User talk:Mddkpp

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


Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Mddkpp!
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 | Íslenska | 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)‎ | +/−

-- 11:28, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 210079bc6549948d0f71481d1f5c1c49[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

210079bc6549948d0f71481d1f5c1c49

Copyright status: File:Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT).png[edit]

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT).png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. Thank you.

Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT).svg[edit]

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT).svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. Thank you.

Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

calling for discussion please...[edit]

In this edit you replaced a more specific category with a more general one.

"Steel Industry" is broader than just steel mills. Shipping steel rods or rails to customers would also belong in "Steel Industry". So would the shipping of scrap metal, or the crushing of cars for scrap metal.

Did you raise your idea for discussion, first? If so, can you tell me where this discussion took place?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 22:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I looked in your contribution history, and saw no sign you discussed this anywhere. I am sure it didn't occur to you that anyone would disagree with your edits.
I am reverting the edits on my watchlist, as, in my experience, it is lot more work to unwind these kinds of things after a delay, than it is shortly after they are made.
I will open a discussion at {{cfd}}. That would be the place to explain why you don't think there should be categories specifically for steel mills. Geo Swan (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Churchyards[edit]

Hi, to me (and many others I noticed), a church graveyard is a specialisation of a generic churchyard. So until this is cleared out, please stop removing the churchyards from the images that concern church graveyards. --Foroa (talk) 16:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I assume I'm still allowed to remove spam categorisation without your permission eg File:St. Peter's Church, Bilton - geograph.org.uk - 266570.jpg -can you actually see the churchyard in this - because there are literally hundreds of images of churches (or gravestones) that have had the churchyard category added to them.? No I'd better stop and wait for you.Mddkpp (talk) 16:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
This is exactly what I am saying - a "church graveyard is a specialisation of a churchyard" - ie it's a subcategory - so why not put images of church graveyards in a category called that.
It is twenty times more efficient to move them to a better category then to remove them and have to find them again for recategorisation. Last year, there have been tremendous categorisation efforts in the area of East Riding of Yorkshire, so I would prefer the opinion of the people that did the work. --Foroa (talk) 17:11, 2 March 2012 (UTC)