories is that they can apply to the various situations of people in a country with a link from another country: both migrants and descendants, both dual and single citizens. In the case e.g. of this revert you made or this one, can you please explain what information you have about the citizenship of the people in the picture that would require them to be in a Ukrainians category? As you seem to wish to keep a Category:Ukrainians in the United States, which I find perfectly redundant with American people of Ukrainian descent (for individual people) and Ukrainian diaspora in the United States (for generic topics), can you please help me to understand which content I should place in each of these categories in your opinion?

I would also like to bring up COM:OVERCAT (see scheme to the right). Content should be placed at the more precise location. It is useless and redundant to place a file at a price location and its more generic parents at the same time, as you did for instance in this revert: People of Boston is more precise, so People of Massachusetts is not necessary. American people of Portuguese-Jewish descent is more precise, so Portuguese Americans is not needed. Kudos to you, this edit e.g. is very positive as you moved the file in a more precise sub-category.

Now it seems you are getting a little personal and that you blanket reverted a number of my edits which were perfectly legitimate. On Category:Jess Harnell you added back no less that 30 absurd categories of fancy ascendancies of which the Wikipedia articles says absolutely nothing: Bahamian? Belarusian-Jewish? Cherokee? On Category:Richard Pryor you added descent from 15 different African countries from Guinea-Bissau to Ethiopia and Mozambique, none of which, again, are mentioned on the Wikipedia article. On Samuel Armstrong (artist), besides adding descent categories for 6 different Italian regions AND the generic Italian descent, you replaced perfectly legitimate People of Minneapolis by redlinked Artists of Minneapolis and removed perfectly legitimate Animators from the United States. And these are just a few of many similar blanket reverts. Cleaning up this nonsense, like I attemted to do, is an improvement. Blanket reverting edits without looking at them is a disruption.

So I would kindly and civilly ask you to reconsider. We are both doing editing that is mostly improving Commons (and that improvement is needed). Stupid conflicts like this and the blanket reverting of perfectly legitimate edits make us lose time and energy for nothing. Place Clichy 10:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This are not Ukranian diaspora in the USA or Americans of Ukranian descent but Ukranians that happen to be in the USA, i.e. Category:Ukrainians in the United States and not Category:American people of Ukrainian descent nor Category:Ukrainian diaspora in the United States.

Daniela Ruah, who has double nationality, was born in the portuguese family Ruah, one of the most well known portuguese jewish families but in Boston so Jus sanguinis and the 14th ammendement applies, so she is one of the Category:Portuguese Americans and definitely not one of the Category:American people of Portuguese descent, like you tried to claim.

Also you are claiming that several other users add categories as "vandalism" and so that you are removing, when those edits were made in good faith and can be very well proven with sources and this blanket removal is disruption at best. Tm (talk) 15:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So if I understand you well, Ukrainians in the United States is for people who are strictly Ukrainian (i.e. from Ukraine, not Americans) who happen to be in the USA. Then why did you place this category on this file, which is a collage of famous Ukrainian Americans? Why did you place it on this file, which shows a festival in long-established community in New York, and whose parent category is already in no less than Category:Ukrainian diaspora in New York (state), Category:Ukrainian festivals in the United States and Category:Ukrainian culture in New York? The rationale is not consistent.

Again if I understand correctly, Category:Portuguese Americans seems to be important for you for people of dual citizenship, who are both Portuguese and American. Then why did you move Category:Kari Ann Peniche to this category, whereas she is born in San Diego and her Wikipedia article makes no mention at all of any link to Portugal? She seems to fit perfectly into American people of Portuguese descent if she indeed has this background, however you removed that category.

About Danielle Ruah, you wrote that "she is one of the Category:Portuguese Americans and definitely not one of the Category:American people of Portuguese descent, like you tried to claim", however you later added yourself the same category she is "definitely not one of" according to you, which you later replaced by even more precise American people of Portuguese-Jewish descent. You're just not making any sense.

Re: vandalism I indeed found an editor (or group of editors) mostly editing from anonymous IP addresses (nothing forbidden there) that have a pattern of adding large numbers of fancy ascendancy categories to dozens (hundreds) of biographical categories. An example of this disrupting behaviour is this Revision of Category:Richard Pryor where the IP added 25 ascendancies including 17 different African countries (Angola, Cameroon, Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Togo and Zimbabwe) as well as Choctaw AND Native American (a redundancy itself suspicious under COM:OVERCAT), all 4 British nations (English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh), Dutch and German. Of course people can sometimes have a very diverse background, however the Richard Pryor Wikipedia article does not mention any of these. Seen the pattern of the same IP address (group of IPs, actually) of adding such fancy background to many articles, I indeed consider that such an edit is disruptive, clear vandalism, and probably, until proven otherwise, the fruit of the editor's imagination, although not excluding that it can be made in good faith. I respectfully disagree with your statement that these edits can be very well proven with sources: some of that nonsense may be true, but it should probably be proven before it can be allowed to stay, for instance by a sourced mention on the Wikipedia article (I always check). Note that I am not the only one to revert such gibberish: User:Denniss (diff, diff, diff) and User:Jdx (diff, diff) seem to have participated in the cleanup. You, in turn, only help the vandals in blanket reverting legitimate edits.

Note that I always check the credibility of categories before removing any, mostly by looking at the associated Wikipedia article and its sources. For instance, Drake's Wikipedia article mentiond him (in sourced statements) as the son of an African-American Catholic father from Memphis, Tennessee and a Canadian Ashkenazi Jewish mother, who made him attend a Jewish day school and become a bar mitzvah. I therefore edited the page, leaving Category:Canadians of Black African descent and Category:Canadians of American descent (which are legitimate), removed Category:Canadian people of Latvian-Jewish descent and Category:Canadian people of Russian-Jewish descent (which are never cited) and added Category:Jewish people of Canada. Similarly, on Category:Howie Mandel, I found that Category:Canadian people of Polish-Jewish descent and Category:Canadian people of Romanian-Jewish descent are supported by the Wikipedia article, however I removed Category:Canadians of Polish descent which is redundant per COM:OVERCAT.

Does this help you to understand the rationale of my edits? Will you please let me do the constructive clean-up and editing which I try to do without blanket reverting large number of valid edits? Place Clichy 01:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200129062).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200129062).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200128957).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200128957).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200128967).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200128967).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200129007).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200129007).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200843206).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200843206).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200843246).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200843246).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200843266).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51200843266).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51201048328).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51201048328).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51201048448).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51201048448).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Alpine (24923864468).jpg[edit]

File:Alpine (24923864468).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

~★ nmaia ^d 02:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

defaultsort[edit]

Hi Tm, the defaultsort "place patronsaint", such as {{DEFAULTSORT:Vilamorena Maria}}, is necessary to get the churches in several categories (by coutry, state or province, by diocese, by times of construction, by style, by shape) listed in the same way, as they are listed in all scientific publications: primarily by place, and churches of the same place by patron saint. Best regards, --Ulamm (talk) 01:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)+--Ulamm (talk) 01:21, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Where is that "rule" written in Commons? Tm (talk) 12:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Joji infobox image update[edit]

Hi, there! Would it be possible to update Joji's infobox image to a more recent one, please? The current image is dated 2018, therefore, I suppose it's necessary to update it with an image reflecting the subject's current appearance. Thank you. Graphdz (talk) 04:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51202015165).jpg[edit]

File:MTA New York City Transit Unveils Memorial Mural and Plaque To Honor Garrett Goble At Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College Station (51202015165).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Deep Q Learning (52012317170).jpg[edit]

File:Deep Q Learning (52012317170).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

73.228.114.21 00:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914003471).jpg[edit]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914003471).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Ricky81682 (talk) 01:24, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vila Cova do Covelo e Mareco[edit]

Hola. El 28 de marzo de 2013 se cambió su denominación por la de: União das Freguesias de Vila Cova do Covelo/Mareco.^[1] Aitorembe (talk) 22:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914629765).jpg[edit]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914629765).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914631360).jpg[edit]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914631360).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914008051).jpg[edit]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914008051).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914101988).jpg[edit]

File:2022 NBA All-Star Banner Cleveland (51914101988).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:NBA All-Star Crossover Event (51913369322).jpg[edit]

File:NBA All-Star Crossover Event (51913369322).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 14:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Poppy Playtime (52084660702).jpg[edit]

File:Poppy Playtime (52084660702).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Olcyx Commons (talk) 09:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Model of Procession Street of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (28086658814).jpg

And also:

File:Model of Procession Street of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (28086714954).jpg

Yours sincerely, TadejM ^(t/p) 00:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Jessi (11) (4484833735).jpg[edit]

File:Jessi (11) (4484833735).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

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

And also:

File:Jessi (7) (4485480600).jpg ( Nominator : NoonIcarus | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lamilli )
File:Jessi (6) (4484829531).jpg ( Nominator : NoonIcarus | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lamilli )
File:Jessi (2) (4485477702).jpg ( Nominator : NoonIcarus | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lamilli )
File:Jessi (1) (4485477042).jpg ( Nominator : NoonIcarus | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lamilli )
File:Jessi (12) (4485485156).jpg ( Nominator : NoonIcarus | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lamilli )
File:Jessi (5) (4484828975).jpg ( Nominator : NoonIcarus | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lamilli )

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) 12:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Ambassador Brink visited Serhiy Prytula's Charitable Foundation, Feb. 2, 2023 (52666377507).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Abzeronow (talk) 17:47, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Awkward or U+1F62C (42207324395).jpg[edit]

File:Awkward or U+1F62C (42207324395).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 17:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Olivenza[edit]

This town cannot be under any Alentejo categories in the same way that Gibraltar is not under any Andalusia category. Let's get stuck to reality, not fantasy. J.M.Domingo (talk) 19:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a territorial dispute between Portugal and Spain, so those categories are proper. Portugal and Spain have its reasons to claim said territory so "let's get stuck to reality, the not fantasy" that you pretend that this dispute does not exist. Tm (talk) 19:38, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, such categories do not correspond, as that Gibraltar is not under the category of "municipalities of the province of Cádiz". Stop adding false content to this project. If you have some kind of coherence and you dare, then go and put this article under this category, and watch carefully what happens next. J.M.Domingo (talk) 09:13, 16 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You said that i added alentejo and yet who is the one that added? And you are now removing and are the one that is trying to hide the facts. Portugal and Spain claim this territory as being theirs De Jure and no ammounts of whining will change that. Tm (talk) 11:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I have said that you have added Alentejo. And it is true, as you can see in this edit and in this edit. These edits are of yours, aren't them?

I have invited you to go to pt:wiki and to do the same kind of edits you are doing here. But you don't do it, and you do not even have a simple comment about my proposal. Why? The answer is obvious: you are perfectly aware of the fact that you are adding fake content to this project, and you do not dare to behave there in the same way (you would be immediately reverted).

It is important that you assume which is the nature of this project. You cannot use Commons as a platform to promote or spread your political views (irredentism or any other kind). Finally, and once it is clear that I am wasting my time in this discussion, I have done something that I do not like at all, but maybe you were looking for. Now this issue is in the hands of the administrators of Commons. J.M.Domingo (talk) 14:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You assume things about me that i never said and\or think. There is a territorial dispute , that is a fact that you cannot hide. Both countries have arguments to claim Olivença as being De Jure theirs. To stretch that fact to say that i have irredentist political view, when i have almost 4 million edits, almost none related with portuguese irredentism views (be it Olivença, Galiza or the former portuguese empire), it clearly trying to make ad hominem attacks, when you do have arguments to counter the facts that there is a territorial dispute. Tm (talk) 18:59, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you blaming me for supposed ad hominem attacks you, who a couple of comments ago were mocking at me for "amounts of whining"? Well, I am not interested in continuing with this because it leads nowhere. J.M.Domingo (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:SC 329870 - With the 15th Army Group in (Florence) Italy Maj. Gen. Alfred M. Gruenther, Chief of Staff 15th Army Group, discussing the terms of surrender for the German armed forces in Italy. (52593810266).jpg[edit]

Hello noticing your edit, I was wondering, isn't that Victor von Schweinitz (Q94860552)? I posted a message/question on the Commons:Bundesarchiv/Error reports asking for some help here. You might wish to follow the outcome. Cheers. Lotje (talk) 06:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:An ATA-trained bomb tech with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau uses a nonlinear junction detector to scan for components of a detonated IED at a blast site in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128090038).jpg[edit]

File:An ATA-trained bomb tech with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau uses a nonlinear junction detector to scan for components of a detonated IED at a blast site in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128090038).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 07:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ATA-trained bomb techs with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau collect evidence after rendering safe an IED outside the Royal Thai Police headquarters in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128762997).jpg[edit]

File:ATA-trained bomb techs with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau collect evidence after rendering safe an IED outside the Royal Thai Police headquarters in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128762997).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Spilno Christmas 5U5A8723 (52616420117).jpg[edit]

File:Spilno Christmas 5U5A8723 (52616420117).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Mztourist (talk) 12:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Por suas inúmeras contribuições ao Commons. Não paro de esbarrar em ficheiros carregados por você. Melhores cumprimentos, RodRabelo7 (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar. Best regards. Tm (talk) 19:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

COM:Overcat[edit]

Hello. Files cannot be in Category:Files from Lies Thru a Lens Flickr stream and their subcategories at the same time. See COM:OVERCAT. Best regards, BrightRaven (talk) 12:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These are sorting categories and not visible to all, so it is perfectly acceptable to have the same image in two (or more) categories, one that have all photos by the same author and another(s) to specific subjects. Best regards. Tm (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is against the guidelines of COM:Overcat, so no, it is not perfectly acceptable. There is no exception for hidden categories. This actually created sorting problems, some pictures (for example File:A Million Miles From Everywhere (21463823538).jpg) were not present in Category:Files from Lies Thru a Lens Flickr stream, female model photos, where they belonged, and it was not easy to detect them because of this overcategorization. BrightRaven (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Dutch" and "Romanian" Mannlichers[edit]

Your current insertion of the "dutch mannlicher" category into the mannlicher m1893 is a misunderstanding. For example, the Danish Mannlicher M1895 (which is mainly affected by this category) has no relation to the Romanian Mannlicher M1893. Such arrangement suggests that the Danish mannlichers were some kind of subversion for the rifles produced for Romania. In addition, the "dutch mannlicher" category should be separated into separate models (M95 and M93 family of rifles) Sumek101 (talk) 11:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did not knew that Portugal and Greece were part of Romania? Tm (talk) 11:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But you can find out who the guns were originally designed for. The designations M93 and M95 are simply a coincidence of names (M95 coincides with the Austro-Hungarian and Danish rifle, and M93 with the Danish and Romanian rifle). Other than the confusing names, these weapons are unrelated. Sumek101 (talk) 11:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mannlicher M1893 was used by romanian, dutch, austro-hungarian and portuguese and in dutch was known as Geweer M. 95, so i dont understand why you said that "the Danish Mannlicher M1895 (which is mainly affected by this category) has no relation to the Romanian Mannlicher M1893" as Category:Dutch Mannlicher is for the Netherlands, not danish rifle. Also M1893 is a bolt action, not an straight pull like the Mannlicher M1895. Tm (talk) 12:00, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes! Sorry you are right. It's obviously a language error (I meant the Netherlands, of course). Also, I completely mixed up the models (I must have been thinking of something different at the time when i write it) ;) Sumek101 (talk) 12:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry for the confusion Sumek101 (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Porto, Portugal (49127170568).jpg[edit]

File:Porto, Portugal (49127170568).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

RodRabelo7 (talk) 03:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverts "People by name"[edit]

Hi TM, out of about 1200 reverts you did (and correctly), I went back to editing the 43 files that follow, and I hope I fixed all the mistakes I made earlier.

Title1	Title2	Title3	Title4
Lino Átila	Tibúrcio Joaquim Barreto Feio	Isabel de Saldanha da Gama	Gemeniana Branco
Master of Saint Blaise	António Leitão	Henrique Zeferino de Albuquerque	Belchior da Fonseca
Franco Fernandes	António Bernardino de Almeida	Elisa Baptista de Sousa Pedroso	Maria Germana de Castro Pereira
Carlos Aguiar	Mónica Kahlo	Adélia Heinz	Josefa de Sandoval y Pacheco
Xana	Eugénia Francisca Xavier Teles da Gama	Amélia de Carvalho Burnay	António de Vasconcelos e Sousa
João Vladimiro	Chei Krew	Palmira Torres	Júlia Adelaide Braamcamp
Afonso of Portugal	Costah	Luís de Almeida e Albuquerque	José Maria do Espírito Santo Silva
Ferdinand of Portugal	GODMESS	Décio Ferreira	Rosa da Mota
Sónia Matias	Hugo Sousa	Joana Chaves Hintze Ribeiro	Tó Viegas
Luís Ferreira	Joana Monteiro	Eugénia Mendes de Loureiro Relvas	Lina Demoel
João António de Pádua	Alexandra Aline Stjernvall	José Joaquim Fernandes	Júlia Labourdonnay Gonçalves Roque
Isabel of Portugal	Paula Cabaço	Zoé Batalha Reis

--JotaCartas (talk) 09:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ukraine Defense Contact Group is the correct name.[edit]

I opened a discussion here: Category talk:Ukraine Defense Consultative Group#Ukraine Defense Contact Group is the correct name. You created this category, so I wanted to notify you. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 23:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:IMG 2685 (8054248543).jpg[edit]

File:IMG 2685 (8054248543).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 01:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ghostly boats. (5510379055).jpg[edit]

File:Ghostly boats. (5510379055).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Adam37 (talk) 18:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverting sensible crops?[edit]

Why are you doing things like https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3APoul_Andersen_mf_2010.jpg&diff=742057842&oldid=736065908&diffmode=source ? Reverting this makes absolutely no sense. Hjart (talk) 15:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What uou call "sensible crops" are not that but are a substancial crop that changes aspects ratio, changes the composition, etc. Tm (talk) 16:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What I'm cropping is basically just empty space. I could create new files, but then the originals just would be practically useless. Hjart (talk) 16:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The images were upload, some by agents of portrayed people and others by the photographers themselfes. Wikimedia Commons exists to cater to many needs, not only yours, so upload your versions under a new filename. Tm (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that's basically just a bad excuse. I've categorized quite a lot of files and I can't imagine any of the uploaders here are aware of what happens to the files they have uploaded or have any need for them. Hjart (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If they uploaded these files as there are at the origin they either know that they ar usefull as is or themselves need them to use in one of Wikimedia Foundation projects. Also you are one user among innumerable users and if you need one croped version upload them under a new filename, not overwrite what others uploaded originally. Tm (talk) 18:12, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sometimes the photographer and uploader just don't take the time to crop the photo, or do whatever else would improve it. There is no reason to believe a photo is in the shape the photographer/uploader thinks is ideal – unless they themselves revert the modification, or the photo is a work of art, taken from a book, or otherwise with a source where great care can be assumed to have been made in getting a good image. I agree that these crops aren't minor, but I also agree with Hjart that the cropped photos (those that I checked) are better for any use I can think of (except for specifically studying the original, which can be done by clicking the original version).

If you, Tm, reverted out of principle, I think we should revert to the cropped versions. On the other hand, if you honestly think the originals are better for some uses, then we should revert to the uncropped versions. There is no use arguing about what version is better, and there is no one who can arbitrate, so if you insist, we should follow policy as written.

–LPfi (talk) 10:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've categorized quite a lot of files uploaded by complete newbies to Wikipedia, who appears to have had absolutely no idea about anything commons related. Considering the state in which I found several of the files I cropped (several years old and unused) , I find it quite unlikely, that anyone would have any specific purpose for those files in their original state. I'm convinced that your reverts will really do absolutely nothing but add to the clutter of this database. Hjart (talk) 10:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Adraga Overexposed (7887925174).jpg[edit]

File:Adraga Overexposed (7887925174).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 12:22, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Vitalino Canas.jpg[edit]

File:Vitalino Canas.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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Josegoulao (talk) 12:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Treasurer Rios Guest Teaching Personal Finance (5579817596).jpg[edit]

File:Treasurer Rios Guest Teaching Personal Finance (5579817596).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:05, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Secretary Geithner Visits BNSF Railway Dallas-Fort Worth, TX (6980281033).jpg[edit]

File:Secretary Geithner Visits BNSF Railway Dallas-Fort Worth, TX (6980281033).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:06, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Deputy Secretary Raskin at the American Bankers Association Meeting (19501596790).jpg[edit]

File:Deputy Secretary Raskin at the American Bankers Association Meeting (19501596790).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:07, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Secretary Lew speaks at the Christian Science Monitor breakfast (19494086064).jpg[edit]

File:Secretary Lew speaks at the Christian Science Monitor breakfast (19494086064).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cosplay of Tracer and D.Va from Overwatch at Animethon 24 - 2017 (35885255703).jpg[edit]

Hello. Why did you revert File:Cosplay of Tracer and D.Va from Overwatch at Animethon 24 - 2017 (35885255703).jpg to its old version? Minor color correction, noise reduction, perspective correction etc. are valid reasons to overwrite a file. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 00:13, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Die Werbeflächen am Flughafen BER werden ausnahmslos von anderen fossilen Firmen bespielt (50570120697).jpg[edit]

File:Die Werbeflächen am Flughafen BER werden ausnahmslos von anderen fossilen Firmen bespielt (50570120697).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

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

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

This image is definitely not de minims and not covered by FOP.--GPSLeo (talk) 09:36, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

COM:AN/U[edit]

العربية ∙ বাংলা ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tagalog ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Tm edit-warring categories. your edit-warring on File:UH-1Ds landing during Operation Bolling, September 1967.jpg. Thank you.

Mztourist (talk) 06:08, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Vitalino Canas.jpg[edit]

File:Vitalino Canas.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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Josegoulao (talk) 11:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ymer WMQ22 (4) (52191115288).jpg[edit]

Hi, this is not Mikael (File:Ymer WMQ22 (4) (52191115288).jpg), but it's Elias (File:Ymer WMQ22 (4).jpg). Cheers, Kacir (talk) 09:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

MartinoPhotos (talk) 16:19, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874192966).jpg[edit]

File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874192966).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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : A1Cafel.

And also:

File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874568045).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874634748).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874191346).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874363214).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874362414).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874570150).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52873614217).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874191231).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52874193471).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )
File:Buckingham Palace reception (52873612482).jpg ( Nominator : A1Cafel | Entry page : Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) )

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) 03:26, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:OK boomer (50328740462).jpg[edit]

Template:Autotranslate SaschaHolzhauer (talk) 10:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:PHP (9686748353).jpg[edit]

Template:Autotranslate SaschaHolzhauer (talk) 10:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

why the revert?[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gisele_Bundchen-011_Cropped.jpg FMSky (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why the constant overwriting of other people uploads and crops when they are in heavy use? Tm (talk) 19:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

perfectly fine if they are obvious improvements like in this case --FMSky (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it was not. Many times never is as those files are in heavy use without any problems but yet you have to overwrite other peoples work\uploads\crops for whatever reason. Tm (talk) 19:32, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Autotranslate[edit]

Template:Autotranslate Per https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=765221679#Reactivating_complaint_archived_without_Admin_action. I'm not going to bother reiterating what I wrote on COM:AN (click through if you don't recall) but you did exactly what I told you not to do.

I don't like blocking someone who is usually a good contributor, but you leave me no choice. - Jmabel ! talk 07:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jmabel This is utter ridiculous

Did Mztourist tell you that?

1~File:"Doe" Morris moves through heavy grass in a deserted rice paddy while on patrol during operation Kentucky V with A... - NARA - 532455.tif this image celarly shows a rifle with an lower receiver M16A1 and an upper XM16E1 as i said in the discussion and as Mztourist admited to that "that the gun has attributes of two different models, the XM16E1 and the M16A1"? I explained that this image could be categorized under the two categories as it is a good ecample of the use to two different receivers of two different models (i speculate that was made by us army armourer with parts of two damaged\unserviceable rifles). This image is such a good example of those frankstein rifles assorted from different models in use in the US Military, like some M16A1 receivers that were used with newer receivers until the 1990´s in the USAF (if my memory is correct) but it seems Mztourist want to impose his will albeit all the discussions, like as he showed that he did not knew what differented an Xm16E1 from an M16A1 or understand what he sees.

2 - File:Lieutenant Colonel R. Duke examines a captured Vietcong helmet worn by an ARVN officer.jpg clearly shows a Pattern 1951 Canadian holster for the Browning Hi-Power pistol that was also in use with the Australian Army, as i showed in the edit description, detail that Mztourist conveniently forgets to say.

3 - File:NARA 111-CCV-569-CC44318 4th Infantry Division soldiers watching artillery strike Task Force Oregon 1967.jpg The image is clear enough to see that the muzzzle is of an XM16E1, his royal majesty Mztourist insists that he doesnt see one. Well if he knew anything he would open this image in a photo editor and invert colours and see what muzzle type it is, like i did. There you see that when i say something with such conviction i did my research contrary to what Mztourist does that is to now know what he is talking

4 - File:CS gas, Operation Pershing, July 1967.jpg Mztourist insists in deleting valid categories when the categories are clearly valid.

This vengefull user reopened that discussion just to try exert revenge against someone that has showed that many times he doesnt know what he is talking about but demands that other explain their edits, they (me) explain their edits, but not satisfied now wants to block them.

Ok. Point taken, that Commons enables, promotes and aids ignorant vengefull users to harass other users instead of ones that loose their time to do the proper research. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mztourist removes from several valid categories from File:"Doe" Morris moves through heavy grass in a deserted rice paddy while on patrol during operation Kentucky V with A... - NARA - 532455.tif with flimsy excuse like of "has attributes of XM16E1 and M16A1, so not appropriate to have either category" (Template:Diff), so instead of adding the M16A category he remove the XM16E1 category with that flimsy excuse, when there are valid reasons for the two categories for the motives that i said above, besides removing several other valid categories from the same file as "overcat" (Template:Diff)

He did the same removal of several other valid categories from File:CS gas, Operation Pershing, July 1967.jpg and when it is seen that this is an XM16E1 if he had open this image in a photo editor and invert colours and see what muzzle type it is and the presence of a forward assistant. But that user cannot be bothered to do a modicum of proper research. (Template:Diff)

In File:Lieutenant Colonel R. Duke examines a captured Vietcong helmet worn by an ARVN officer.jpg willfully ignores that the holster is and "Pattern 1951 Canadian holster" made for hostering the Browning Hi-Power pistol, used by the Australian army, fact that i pointed out (Template:Diff) but he proptly ignored (Template:Diff)

File:NARA 111-CCV-569-CC44318 4th Infantry Division soldiers watching artillery strike Task Force Oregon 1967.jpg he removed the XM16E1 category albeit i pointed to you that if he would open this image in a photo editor and invert colours and see what muzzle type is of an XM16E1.

But, alas, it seems that not knowing nothing of what one talks about and willfully ignoring when others point out why that categories are valid is compensated- The users that show that they have made proper research and\or have knowledge and a user doing proper research are punished in compesation.

More than a month after the several discussions and edits by several users were done and closed, this user just reopened that closed discussion in the administrator board with what purpose? Why did he started again with edit warring with removal of proper categories, that had already been discussed? He waited a month for what reason? Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:20200205 Fatima 6644 (49657912886).jpg[edit]

Template:Autotranslate Danuše21 ([[User talk:Danuše21|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:26, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

↑ Template:Cita web

[1] Template:Cita web

[1]