User talk:MGA73

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


Map problems[edit]

Hello. Sorry to bother you, but I need an advice of someone more experienced in commons. I am not sure if you remember, it is all about the File:Lands under Louis the Great in the middle of the 14th century.jpg. I am meating some opposition and blind reverts on behalve of Hungarian editors in both em.wiki, bs.wiki and here on commons. One editor here blindly reverted me after being called to intervene at his talkpage (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fakirbakir#A_discussion_that_you_might_be_interested_in...). Then, at en.wiki there were some attempts from Hungarian editors to reinsert the map in the history section of Hungary. And then on Bosnian Wikipedia happened the same, as obviously some Bosnian editors fancy the map as it shows Bosnia much larger than it really was at that period. How should I procede in order to fight this clear nationalist POV? I really have some difficulties finding sources for something that never happened; for instance, there are no sources saying Serbian Empire was NOT vassal of Louis (there would be if he was), or that Bosnia never ruled that far South. My sources are the maps of modern historiography for that period found on commons for Serbia and Bosnia in 14 century which are cearly very different from what that maps shows. FkpCascais (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

FkpCascais, Could you please design your own map instead of senseless accusations? Find my opinion, here: [1] Fakirbakir (talk) 19:03, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't need to design any map, I wish I knew how to design maps, but I don't. However, that doesn't mean we can use old unprecise historical maps as presentation of historical facts. I am asking you scholar sources that can confirm some strange facts found in those Hungarian 19 century maps: a) sources that confirm Serbia was vassal. b) sources that confirm Bosnia ruled over territories of Northern Albania and Macedonia. Unless this sources exist, and I am talking about modern scholarly sources (neutral and contemporary, non-Hungarian preferably) wrong old maps shouldn't simply be used. I went trough a similar situation on a map whith much less mistakes as this one and the map was disregarded (wrightly). FkpCascais (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
@ FkpCascais. It is a historical map so we can't change it. If it were a new one we could just fix and upload a correct version (I'cant make maps either).
I think the best would be to discuss on the image talk page (like you allready do) or on the talk page on the Wikipedia article if you think that the map should not be used in the article. --MGA73 (talk) 08:24, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
But I don't pretend to change or delete the map obviously. The only thing I pretend is to prevent its inadequate use. We have many sources and most historians agree that Louises rule in the south was weak, and when he proclaimed himself king of Bosnia and Serbia it was more his intention than actual reality. He did intended to expand southwords, but as per most sources, he failed in that. He made Bosnia his vassal but with a much shorter territory that shown in the map (actually Bosnia was just the northwest third of the territory shown as seen in the commons category Bosnian maps in 14 century or middle ages). Then, he only made Serbian king Lazar his vassal but even there sources are not clear, and it only happened in 1377 (late 14 century, not mid) and some sources say it didn't actually happened, Louis took just Belgrade, Branicevo, Macva and some other parts in the extreme north of Serbia, but not more than that, far from being the Serbia shown in the map. Then, regarding Bulgaria, it says he made the principality of Vidin his vassal for a short period of time but soon he abandoned Vidin, which btw was just one minor Bulgarian principality in the extreme northwest of Bulgaria 8and again, the map shows like Louis having entire Bulgaria as his vassal). The territory he made vassal in the map is just way too enlarged, it is not a minor mistake, but a huge one.
What I pretend is:
a) To stop the use of the map in articles indicating that the map shows the reality at time of Louis. Seems to me that it would be fair, as the map exaggerates too much Louises possessions and makes readers think he ruled over entire central Balkans for most of 14 century which is totally false.
b) To see alternative maps in commons. I already found a number of maps showing Hungary in 14 century with borders which seem qute correct.
c) To add a note to the map description indicating that the map is just a work from Homolka in 19 century but that has numerous inaccuracies to what is known nowadays that was the reality in mid 14 century. The notes were already added to maps with much minor mistakes than those found on this maps.
Seems fair? FkpCascais (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I think it is good to get mistakes corrected. And if you find better maps you are most welcome to suggest that the Wikipedias use these. But normally we do not decide on Commons which files Wikipedias should use so if a Wikipedia do not want to change the map it is their choise. :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:00, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, obviously Wikipedia should not use old expansionistic maps in order to fit the nationalistic agendas, and per Verifiabity it is better not to have any map than having a wrong misleading old one. The debate by know has been only limited to a few editors by now, we will see how it goes. I will ask at en.wiki to see alternative maps that are more precise and that correspond to what most reliable sources say. And what I am asking commons is to add a note in the description saying that the map doesn't correspond (if necessary at what points exactly) to what modern historiography claims for that period. What do you think about the part regarding commons? FkpCascais (talk) 18:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Mike Vossen 1L icing.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Mike Vossen 1L icing.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)‎ | +/−

Buxtehude (talk) 00:57, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Cathedral, Lima, Peru.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Cathedral, Lima, Peru.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)‎ | +/−

Tine (talk) 14:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)