User talk:Bjs/Archive/2006

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

This is a closed archive. Please do not edit messages here, but on the current discussion page.

Archive: 2006 - 2007 - 2008 - 2009 - 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014

Journey in Sicily - Sicilia[edit]

Ciao Mac9,

gia alcuni volte hai modificato le mie paggine removendo categorie. Mi pare bene che guardi alcune categorie per farle clare, ma devi anche rispettare i desideri di altre persone.

Voglio che le mie paggine sono accessibile della categoria "Sicilia". Capisco che non vuoi che gli immagini apparescono direttamente nella pagina della categoria, e rispetto la tua volunta. Anche ho capito che non vuoi che ci sono delle pagine "user:xy" direttamente nella pagina della categoria "Sicilia". Rispetto anche queste volunta tua, anche si queste cose non sono regolati nelle Commons e sono fatti diversamente en altre categorie. Ma penso che avere le mie pagine en la categoria "Journey in Sicily" e fare queste categoria una sub-categoria die "Sicilia" dev'essere un compromisso con che possiamo vivere tutte i due. Anche la categoria "Journey in Italy" è una sub-categoria della categoria "Italia".

Per questo ti prego di lasciare "Journey in Sicily" una sub-categoria die "Sicilia" e di rispettare anche la volunta degli altri utenti di Commons. Neanche mi pare bene che fai questi modificationi senza dire nessuna parola. Si qualcuno fa una cosa che ti pare falsa sarebbe meglio discutare questa cose nelle pagine "talk" che modificare le cose come ti piace.

Saluti --Bjs 15:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Entschuldigung wenn ich was falches gemacht habe. Nach meiner Meinung Wiki ist kein Blog, wo du was willst machen koennst. So wenn dir nicht stoert ich moechte dir fragen nicht andere Kategorien zu benutzen; diese Kategorie, Journey in Italy, kann dir nicht benutzen? Tschus, —Mac9 16:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Certo in Wiki no si puo fare tutto che uno vuole, ma anche certo c'è un grande àmbito di libertà e non si devono introdurre regole dove non ci sono. Ti ho detto che voglio che queste pagine sono accesibile della categoria "Sicilia". Questo non è possibile si sono solo nella Categoria "Journey in Italy", ma è possibile quando si fa "Journey in Sicily" una sub-categoria di "Sicilia". Sicilia è una designatione tan generale che non e riservata solo per luoghi di Sicilia. Forse un giorno ci saranno anche sub-categorie come persone di Sicilia, paesaggi di Sicilia, instituzioni di Sicilia, simile come gia è nella categoria "Italy", e allora forse sarebbe bene fare anche una categoria luoghi di Sicilia con le pagine che adesso sono direttamente nella categoria Sicilia. Per questo penso che non c'è problema avere una sub-categoria "Journey in Sicily" (o si ti piace meglio "Viaggi per Sicilia" o simile).
Per favore, lascia le mie pagine come sono senza cambiare le categorie. Ho rispettato la tua volontà di non avere degli immagini o delle pagine utente direttamente nella categoria Sicilia, e ti prego rispettera anche la mia volontà di avere le pagine accesibile della categoria Sicilia a traverso la sub-categoria "Journey in Sicily". Saluti --Bjs 21:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Non ho canellato niente, dopo che mi hai scritto. Aber das ist kein Blog. Ueberhaupt. Please konsider to put your category somewhere else, not in a kategory designed to containe, cities, archeological sites, mountains, lakes, islands. Ich moechte nicht das wikipedia ein blog wird; è una enciclopedia; to serious for a blog. (and you can build your pages on journey in italy) —Mac9 22:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I will switch to English, too, because I can express myself better in that language than in Italian. I appreciate your efforts to keep the Italian pages clearly arranged and concise, and I am willing to cooperate to a certain extend. However, you cannot force your own rules on everybody in the world. I do not know how the rules are in the Italian Wikipedia. Commmons, however, is not part of the Italian Wikipedia, but a worldwide project, and has rules of its own.
I am not making a blog of Wikipedia. I have already edited some of the articles in the German Wikipedia about Sicily, and I have created some new ones. I will continue to do so in the future. I use my pictures to illustrate these articles, not just for having them put on the net. By this, I serve the purpose of Wikipedia as an encyclopaedia. Commons, however, is not an encyclopaedia, but a collection of media used for the encyclopaedia and other Wikimedia projects. Here, other rules apply. A main object is to find media you are looking for. For this purpose, proper assignation to categories is important. Someone looking for images about Sicily will look into the category "Sicilia", and not into "Journey in Italy". That's why I am interested in having a link from category "Sicilia" to my pages.
I have already largely taken your opinion in consideration and respected many of your arguments. But you cannot ignore completely other peoples opinion. Wikimedia Commons is not a property of anyone who can decide what other peoples have to do or to let. As a last suggestion for a compromise, I propose to state the purposes cited by you above in the header of the category and have a link from there to the Journey page. If you are not willing to accept either this solution or a subcategory "Journey in Sicily", I will have to cantact an administrator of Commons as an arbitrator. --Bjs 08:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think is true that i don't take in connsideration your opinion or i don't answer to you. If i intend well you're creating articles and reffering from them to commons page yoou create. On this point I don't sure fully understand what are you doing: are you writting articles on journeys? like traveller's guide? If this is your aim, can i propose to structure this inside the journey in italy, so to have under this category journey in tuscany, journey in sicily, journey whatever. The problem is to avoid to discuss with many people who will use commons like a blog ( have you see www.flickr.com; i find it beautifull ), and we're expericed that if we live such categories, there will be a mess on this categories. Is it acceptable from you? Just a favor from you; please don't revert my personal page. If you would like to mantein track of this discussion, can I suggest to copy it in your page? let me know . By the way, from the last time i haven't touch you category. let me know. —Mac9 09:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
According to your suggestion, I have copied the entire diskussion to my page.
I am really creating articles (e.g. de:Ägadische Inseln, de:Zisa, de:Muqarna) and editing existing ones (e.g. de:Segesta, de:Erice) from the German encyclopedia, not just writing a journey's diary. You can follow the links to see that these are "serious" articles, not a traveller's guide. For putting pictures at these articles, I would not have to use any category at all. However, if some other people e.g from the Japanese Wikipedia looks for pictures about Sicily for illustrating a Japanese article, he will look neither into Category:Journey in Italy nor into User:Bjs, but into Category:Sicilia. That's why I want to have at least a link leading somehow from there to my pages.
Please let me know if you accept my last suggestion as it is presently shown in Category:Sicilia. In this case, I will no longer put Category:Sicilia on my pages. --Bjs 10:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Example: Zisa[edit]

I create a page Zisa, under Category Palermo; then I refer from de.wikipedia to this category (de:Zisa). This is the standard solution (everybodu cone follow and use this category) and you don't want to use that. If I intend well you want to collect photos under you're personal page and refer from de.wikipedia to those page. Is this true? I saw your personal page, but I only see photos that refers also to existing categories; so i'm not sure on what's your purpose. Maybe you're the author and would like to be mentioned? I'm little bit confused, because you said that you don't want to make a blog, so what is the sense of having a personal photos page? thanks for your patience, —Mac9 11:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

That is a possible way, thanks for the hint. Now I know what you meant by "reffering from the articles to the commons page". However, it seems not practible for all the cases. Take de:Muquarna (a detail in islamic architecture). I cannot make a sub-category muqarna under Sicilia putting all the pictures containing a muquarna therein. Neither is it practicable to make links to all categories containing an image with muqarnas. Your system works quite well with the example "Zisa" but is limited inother aspects. Further, it does not solve the problem stated above: a Japanese user will not look in the German Wikipedia for pictures and then follow the link, but go to commons and what is to be found under "Sicilia". Some more remarks on your questions:
    • reasons for having a personal image page
-to have a personal overview over the pictures loaded by myself to Conmmons (does not take much additional ressources, just the few bytes of the text written on it)
-not to have to make an article for all the pictures I upload (where do I post an image "Sicilian landscape at some location at the north-west coast", for example, or animals typical for Sicily?) You saw only a part of the pictures I intend to upload, there are more on stock which still have to be prepared and do not so easy fit into your cetegories.
    • reasons for linking to this page somehow from the category Sicilia (does not have to be a sub-category)
-to allow browsing images by author, too (as an alternative to browsing by location)
-to find images not contained in a special article
    • reasons for not having locations only in category Sicilia
-I found for example an article Coats of arms of the cities of Sicily which according to my opinion also should be listed under the category of Sicily. Other articles may already exists or follow. Therefore I hold your concept of having only articles and sub-categories relating to locations on Sicily for too narrow.
-It is not common pratice on the Italy pages, either. If you look to Category:Italy, a much broader concept is implemented. I would prefer this way also for Sicilia.


These are just a few arguments coming into my mind directly. Others might follow when I really think about it. You see that I also have my reasons and am not just doing what comes into my head. For the moment being, however, I would be content if you leave the first sentence on Category:Sicilia as it is. ok? --Bjs 15:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


As you see I haven't changed nothing; still i'd like to talk with you about the question. I noticed that it's common, to put a link in page, in a section called links, to users pages; could this solution be affordable for you? Browising by author, in my honest hopinion, is something like a blog. I know, it's just an opinion, but what of enciclopedic is in authors? Moreover, till now, i didn't find anything that can't be categorized; to be clear. I'm not questioning on your personal page; it's ok for me. I'm questioning of categorizing this kind of pages, but again we create a category also for that. Can yoou consider the option of use one category and put links under the pages to refer to your personal one? —Mac9 08:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I see there still remain differences we cannot agree. I do not wish to put links from Wikipedia pages to my personal pages. This I would really regard as un-enciclopedic, since Wikipedia is the real encyplopedia. It wouldn't help my Japanese friend, either, since he would not look into the German Wikipedia for a link to Commons, he would directly search in Commons. In my view, however, Commons is not encyclopedic in itself, but a source of media common for different projects. Therefore, "findability" of pictures should be the first concern here. How this is best achieved we have different opinions, even if I generally appreciate the order you bring into the Italian categories as serving this purpose.
Even if we cannot agree on all aspect, I believe we now have come to a solution we both can live with since it does not disturb the order of the category system and I have a possibility to be found from Sicilia. I also believe we have exchanged almost all our arguments, so that we should concentrate on the substantial work. For this I have posted a question on your talk page and wish to have your opinion. --Bjs 16:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Flickr[edit]

In the meantime, I had a look at www.flickr.com. It seems useful and I may use it for some other purposes, thanks for the hint. See also my latest comments on User talk:Bjs --Bjs 21:01, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Flick is a amazing container of photos; be carefull, you can use only the one licensed with attribution license, and shareware like; there is a template for the information to ut on this photos, and a category , flickr, where this are put by default. I weekly seek there for photos about italy. See you, —Mac9 08:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I did not mean to use tho images there, but thanks for the warning. It is excellent e.g for uploading pictures of events and sent the participants a link. I made it with Yahoo, but there the memory space is limited (instead of the upload capacity). --Bjs 11:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Palermo[edit]

According to your suggestion, I will put my pictures of Palermo into individual articles and not all together into the article Palermo. This will facilitate linking from Wikipedia articles to these commons articles. Further, the article Palermo will be kept clear and concise.

I also intend to remove the sections from the Palermo article for which I create a new article, leaving there only sections concerning the entire city or pictures that cannot be assigned to individual articles. Especially, in the sub-category Churches of Palermo are up to now only 2 articles, instead the pictures are all crammed into the Palermo article. I therefore will take these pictures together with pictures of my own to individual articles in the sub-category Churches of Palermo and remove them from the Palermo article. Is that ok? -Bjs 13:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I now had a look at the page of Roma and saw that it is done there in another way: leaving some "teaser" pictures on the page and referring to the article. In my view, this is good for Rome but might be not so good for Palermo, since there will be much less pictures. For Example, to have 3 pictures of [[Zisa (Palermo)or San Cataldo (Palermo) on the page of Palermo, then referring to an article also having only these three pictures, seems not so useful. I therefore still prefer my first attempt indicated above, i.e. clearing the page of Palermo of the pictures that are present in the articles, just leaving general pictures there. What do you think? --Bjs 16:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Your right,imho; now Palermo has not so many photos, but you never know. Maybe in one year there will be a lot of photos regading Palermo; important is to set up fundamentals and then you will helped by other people with your favourites argouments.
Now Cities in Italy is growing thanks to many people, all doing things the same vay. See you around, --Mac9 16:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I now have arranged Palermo as I suggested, have a look at it. In the next weeks when I will have finished with Sicily in general, I will upload more pictures of my own into the Palermo articles. --Bjs 17:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Ficus macrophylla[edit]

You're right! I'm the author of changes to description of Image:Palermo-Park-bjs-1.jpg.

I confirm you that the tree in the picture is a Ficus macrophylla, previously classified as Ficus magnolioides (Borzì).

Antonio Borzì, the botanist who first described this plant, was the Director of the Orto botanico di Palermo at the time the plant was first imported in Palermo. Elements of this specie where planted at that time in Orto botanico, in Villa Garibaldi (the one in your picture) and in Villa Whitaker.

See also http://www.comune.palermo.it/Comune/centro_storico/quattro_mandamenti_tribunali.htm.

--Esculapio 13:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

You're right! I made a mistake.
When the Ficus macrophylla was imported into the it:Orto botanico di Palermo (in 1840), the Orto was directed by it:Vincenzo Tineo.

Borzì, in 1897, described this tree as Ficus magnolioides- see here. Starting from 1996 (not 100% sure about this date!) the plant was re-classified as the subsp. columnaris of the Ficus macrophylla(Desf. ex Pers.) --Esculapio 18:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Sicilian plants[edit]

The only one I'm sure to recognize is Opuntia ficus-indica or Feigenkaktus. --Esculapio 17:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Sicilia[edit]

Glad your still here around. Sicilian pages where not consistent with the other italian pages, and this drives to confusion. Ciao, --mac 07:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Category:Coats of arms of Italian municipalities[edit]

Ciao Semolo75, pare che tu sei la persona che piu guarda le categorie delle Coats of arms relating to Italy. ( I better continue in English). I have noticed some inconsitencies in these pages. For example, further to the Category:Coats of arms of Italian provinces also exists the Category:Coats of arms of italian provinces with a minuscle letter "i" and some more pictures with a different name convention.

Further, I have asked a question on the intended use of the Category:Coats of arms of Italian municipalities on the talk page thereof. I would prefer to have the coats of arms sorted into the region categories only and leave this category free from pictures (how many thousands would it be in the end if all Italian municipalities are present?)

Would it not be convenient to have a Category:Coats of arms of Italian regions, too, e.g. for Sicily, Sardegna, Südtirol etc.?

In the tree of Category:Sicilia, I have restructured Coats of arms of the cities and villages of Sicily according to provinces, but I am no longer sure whether this really makes sense. Perhaps it would completely be sufficient to have the pictures categorized in the correspnding category. What is your opinion?

Please answer on my Commons talk page since i cannot watch your Italian user page. --Bjs 16:08, 6 giu 2006 (CEST)

The Category:Coats of arms of italian provinces now is a "category redirect" and should be kept empty. I have moved the pictures to the Category:Coats of arms of Italian provinces.
If you want, you can move the pictures from the Category:Coats of arms of Italian municipalities to the correct regional subcategory.
My original idea for the coats of arms was to create a page for each province (for example, look at these pages: Coats of arms of the province of Padua and Coats of arms of the province of Vicenza). Note that, in these cases, the files are only linked by the page: they are not in the category.
But my work was stopped by a discussion with an italian lawyer (and wikipedia sysop). It seems that the coats of arms' copyright belongs to the municipality, so the licence of the images of the italian coats of arms is not free (they could be deleted from Commons in the future). Semolo75 09:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry[edit]

Sorry, it was late when I realize it was you with the coats of sicily; if you prefer I'll revert to your digits. --mac 12:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The page Sicilia was intented (mainly) as a link for the Hauptstadt of provinces; I don't like the image of "sicilian" man; imho it sounds like razist. ( I don't belive in races ). But I noticed that many users would like to create such a page: flavours, colors, ...of sicily. Ciao and sorry again. --mac 07:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Sicily[edit]

Talking honestly, I'd admit that you've right. It's quite a long time that I was reconsidering your job on sicily pages, and I'd admit I was wrong to revert your job. I think that a category Cities in Sicily ( consistent to Cities in Italy ) should the bet option ( we are putting districtd under the municipalities they belong to, so maybe it's not the case to use villages). I don't agree totally with you about that phot of sicilian man; there was not a tipical cloath, but a "typical" schema of sicilian man; but I agree with you with when you talk about typical costumes ( cloaths ) or typical cusine. Just a last question. Why do you wrote IMHOO with capital letters? --mac 11:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Few weeks ago, I had a discussion with an expert admin ( duesendriebe , a german one ); in his opinion we should try to render as much reacheble as possible the pages, so he suggested to have more than one category that link to a page or a photo( if it is appliable ). I was convinced by this argoument; is this reasonable for you? --mac 07:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC) I prefer to see all the cities under category:Cities in Italy...

Cities in Sicily[edit]

Can you consider to postpone to add this cat to cities in italy? by now it contains only cities and category about cities. I think that in future, we can make all this page consistent and create cat like cities in sardinia, cities in lazio... what about a cat, cities by region under cities in italy? It can lead to another browsing facility. --mac 11:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you see the new cat Cities in Italy by Region? could this be a solution also for you? --mac 15:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
mmm.., this way this new feature is hidden, an no many user will have the possibility to browse cities with this cat. Is this cat present also in Cities in Germany? I'll will have a look to other similar categories. If you don't mind, for now, I revert your last modification. See you around, --mac 07:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Casalvecchio Siculo[edit]

My ground source was it.wikipedia because I know thay made a great job on italian "comuni". As official site I found only http://www.comune.casalvecchiosiculo.me.it/ ( this is the standard way for web site name for italian comuni - www.comune.name.provincia name.it ) but you're right that on the web there are a lot of news about a comune of Castelvecchio; the fact that there is not any official web site with this name, can lead to consider this as an error. In italy there are many place called castelvecchio ( tuscany, valle d'aosta, abruzzo ), so it could be a spelling error, but I don't know it for sure. --mac 13:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Just for curiosity: are you sure that it is "also" called castelvecchio? I'm sure that you know that the web is not always sure as source. Which is you source? --mac 08:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Santa Elisabetta[edit]

...oopsss...thanks for the correction. --mac 15:28, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Tool[edit]

Thanks for the hint; I'll will have a look to it. --mac 05:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC) Tschus

Löschanträge[edit]

Grüße Dich. Vielen Dank, daß Du Dich für den Erhalt des Kopfes des Blonden Jünglings aus der Akropolis mit eingesetzt hast. Ich habe mit Entsetzen den Löschantrag von der Maske des Agamemnon zur Kenntnis genommen und soeben auch gegen die Löschung protestiert.--Mario Todte 09:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Das hattest du ja ganz raffiniert versteckt so dass ich es nur über die Änderungen unter "Version" gefunden habe. Ich hab es mal hierher verschoben. Bei Image:MaskeAgamemnon.JPG habe ich aber nichts gesehen. Meinst du ein andeeres Bild? --Bjs 19:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Ah jetzt hab ich es gefunden. Aber es leitet nur auf dieselbe Diskussion weiter wie beim blonden Jüngling. Da hast du wohl zweimal abgestimmt! Ich streich mal dein zweites Votum und behalte den Kommentar. Grüße --Bjs 19:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Museo Regionale Archeologico[edit]

Hi. In Palermo there are 2 Archeological Museums: one located in via roma and the other in via alloro. Do you know to which refers the page you've created? Thanks, --mac 07:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mac, I only know about one Archeological Museum in Palermo. The correct designation is Museo Archeologico Regionale 'Antonino Salinas', and the address is Piazza Olivelli, 24. The building itself reaches until via Roma, but the entrance is Piazza Olivelli. :By the other museum, you probably mean the Galleria Regionale della Sicilia in Palazzo Abatellis, via Alloro, 4. Greetings --Bjs 07:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)