Ö

Welcome to the Commons, Ö!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Sorry on that one

re: these fixups and the moves before that... I'm afraid I'd overgeneralized, this was the first I've really dealt with 'Article space' over here, and the Categories are to be in English-- which I extended in error. As far as those fixups go... navigate via the link and see the finished table on the en.wp. I'm chasing down email change notices right now... but shouldn't need much tweaking to work here if you want to bring it over. Cheers! // FrankB 04:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate warning

There used to be a warning if you were uploading something that had the same name as an existing file, but now there isn't. I accidentally uploaded over this and another file today (though the other was one of mine that wasn't as good). Is that warning just not working today, or has it been removed? IFCAR 15:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I do see that, but even that used to show up more prominently. Sometimes I can't even see it on my screen, and there used to be thumbnail icon of the other image. But if you accidentally hit enter with the warning, it just lets you go through with it now without another page showing up. I miss that feature. IFCAR 16:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Potd

There can be used QI not only FP on picture of the day!

I'm going to revert your edit!

--WarX 08:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

So sorry - my mistake, :( fix it please ;)

--WarX 17:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

NSRW categories

Hey, I renamed all the categories per your suggestions (though I kept the preposition consistent: both Images from... and Pages from...). Let me know what you think. --Spangineer^en ws (háblame) 03:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Restore

Done. Please put a note in both file pages about how they are different. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Creating redirects for orphaned an deleted duplicates

Hi. Could you please explain why the heck you are creating redirects for orphaned an deleted duplicates? Cheers! Siebrand 22:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

So that links to the images still works. /Ö 10:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

There is absolutely no need for that... The media are not deleted before they have been orphaned. In my opinion you are wasting your time you could spend better... Cheers! Siebrand 12:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Redirects are not needed for all deleted duplicates. But for all images that has been in use on Wikimedia projects it is needed to avoid red links in old page versions. And for all images created by Wikimedia users and are used outside Wikimedia it is needed so that reusers can link to an image page here.

It is difficult to find out if an image has been used in Wikimedia projects, and impossible to know which images are reused or linked to from outside Wikimedia. That means that all deleted duplicates needs to be redirected. The admins who delete images should follow the instructions in Category:Duplicate and redirect the deleted files. /Ö 14:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

There is not requirement in Cat:D to create redirs and there is no need for that requirement. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The requirement is in the deletion guidelines, see the discussions at Commons talk:Deletion guidelines#Deleting duplicates. The important point is that CommonsDelinker can not delink links from outside Wikimedia. /Ö 13:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

It only states that "Heavily used files can be deleted, then redirected.", however I get the impression you are almost redirecting every image such as here Image:Archduchess Maria Christina, Duchess of Teschen.JPG. Please stop doing that, it really is not necessary, unless the image is Mona Lisa IMO. Gryffindor (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

deprecated function in your monobook.js

Dear user, I noticed that you use the includePage function in your monobook.js page.

This function is now obsolete, as the importScript function was introduced with rev:35064 to the MediaWiki Javascript core library wikibits.js. It also keeps track of already imported files.

To allow us to remove includePage from Mediawiki:Common.js I'd kindly ask you to replace its use with importScript (same syntax!). Thanks! --Dschwen 17:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Duplicates

Thanks for the tip. I had used check usage, but hadn't realised the type of use you mentioned. I'll search better next time. Cheers. Lycaon (talk) 19:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Renaming von Glodedn

That's ok with me, Thx. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 22:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Answered

there : Commons_talk:Rename#Instead_of_signing_here... .Yug (talk) 19:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

van Gogh Cleanup Project '08

Hi "Ö", in case "Ö" stands for you being Austrian, please tell me, it would help a lot if I could talk in German.

Anyways I'd like your advice on optimized design of file names, and on categorizing, since you commented on Betacommand's talk page recently.

Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh got meanwhile somewhat "clumsy" to read, that's why hardly anybody comments and I meanwhile prefer to ask single persons on their opinion about certain cases. I recently talked to M. Manske on this, but would dislike "overdoing" it ;) So, worst case, you would be asked (a total of) 10-15 questions. Maybe just 5. Waiting for reply, and probably not commenting within less than 12-18 hrs. Best, -- Wolfgang (talk) 12:34, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

It is the Swedish letter Ö, so unfortunately I don't understand German. If you think I can help, feel free to ask questions. I think that good filenames for paintings should at least include the name of tha painter and some kind of title of the painting. I don't think it is very important if the name is "van Gogh", "Vincent van Gogh" or "Vincent Villem van Gogh", if different files use different names they can be sorted in categories with [[Category:...|Van Gogh, ...]]. Titles of works are more difficult, since there is not always a single title, but including a title will make a more descriptive file name. /Ö 15:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, first: thanks for answering at all. For starting, I copy here my proposal from November 1, on Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh#Talk_on_File_names which was not commented but by user:Gryffindor, with whom I unfortunately highly disagree. So, my question to you would be: Do YOU see anything wrong in a filename like

van Gogh 1888-04--1888-05, Arles - Peach Tree in Blossom F_404 JH_1391.jpg, which means,
v.Gogh -- date, location created -- English title of the picture
Furthermore both "quasi-official" F_ and JH_ catalogue raisonné numbers, as sole perfect identifiers (work's titles are quite arbitrary, and their translations are even more arbitrary). [...] --Wolfgang (Diskussion) 10:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC) [Note: vGogh did more often than once "replicas" of his own work, which in some cases are quite difficult to be distinguished; see, e.g., Category:Bedroom_in_Arles ].

As of now, I first will "Defaultsort" existing files in this category, and sub-categorize as much as imo useful. This will sort the oeuvre, as actually existing on COM, according rather precisely researched creation-date+place, and display one-beneath-the-other all those up-to-5 multiple files from same piece of art. I left a statement about those on Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh#On_"Duplicates".

In step_2, I might either improve on existing file descriptions, i.e. making all ~350 of them ONE style, or, [I'm not yet certain whichone is to be preferred as "Step_2, the otherone would be Step__3] add some ~100 items, because the category as-is terribly lacks vG's draughtmanship, which is the bigger part of his oeuvre and which influences his painting, all those 10 years he worked as an artist, in a way which up-to-now was insufficiantly documented. It besides is short of his early works. WP has focused, up-to-now, on "average consumer's "great-to-look-at-&-famous" oil paintings, as unfortunately did most of the rest of the world.

cu, Wolfgang (talk) 17:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

The only thing I think maybe is strange is that two different identifier numbers are in the title. But I don't know much about the numbers, so maybe it makes sense to use both numbers. Other than that I see nothing wrong with names like that. I think the information in the name is useful, and I don't think anything important is missing (and we have description pages so all possible information does not need to be in the title).

Sorry for taking so long to answer. /Ö 23:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Template_talk:Painting#Location_created

Hi Ö, I would like to have your opinon, there. There is almost no traffic for quite a while and I need to have some feedback on my proposal, ASAP.

Further, I created today "Category:Drawings and other by van Gogh in the Van Gogh Museum" and a paternal category, for a trial run. At the moment, COM has many of those fancy vGogh paintings, but more than half of vG's work is draughtmanship, and I'd like to create some better balanced view on the oeuvre, soon. I'm uncertain about correct category names, and too stupid to learn it from Commons:Naming categories. A similar question which I asked Siebrand, User_talk:Siebrand#Let's_come_to_the_point: is not answered for three weeks. Do you think my language sounded unfriendly? I for sure did not want to be unfriendly in this case.

"Category:Drawings and other by van Gogh in the Van Gogh Museum" should contain everything except paintings, as I wrote in the description. I was reluctant to create more differentiated similar categories, because they would hold too few items, I suppose. Thisone might however keep two or three dozen, soon. Thanks, and I hope you can afford the time to have a look at my questions before Monday (this is when I really would like to start filling this CAT). 08:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Categories for different kinds of works seems lika a good idea. My English is not good enough to say what is a correct category name in English, so I cannot help much with that. I don't like the "and other" in the name. I would prefer to have a parent category with subcategories for the specific types of works (paintings, drawings, and maybe more types), and if other works does not fit in those subcategories they can be directly in the parent category. But you probably know better what categories are useful. /Ö 00:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you were en=4. Actually, I addressed (with little success) quite some people with my questions, especially for finding better category names, and therefore forgot to pass by here to "update". An overwiew on actual Categories can be found at Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh#Category:Van_Gogh_Collections, Talk (does not happen) should be on Category_talk:Vincent_van_Gogh#Talk or at the bottom of this page. As of now, I call it "Draftsmanship by Vincent van Gogh...", e.g. Category:Draftsmanship by Vincent van Gogh in the Van Gogh Museum. To me, it is quite sad that there is so little feedback on my proposals for that long time, and then renames are done "at once" without talking about (which happened, earlier; I refer to it there), but I learn to live with it. eod on thisone, here. Thanks. Wolfgang 04:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Christmas SPAM.

Hi, I'm aware that Christmas greetings are more-or-less to be considered to be SPAM, but I can't help:
Here is one more, which is from me.
Although I might have [and might in the future] disagree with you, I'd like to ascertain you that I respect and love you. Believe it or not. [w.] 16:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Deletion

What you think is also not a valid reason for leaving unnecessary redirects. Point me to a Commons rule saying that we need to have redirects from deleted dupes. odder 10:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

See point 4 in Template:Duplicate/en. And also the discussion at Commons talk:Deletion policy#Deleting duplicates, especially the comments by Tim Starling: "The old name will still work, as required for compatibility with external sites." /Ö 19:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Restoration

I restorate the previous system. First, note that the project is still under construction, which means that I [organisator/manager O.o] I'm still thinking about the best ways to process. To help me, talk first. I have a global view on this project, and if I set things like that, there are some reasons. The best is to talk on the project page, I'm open to suggestions. Edit too fast cause a lot of confusion. As you can see there, I will be away for some days. But your suggestions are welcome. Explain me as clearly as possible, I will look at them soon. Bye Yug (talk) 10:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Huh?

Why did you delete the move request regarding heads of state automobiles? Ingolfson (talk) 09:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. But if I did something it was probably by mistake. /Ö 09:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

You just did an edit at the delinker which overwrote a move request I had placed shortly before. But if it was just a mistake, no worries. Ingolfson (talk) 09:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Sunne Eagle Jussi Mäntynen 02.jpg

I think File:Sunne Eagle Jussi Mäntynen 02.jpg should not be in Category:Värmland, since it belongs in Category:Sunne, which is a sub-category of Category:Värmland. --Zejo (talk) 12:51, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Men stenen under örnen visar hela Värmland, inte bara Sunne. /Ö 12:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Jaha, du menar så...--Zejo (talk) 13:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Redigering av bilder

Ser du gjort någon sorts redigering med bland annat mina bilder. Vad är det du har gjort? Sen om du redigerar om någon annans bilder, skriv vad du gör tack. Ångrar tillbaka annars. MVH Danielåhskarlsson (talk) 15:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Jag kategoriserar bilderna (just nu svenska sångare) i mera specifika kategorier. En bild som ligger i en sångares egen kategori behöver inte också ligga i överkategorin för svenska sångare. /Ö 15:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

okey, vet inte riktigt hur du menar nu. Då kan man ju lika gärna ta bort kategorierna "Category:Musicians from Sweden", "Category:Vocalists from Sweden", "Category:Television people from Sweden" osv? Jag håller inte med dig och tycker det kan vara skönt att glida runt bland någon av ovanstående gallerier, sen tycker jag det är en bonus om alla artister har sitt eget namn som en kategori. Vill gärna höra fler personers åsikter om detta, för jag gillar inte det du gör om, men ja ger efter om andra tycker att ovanstående kategorier är överflödiga. MVH Danielåhskarlsson (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Problemet är att om alla bilder på svenska sångare skulle ligga direkt i samma kategori så skulle den bli väldigt stor och svår att hitta något i. Det finns en sida om kategorisering där avsnittet Commons:Categories#Over-categorization handlar om just det här typen av kategorisering. Exemplet där är att bilder på Albert Einstein bara ska ligga i Category:Albert Einstein och inte i Category:Physicists from Germany. /Ö 15:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Är helt med på din idé, men du skapar många frågor nu. Vem bestämmer vilka artister som ska vara bland "Category:Musicians from Sweden", "Category:Vocalists from Sweden", "Category:Television people from Sweden" osv? Ska jag följa hela din tanke bana så ska inga bilder alls finnas under de kategorierna och alla bilder ligger under artisten/personens egna namn. Så du ska tömma dessa tre exempelkategorier helt på bilder? Danielåhskarlsson (talk) 15:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Alla svenska sångare kan vara med i "Vocalists from Sweden", men helst genom att bilderna ligger i underkategorier för de olika artisterna. På samma sätt är det med musiker i musikerkategorin och TV-personer i TV-personskategorin. Jag kommer inte själv ta bort alla bilder från de här kategorierna eftersom jag inte gillar att skapa kategorier med bara en bild i, så en del bilder blir kvar. Men i princip tror jag att alla bilder i kategorierna kan flyttas till underkategorier för enskilda personer. /Ö 15:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Okey, men om vi säger så här. Nu laddar jag upp en ny bild, vilka kategorier ska det vara? Imagebydan... + personens namn och sen inget mer? Bildas en underkategori i vocalists automatiskt om jag alltså skapar en mapp med (exempel) Elin Lanto Danielåhskarlsson (talk) 16:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Jag tycker att de två kategorierna räcker när du laddar upp en bild. För att skapa en underkategori så får du gå till exempelvis Category:Elin Lanto, redigera den sidan och lägga till texten [[Category:Vocalists from Sweden]]. (Fast just Elin Lanto har redan en kategori som är en underkategori, så du får pröva med någon annan artist) /Ö 20:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

J:son

Category:Jacob J:son Gate (which you created): is this really correctly named? From the one image in which the name appears it seems to be Jacob J^son Gate, which of course we can't do in the category scheme. Wouldn't that simply be a shortened form of Jacob Jonson Gate? Or am I mistaken? - Jmabel ! talk 03:33, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I used the same name as the article in Swedish Wikipedia. I don't know if that is his real name in official records, or if it is just the name he is most known as. But some Swedish people really have such shortened forms with colons as their official names. /Ö 14:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Bro kyrka

Hej, såg att du omkategoriserade kategorinBro kyrka. Är inte säker på att Bro kyrka, Lysekil nödvändigtvis var det bästa namnet, men med tanke på wikipedia:sv:Bro kyrka tycker jag ändå att det finns en poäng i att kunna skilja på kyrkorna, så varför inte lika gärna göra det från början? /Julle (talk) 21:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Att kommunnamnet inte är den bästa särskiljningen kom jag på ganska snabbt (bl.a. för att det är för lätt att blanda ihop kommunen med tätorten). Så det ändrade jag nästan direkt till landskapet "Bohuslän", som länken på grensidan på Wikipedia. Andra alternativ kan vara stift, som artikelnamnet på Wikipedia, eller län. Men det tycker jag blir onödigt långa namn: "Bro kyrka, Diocese of Göteborg", "Bro kyrka, Göteborgs stift" eller "Bro kyrka, Västra Götalands län". /Ö 13:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Church photo

I would like to point out that we did not throw the church picture away. We just moved it one day forward, to October 1, instead of a butterfly - because as JovanCormac pointed out, the POTD for the first days of October was dominated by butterflies. See for yourself. Airwolf (talk) 10:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Category talk:Sylvia

Hello Ö - this topic that you have contributed to before, has become active again. Letting you know in case you wish to comment any more - MPF (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Why remove source category

Interested to know your motivation behind this edit - specifically why you removed the source category, source that contributed all these free images to WM? SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Source categories are for individual images, not for entire categories of images of a person. Even if currently all images are from that archive it is possible that someone else uploads images from some other source, so the cateorisation is incorrect. Compare to the categorisation of (for example) American astronauts. For many of them all images are from NASA, but still the NASA source category only contains images. /Ö 22:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

All of those images of Adolphson are from Southerly Clubs. So we should go through about 700 images in these subcategories and put back the Southerly Clubs category on each one? You removed the explanation we put in about the creation of that subcat - ??? - So there are to be no subcategories under any source categories in the entire Commons project according to you? Any constructive ideas? SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

All images of Adolphson already are directly in the club cateogry, so they do not need it put back. I don't know how it is in other categories, but if other images from this archive are only included in the archive category by a subcategory then the category should be put back. I don't think I am the only user who think that source categories should not have this kind of subcategories. /Ö 11:36, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Norske bøker

Er det verkeleg turvande å leggja alle dei norske bøkene i kategorien Category:Scanned Norwegian books når dei allereie ligg i kategorien Category:No Wikisource book djvu? Sistnemnde er jo ein underkategori av den fyrste. V85 (talk) 22:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Det är kanske inte ett problem nu, men om andra projekt bidrar med norska böcker så kan det bli problem om det skapas flera projektkategorier för böcker. Då blir det svårt att veta vilket projekt som kan ha bidragit med böcker man är intresserad av. Därför är det bättre att alla böcker är samlade i en språkkategori oavsett vem som laddat upp dem till Commons. /Ö 23:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Javel... Du gjer som du vil, men for meg verkar det å vera dobbelt opp... :-) V85 (talk) 23:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Personer

Anledningen till att jag kategoriserar personerna under årtal är att det ändå finns ett land som de förknippas med. J 1982 (talk) 21:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Bad name

Hi,

I have a badname picture. Delete it, please. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Andrew_II_of_Hungary_seal.svg

Bye,

Madboy74 (talk) 20:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I am not an administrator, so I can not delete. But I made a change [1] so that an administrator can find and delete the picture. /Ö 21:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2009 / Hunting of the Snark

Hi Ö ! You supported the picture Hunting of the snark for the picture of the year.
But you forgot to use the correct voting syntax : {{2009POTY/Vote|Eligible user account}} !
Shouldn't you correct it ?
Hoping to help,
Trace (talk) 09:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I fixed it. /Ö 11:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Now you can fix this one ;) - Trace (talk) 12:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

And this other one !
Incredible ! We really like the same pictures !
Trace (talk) 12:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

And also this one, this one, this one and this last one.
Maybe you could check all your votes ?
Regards, Trace (talk) 12:53, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

People by name

Category:Men by given name is sub-category of both Category:People by name and Category:Men. Isn’t putting back into Category:People by name is against the COM:OVERCAT policy, or am I wrong?--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 19:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

When I looked i did not see that "Men by given name" (or "Men by name") was a subcategory of "people by name". But I don't think it should be. The purpose of "by name" categories is to collect all things of some kind in a single category without having to look in subcategories.

"By name" is also the standard way to sort people in the more specific categories. For example "Actresses from Sweden" is sorted by name, so it would be a subcateogry of "Women by name" which would be a subcat of "People by name", and then we would just have got a copy of the ordinary category structure for people.

A difference to other sort criteria is that "by name" contains its contents directly and not in subcategories. For example "people by country" has its contents in "people of France", "people of Germany", and so on, and it is still possible to first select those subcateries even if there is a "men by country". But if "people by name" is divided into men and women "by name" it is not possible to navigate by name anymore. You can not first choose people with names starting with "Smit", you have to first choose between men and women. /Ö 17:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Photo categories

Thanks for sorting my photos to more specific categories! Dmitry G (talk) 11:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Forshagafors

Hej! Vad var skälet till raderingen? Var det att det var en karta? MVH Gräsmark (talk) 17:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Det har i alla fall att göra med att det är en karta. Blir en karta fri från upphovsrätt genom att man fotograferar den? Det tycker jag skulle vara konstigt. Därför startade jag diskussionen på Commons:Deletion requests/File:Forshagaforsinfo.jpg för att få ett bra svar på den frågan. /Ö 12:55, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Removing source category

What, may I ask cordially, do you mean by removing the source Category:Ristesson History from several category pages? Intentional or mistake? SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Only files need sources. Categories are collections of many images from different sources. So a category for a person (or some other subject) should not hava a "source category". Even if right now all images of a person are from the same source, it is still possible that files from other sources are uploaded and added to the category for that person. /Ö 21:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Those two categories were created by me or other users also representing the interests of the Southerly Clubs and need to be sourced so we can keep an eye on them easily. This is particularly important to us regarding living people who are personal friends of the chairman, or other subjects to which he or other members have particularly close associations. I would ask you kindly to stop interfering in the system we have meticulously devised to keep track of images and categories we have donated or created. We have no problems at all with other images being added, but your removal of our categories serves no constructive purpose that I can see. SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I do understand that you want to keep track on your images, but I cannot understand that that would be the way to do it. Establishing it as a practice might result in many people adding their own categories to categories they are interested in. There is a short discussion of the topic (with some suggestions about how to handle the tracking) in the Village pump archives. --LPfi (talk) 08:48, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

There is also a discussion started at Commons:Bybrunnen. --LPfi (talk) 08:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to stick my nose in here. Image source categories are rather standard practice (see Category:Image sources). Category:Ristesson History is properly hidden and it could be renamed, but otherwise I don't see a problem with it. howcheng {chat} 16:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The problem is not the category, but that it contains other cateogries. /Ö 21:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

To keep track of categories you can make a list of them on your user page (or a subpage). /Ö 21:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

After a board meeting in 2008 the Southerly Clubs chose this method, using categories and subcategories, after surveying several options with expert help at Commons. The Ristesson category and a number of others we have created, as well, have no reason to exist otherwise. Would you kindly respect our system, which does not go against any specific Commons policy? This is now the second time I am asking you to do so. That's why I wrote to you. You need not reply again, unless you feel it is important to you that we keep arguing this. Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

May I ask how you would suggest me doing if I happened to upload an image to some of the topic categories in this tree? In the root category I read that all images in the subcategories are from the Southerly Clubs. This is the problem for me. --LPfi (talk) 14:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You are quite right that the text now could be clearer on the root category's page and I have now edited it accordingly. The intention has also been to clarify on each page of each subcategory that it only ws started by the Southerly Clubs and that additional images from other sources are most welcome there. I will look at this, beginning with Ristesson's subcat/source page. Thank you for helping me try to clarify this! SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

This should of course not have been missing in the introductory text for the subcategories that this discussion began with. Thank you both again for helping identify the problem. I will do my best to see to it that this gets fixed all over, like it was from the beginning. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. And thank you for the pictures. --LPfi (talk) 09:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Svenskt Porträttgalleri

Tack för allt jobb som du lagt ner för att kategorisera bilderna. :) Hälsningar AlphaZeta (talk) 11:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Tack själv för att du scannat och laddat upp bilderna. Det måste också varit mycket jobb. /Ö 12:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Förresten saknar jag File:Johan Axel (Acke) Gustaf Andersson - from Svenskt Porträttgalleri XX.png från sida 8 i del XX. Vet inte om den inte laddats upp eller om den har hamnat under ett annat namn. /Ö 12:22, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Hoppsan. Den råkade hamna under fel namn. File:John Axel Gustaf Andersson - from Svenskt Porträttgalleri XX.png. Satte nu in en request att byta den till rätt namn. Hälsningar AlphaZeta (talk) 16:09, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Revert on Category:Abdalá Bucaram

Hi,

why did you revert my changes added to Category:Abdalá Bucaram? Regards. Badzil (talk) 12:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I added categories directly in the category and added a DEFAULTSORT. That makes it easier for bots and tools and people to work with the categories. /Ö 12:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the explanation. Badzil (talk) 12:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Ö. You have new messages at JotaCartas's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Clean up after JarektBot

Thanks for cleaning after my bot. I noticed several categories to which I incorrectly added Category:People by name and all of the were already fixed by you. --Jarekt (talk) 21:15, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry)

Category discussion notification

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

--ŠJů (talk) 19:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Winged arrows in heraldry‎

If you're going to add images to this category, then (after a short time) you should actually create the category... AnonMoos (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Nordiska museet

Hej.

Sag att du borjat pilla med de nya bilderna fran Nordiska museet. Undrar om du skulle vara intresserad av att formulera vad som behovs goras for bilderna (Commons:Nordiska museet/Todo med diskussionssida) samt ev. komma med forslag pa vad som skulle kunna forbattras redan vid uppladdningen (Commons:Batch_uploading/Nordiska_Museet#Post_trial_run). Vi la t.ex. market till at repro fotografen flyttats till "source" faltet vilket vi inte tankt pa innan. MVH /Lokal_Profil 11:32, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

redirect

Hi Ö, what's the sense in creating an unused and unneeded redirect?!? axp_de^Hello! 16:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Redirects are needed when files are renamed to avoid broken links from reusers of Commons images. Moving without redirects should only be done if the old name is really wrong. /Ö 16:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

The old filename isn't used anywhere and the "V" is definitely wrong. axp_de^Hello! 16:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

How do you know that the name is not used anywhere? Any reuser who linked to the file before the rename would have used an url to the old name. I don't think a single letter is so wrong that someone would be mislead by it. /Ö 17:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

All usage within wikimedia projects can be listed via Special:GlobalUsage. Usage outside wmf is not our problem. It's quite a lot of work to do caring for our own problems ... axp_de^Hello! 14:03, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

It is more work to delete redirects than to not do it. The whole point of creating a free media repository (or free encylopaedias, free dictionaries, free news, ...) is so that people can reuse it. There is no need to create problems for reusers when it is just as easy to not do that. /Ö 19:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Why???

Your work:

18:05, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Alexander churches in Poland ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 18:04, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Alexander churches in Italy ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 18:04, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Alexander churches in Germany ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 18:03, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Alexander churches in Finland ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 18:02, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Aldegonde churches in Germany ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 18:00, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Aldegonde churches in Belgium ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:59, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albuin churches in Italy ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:59, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albinus churches in Italy ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:58, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albinus churches in France ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:57, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albertus Magnus churches in Italy ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:57, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albertus churches in Germany ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:57, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albertus Magnus churches in France ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:56, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albertus Magnus churches in Belgium ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:56, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albert Chmielowski churches in the United States ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina) 17:55, 29 mag 2011 (diff | cron) Category:Saint Albert Chmielowski churches in Poland ‎ (remove unneeded middle category) (ultima per la pagina)

Why, if the same categories have metacategories? Policy? Your POV?--Threecharlie (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

The by country subcategories is not necessary since the Churches by patron saint categories are not sorted in any other way than by country (even if there was no support for this sorting in the Churches by patron saint discussion). Therefor the by country subcategories are just an extra step that users has to click through to actually find any churches. The path down the category three can shortened from

"Churches by patron saint" -> "Saint X churches" -> "Saint X churches by country" -> "Saint X churches in Counry Y" -> "Some Saint X church"

to

 "Churches by patron saint" -> "Saint X churches" -> "Saint X churches in Counry Y" -> "Some Saint X church"

/Ö 17:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Please stop your work in this categories. These are all usual categorizations. Please do not destroy the work of many, only you have another opinion. --NeverDoING (talk) 06:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

FPCBot

Hej, ursäkta att det tog tid men jag såg just på problemet du rapporterade här. Säg gärna till när du ser en sån kandidat igen så vi kan verifiera om det fungerade. /Daniel78 (talk) 10:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

I saw you where helping me with categories. Thanks, I'm pretty new on commons and try to do my best, but have not learnt all yet. Best regards/ Adville (talk) 10:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

hotcat

please use the +⁺-sign (on the left), which allows to change, remove or add multiple categorys. --Akkakk (talk) 08:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Restore intro pls

Hello Ö!

Will you please restore this intro:

• The category includes images with a direct connection to Swedish entertainer Christer Lindarw of Stockholm.

to the top of that category's page?

I am prevented from doing so because of an Interaction ban. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done already. mvh SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Reversion

I place my edit after a request on my talk page - please explain why it was wrong and with no edit summary? --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:22, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

It is not wrong. But I was asked in the section above to write something else. I thought that "for more information, see" is not how categories are usually how categories are described at Commons. Therefor I made an edit and wrote something more like what I was asked to write. /Ö 18:29, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The absence of explanation in an edit summary is not good - I'm unhappy about that. I was also asked to write something and I did - I'll not bother in future --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm very sorry about the colliding good intentions here, and I'll be glad to take the blame. Everyone got busy with this and it all happened in a matter of seconds. Ö had just made another edit there. Herbythyme had made his while I was aking Ö, as involved, to help. Once again, sorry! Sincerely, SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Replacement of assessments template

Could I ask why have you replaced the assessments template some other user had added in 7 April 2010. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 16:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Dance_video_games

Dance video games 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!

W like wiki (talk) 04:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Template:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekt Südtirol

Hey, I saw that you are the author of the Swedish version of the Template:Rijksmonument. Since I am engaged in the South Tyrolean monuments project, I wanted to kindly ask you, if you could provide a translation for the Template:Denkmalgeschütztes Objekt Südtirol, as well. The Google Translator make me believe that the final version should be something like Det här är en bild (? shouldn't be necessarily a photo...)/en kategori av det skyddade objektet med nummer ... i Sydtyrolen. Is that an acceptable version? Cheers, --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Special:Permalink/88219739#Bug in Birds gallery Thank you.

(I just moved it back because otherwise the statistics tool would not work correctly; but the redirect should also work; POTY App btw. does not care for these links (it uses the file names) - that's you are the first who found this issue.) -- Rillke^(q?) 10:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I did the same to some other pages. I assume that also breaks that tool, so I will move back those pages too. /Ö 12:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Join the discussion

Please join the discussion about the length of caption of Potd. You can have your say in here. --관인생략 (talk) 11:30, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar – restoring deleted comments

		The Original Barnstar
		After I spent time fixing a similar problem on enwiki (en:Wikipedia_talk:SOPA_initiative/Action/Archive_1#RfC_page_is_busted_again), I was given a barnstar. I believe that you deserve a similar token of appreciation for your hard work ([2], [3], [4]). --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 18:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. /Ö 19:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Keep up the good work. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/Ö⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

• In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Ö,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

• In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
• In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured sets

I just noticed that you are involved in set maintenance;so appreciating your view on this discussion. Jee 07:06, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Princess_Margarita_of_Romania

Princess Margarita of Romania 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!

ImperialArchivesRU (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Category:Princess_Margarita_of_Romania

Princess Margarita of Romania 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!

ImperialArchivesRU (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Broken links

I'm fixing the broken links to Rome CoA's on sv.wp, I really don't know why it didn't work the first time... Anyway, if you find other problems with Rome images, please let me know! Cheers, --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 10:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Stemma Appio Latino (vect.).svg

File:Stemma Appio Latino (vect.).svg has been marked for speedy deletion. A reason for the tagging has not been detected or none was placed. Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

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

And also:

• File:Stemma Flaminio (vect.).svg ( Nominator : Sannita )
• File:Stemma Gianicolense (vect.).svg ( Nominator : Sannita )
• File:Stemma Monte Sacro (vect.).svg ( Nominator : Sannita )
• File:Stemma Nomentano (vect.).svg ( Nominator : Sannita )
• File:Stemma Portuense (vect.).svg ( Nominator : Sannita )

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 (talk) 11:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Category:Ypenburg_Airfield

Ypenburg Airfield 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!

Andy Dingley (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2023 (UTC)