User talk:Andre Kritzinger

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Andre Kritzinger!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Watermarks[edit]

Please do not upload any more images with a watermark, and do not remove the {Watermark} templates. - Erik Baas (talk) 23:32, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the ones I removed - took about three of them before I realised where they came from. I'll do what I can about removing the inscriptions before uploading, but it will not always be possible. Andre Kritzinger (talk) 23:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, thank you. - Erik Baas (talk) 00:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

SAR category names[edit]

Hi. In future, if you want a mass-recat done, you might find it easier to either use Catalot (available via the preferences > gadgets menu), or, for simple renaming, ask an admin to task CommonsDelinker to do it - it's a lot easier than manually altering every image yourself. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:10, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

You can also do mass moves by replacing the category page by {{category redirect|category to redirect to}}. This also helps as it any images which do end up in the category will automatically be moved. One final thing, rather than blanking cats, please request they instead be deleted - that way they won't show up on tools like HotCat as a legitimate category. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm learning.... André Kritzinger (talk) 00:23, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Feel free to ask questions on my talk page if you need a hand. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:01, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

File:SAR Class 33-000 33-007.JPG[edit]

Please do not upload any more images with a watermark. - Erik Baas (talk) 23:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I crop them off or search for the originals wherever I can, but cropping wasn't possible on this one and the original is no longer in my archives. André Kritzinger (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Something like that should be easy enough to paint out. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I've been amazed at what the photolab folks can do! André Kritzinger (talk) 00:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

SA train images for deletion[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Electrically-hauled express train in Natal, South Africa (CJ Allen, Steel Highway, 1928).jpg

Thought you might be interested, and might even know something about South African copyright issues. The main issue is really at the category deletion page. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_545_1983-04-27_10c_Class_S2_3781.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_545_1983-04-27_10c_Class_S2_3781.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_546_1983-04-27_20c_Class_16E_858.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_546_1983-04-27_20c_Class_16E_858.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_547_1983-04-27_25c_Class_6H_627.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_547_1983-04-27_25c_Class_6H_627.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_548_1983-04-27_40c_Class_15F_2954.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_548_1983-04-27_40c_Class_15F_2954.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_715_1990-02-15_18c_Cahora_Bassa.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_715_1990-02-15_18c_Cahora_Bassa.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_716_1990-02-15_30c_Railways.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_716_1990-02-15_30c_Railways.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_717_1990-02-15_40c_Highlands.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_717_1990-02-15_40c_Highlands.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RSA_SACC_718_1990-02-15_50c_Onderstepoort.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:RSA_SACC_718_1990-02-15_50c_Onderstepoort.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SWA_SACC_459_1985-08-02_12c_Zwillinge.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:SWA_SACC_459_1985-08-02_12c_Zwillinge.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SWA_SACC_460_1985-08-02_25c_Feldspur_Tank.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:SWA_SACC_460_1985-08-02_25c_Feldspur_Tank.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SWA_SACC_461_1985-08-02_30c_Jung_0-6-2T.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:SWA_SACC_461_1985-08-02_30c_Jung_0-6-2T.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SWA_SACC_462_1985-08-02_50c_Class_NG5.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:SWA_SACC_462_1985-08-02_50c_Class_NG5.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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

E1600[edit]

Hi there, we, myself and three other fellow employees had the task of rewiring and restoring this Locomotive. We are at the final stage of completion and commisioning should start in the next two months..........

That's great news! If you can, please upload some pictures. And please also take a look at the article about the locomotive at South African Class Exp AC - any comments or additional information will be welcome.

André Kritzinger (talk) 12:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrol given[edit]

Commons Autopatrolled.svg

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. Érico Wouters msg 03:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! André Kritzinger (talk) 11:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry[edit]

Hi André, sorry for removing Category:Wikipedians in South Africa from File:Col AH Kritzinger, 1999.JPG. I thought it was a joke. --Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 08:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

No sweat. Thought as much. André Kritzinger (talk) 10:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Cat-a-lot[edit]

Andre,

I notice you are re-categorizing a lot of images manually. You might find this useful: Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot. It saves a lot of effort and time. --NJR_ZA (talk) 15:56, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but I prefer the hands-on approach. Some research involved... - André Kritzinger (talk) 17:04, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

SAAF photos[edit]

Thanks a lot for uploading all those excellent images of SAAF aircraft. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Pleasure. Several need rescanning but I'll get to that... -- André Kritzinger (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Independence Medal (Ciskei).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Independence Medal (Ciskei).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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

State Library of Victoria[edit]

Hi Andre. I discovered some great old SA photos online you may be interested in, see some of railroad trains here. I have only uploaded one photo here so far for a new Wikipedia article (File:Cenotaph, Johannesburg.jpg). Do you know anything about the author listed (Linton Brothers)? HelenOnline 12:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Helen. No, never heard of Linton Bros. Could even be from a collection since some look like buider's pictures. Several of the pictures are already on Wikimedia, but these are mostly better resolution so I'll certainly do some harvesting to replace poor pics. All are long out of copyright by now. Thank you for the lead! -- André Kritzinger (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Pleasure. I have found Linton Bros. listed c1930 as Photographic Material and Stock Importers at 61 Market Street, Sydney. HelenOnline 13:15, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again - I've uploaded nine. I'm especially chuffed about the Union Garratt (File:Class U 2-6-2+2-6-2.jpg) that I discovered with a further search. -- André Kritzinger (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad you found something useful. I will upload some more pictures of streets and buildings tomorrow. HelenOnline 21:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:Ruston, Proctor locomotives[edit]

Hi Andre, you are absolutely correct. My reason for using Ruston Proctor was that I wanted to fit in with the prevailing mood leaving out the comma. it is one less key sroke and otherwise something of "a trap for young players". In the same way I have omitted the "& Co" within Wikimedia. I notice you have omitted & Co in Ruston, Proctor locomotives —and for that matter Limited.

Please would you put it back to no comma, otherwise please tell me why you feel it is important to have that comma there.
Regards, Eddaido (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It's in line with the correct title of the main article about the company at Ruston, Proctor and Company. (Two individuals involved named Ruston and Proctor respectively, not one individual named Ruston Proctor.) Some years ago similar corrections were made by someone to insert the comma into Sharp, Stewart and some other loco company categories. And yes, the Co. Ltd. should actually also be included, but in practice that is often left out in text, but never the comma. I'd rather change all the other new categories to include the comma as well. Will do it later tonight when I have a chance, unless you want to fix them yourself. -- André Kritzinger (talk) 15:19, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Andre, please don't do any more. We are going to need help to resolve this. Will be back here. Eddaido (talk) 00:42, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I see you have been busy. What a pity.
If all those categories are now left as you have made them you have given yourself a big job! Because when an editor looks for Ruston Proctor they will not find it.
Ruston, (comma) does not start until after all the Rustons are finished. See what I mean?
You need to change them back because otherwise new images won't get categorised the way you want them, they probably won't be categorised at all unless You do it! Eddaido (talk) 04:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I do not understand your problem.
* Search for "Ruston Proctor" and search for "Ruston, Proctor", and you get the same results.
* A category redirect template has been added to each and every old incorrect commaless category to direct anyone searching to the new correct ones with commas. They were not nominated for deletion.
So what more do you believe needs to be done?
Or would you also want to remove the commas from Category:Beyer, Peacock and Company locomotives, Category:Black, Hawthorn locomotives, Category:Brown, Boveri & Cie. locomotives, Category:Dick, Kerr locomotives and Category:Fox, Walker locomotives, to name a few? -- André Kritzinger (talk) 12:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Good Heavens! I didn't look because I didn't expect a reply! Let me explain, say you wished to categorise this particular page. At the foot, just below here, you will see Categories (+):(+) (or something very like that). If you click on the second + sign and enter Ruston you will at once see the problem.
Yes, I do think you should forget the commas in Beyer Peacock, Black Hawthorn, Brown Boveri, Fox Walker etc etc. They are not spoken and they simply get in the (b****y) way! Anyway I think I can be far more pedantic than you can, you should let me try! Seriously though I do think the commas are a discouragement to photographers anxious to get shot of their obligation to find a category. I went through and categorised a whole lot of Ruston etc images that had not been given any category at all for their manufacturer and I hoped by categorising them in a reasonable straightforward way they'd make examples to follow. I'm really only interested in the businesses of those companies like Brown Boveri etc but you need to be able to let readers get a visual idea of their range of products which can be a good deal broader than railway locomotives - though I'm sure locomotives are a fascinating subject to many people. Best, Eddaido (talk) 04:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

So you really believe it's the right thing to do to accept incorrect information to dumb down the system?
There are two possible ways to approach your "problem":

  • One can use one of the old commaless categories to categorise a picture, but I'm pretty sure a bot or a conscientious editor will pick it up in short order and correctly recategorise such a picture pronto. After all, it's hard to overlook the huge {{Category redirect|Ruston, Proctor steam cranes}} template at the top of Category:Ruston Proctor steam cranes.
  • One can nominate all the old commaless categories for deletion like you did with the correct Category:Ruston, Proctor locomotives, after you created the incorrect Category:Ruston Proctor locomotives, then they'll no longer show up in the category selector. However, any Wikipedia article that still has a Commonscat-link to one of the commaless categories will then just produce a "Page does not exist" result instead of a redirect link to the correct category, when that Commonscat-link (which will still show up blue) is used.
    -- André Kritzinger (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
As I've already pointed out you are not using the correct legal name of the manufacturer and to be utterly determined to put in a comma, somehow claiming it is the correct thing to do, is just, er, I can't think of a Wikiword to express what I have in mind.
Sure, once you've seen the light you will have a lot of fixing up to do. The big redirect sign on Ruston Proctor locomotives should have been put there by A K but you didn't and someone else put it in for you. Right?
What we, i.e. you and me, have to do is make it as easy as possible for donors to categorise their own stuff and not drop it into a "too hard basket". C'mon, leave out the comma! Best, Eddaido (talk) 11:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
So, "...to be utterly determined to put in a comma..." is somehow different from "...to be utterly determined to remove a comma..."?
Over and out, I have better things to do. Go bother an Admin.-- André Kritzinger (talk) 13:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Umm, well, what I want to happen is that you and I agree that it is a mistake to unnecessarily complicate categorising by having a superfluous comma there. If we go to an admin with a united front maybe the confusion can be sorted easily. Yes, I was really annoyed at the way you did what you did without consultation - refer to the first few paragraphs. If you can agree the comma is superfluous in all these cases then I am happy to get to work on the necessary changes. Do we have a deal? Eddaido (talk) 22:46, 22 August 2014 (UTC)