User talk:Spiritia

If you are the first to write on my talk page, be sure that I will answer here.
If it was me to first write on your talk, be sure that I already watch it and feel free to answer there.
Archive

---

Category:Burgas lapidarium

Привет Спири, снимките в тази категория са по-скоро за Археогогическия музей. Вярно там се намира и от време на време лапидариума, ама като гледам надгробните плочи и съркофага нямат много общо с лапидаиум или?--Vammpi (talk) 16:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Какво значи "от време на време" да се намира, като си е там постоянно?! Лапидариумът представлява обособената външна експозиция на каменни артефакти с археологическо значение - а надгробните плочи и саркофазите са такива артефакти. В този смисъл, да, свързани са с Археологическия музей, но има смисъл да се обособят, заради Category:Lapidariums in Bulgaria. Надявам се това да ти реши проблема. →Spiritia 06:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Няма проблем --Vammpi (talk) 11:40, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Молба

Здрасти. Би ли да защитила потребителските страници на Darsie (talk · contribs), че само тук не е направено. Поздрави!--The TV Boy 17:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Защитих ги, благодаря. Не разбрах откъде ти е хрумнало тук] да пишеш "Лазарова", като само веднъж съм забелязвала да се представя с фамилия, и то е било Симеонова. Ако е било само от невнимание, ще помоля в бъдеще при подобни (особено чувствителни) редакции да бъдеш по-внимателен. →Spiritia 19:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

На Разговори пише Лазарова след корекцията на твоята реплика от Потребител:Seddass и аз така го написах, но не знам как е правилно. Все пак благодаря!--The TV Boy 11:42, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Ако не те затруднява

Здравей, Спири. Този файл тук го изтрий, когато ти е удобно. Не се ползва, а съм затрил оригиналните снимки, тоест няма да мога да ги дам, ако някой поиска. --5ko 12:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Извинявай, трийнах я още преди няколко дни, но понеже много бързах, не можах да отговоря веднага. →Spiritia 05:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Снимка за триене

Здравей Спири. мисля че File:Чирпан.jpg този файл е за триене.([1]) Поздрави --Vammpi (talk) 09:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

За съжаление и други(те) файлове, качени от потребителя са за триене. →Spiritia 05:54, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Погледни File:Ill?yellow kid001.gif и прецени какво ще я правиш - аз я извадих от няколко статии при нас... --Спас Колев (talk) 11:59, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

+ едно върнато отдавна copyvio: [2]. Според мен претенцията за авторство е към колажа, а снимката изглежда доста отдавнашна, така че преценявай. :) --Спас Колев (talk) 10:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

И на мен ми изглежда стара снимка, от 1950-те може би. Колажът като цяло се явява обложка на възпоменателен компакт диск от 1999 година, личи си от първоначално качената версия на файла. Уви, за триене. Ще потърся в ДАА за някоя алтернатива. →Spiritia 12:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

File:2d_political_spectrum.svg

Created a "blank" SVG version of the file 2d_political_spectrum.png which can be annotated with overlay text in any language and is also more accessible. Do you happen to know where I could go to get help translating the code?--Abel (talk) 00:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I can help with the Bulgarian translation. You may ask the users who originally uploaded the rest translated versions, namely, User:Shizhao for zh:, User:Gengiskanhg for es: and User:Nagy for de:. I also made an edit in your English source; it should be "personal", not "political" freedom, shouldn't it? →Spiritia 05:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you on both counts. Yes, very much so, it should be personal rather than political freedom. Added "Civil liberties|" in front of "Personal freedom" to avoid the redirect. I have contacted several others, but not Shizhao, Gengiskanhg, and Nagy. Thank you so much for pointing me in their direction, I will contact them as well. --Abel (talk) 12:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Arcul-de-Triumf-Mincov.jpg

File:Arcul-de-Triumf-Mincov.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!

128.250.5.245 07:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion

Здравей Спири можеш ли да погледнеш това Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sofia National Bibliothek.jpg. Благодаря ти --Vammpi (talk) 07:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

OTRS

Re Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pametnik na osvoboditelite,gr.Kardzali.jpg - that's good news, but it needs verification via OTRS (and if we've had that already, {{PermissionOTRS}} applied to the file). Rd232 (talk) 17:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

NB the user has uploaded other files which can be covered by the same OTRS ticket: Special:Contributions/Rusels. Rd232 (talk) 17:05, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in resolving the case. Forwarded correspondence between me and Mr. Zankov will do, right? Unfortunately, I am rather busy offwiki and have absolutely time to translate the whole of it in English, you can use Google Translate, can't you? I'll immediately forward it, can you please inform me when you receive and process it? Thanks a lot for your help! →Spiritia 17:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Correspondence forwarded. →Spiritia 17:30, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an OTRS member, so I left a message at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Alexander_Zankov_images. If Evgeni or you can write a message in English to OTRS, that would be better. Since it takes a while for OTRS tickets to get processed, it doesn't matter if it takes a while - but I expect a Bulgarian message might cause problems, we don't have too many Bulgarian speakers AFAIK... Rd232 (talk) 22:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I've now had a look at the OTRS ticket and added permission tags as described in the discussion linked above. I hope this solves the problem. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Mikael, thank you very much, your support is truly appreciated. :) →Spiritia 17:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Молба и въпрос

Здравей, имам обяснимата (за новак) молба да бъде премахната първата версия на един образ. Опитах се да поправя нещата (със скромните си умения), качвайки нова версия на файла File:Благославящият Христос.jpg. Но се притеснявам от съществуването на първата версия - на нея, на заден план има заснета случайна жена, пресичаща улицата. Предвид слабото качество на образа, моментът с разпознаваемостта едва ли стои, но все пак ми е съвестно. Предполагам, че мога да се обърна към теб, за да бъде заличена напълно тази версия. Дано не греша в нещо (пак). Второ, имам въпрос относно качването на образи, създадени с програмата, наречена "Terragen". Този софтуер е с условие за некомерсиална употреба. Според мъглявите им обяснения, това значи, че не мога да правя пари от изображенията, които създавам. А мога ли да ги качвам в Уикипедия под лиценза (CC), който позволява такава на всички ползватели на сайта? Никъде не успях да открия ясен и еднозначен отговор на въпроса си. Благодаря. Utar Sigmal (talk) 03:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Благодаря. По другия си въпрос получих положителен отговор от Oshyan Greene. Utar Sigmal (talk) 08:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:NGruev

Hello Spiritia. You have participated in a discussion about a template which is now proposed for deletion. As you (1) are a trusted admin here and (2) understand Bulgarian language, could you, when you have time, confirm on the deletion page what Mr Gruev wrote in Bulgarian? Thanks. --5ko 20:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for tipping me, I'd probably miss that discussion otherwise... →Spiritia 17:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Bulgarian pigeon association

Hallo Spiritia,

do you know if User Pigeons really is identical with the Bulgarian breeding assiciation? Pigeons contributed two times on commons and three times in Bulgarian WP.

I suspect the files of copyright violation. They are tagged as "Own work". But if Pigeons really is identical with the bulgarian pigeons association...

I cross posted this request on [3], in case you are not very active any more. --84.181.63.204 15:14, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

They don't seem to have been active ever after these five sporadic edits. Thanks for drawing my attention to that problem. →Spiritia 17:14, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I have to thank you. --PigeonIP (talk) 06:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Sofia

Hi Spiritia,

I wanted to create a category Banishora (a district of Sofia; квартал = Neighbourhood). But Sofia has strange (at least for germans) administrative units: Municipalities, Neighbourhoods and Districts. In Category:Sofia there are three different subcategories. Only insiders may realise, that they are related with each other. I would prefer to put these three categories together, for instance in Category:Administrative units of Sofia or Category:Districts, Municipalities and Neighbourhoods of Sofia or even better Category:Districts of Sofia . An outsider will hardly know whether Ovtcha Kupel, Banishora or Krasno selo are Municipalities or Neighbourhoods of Sofia. Therefore I would prefer only one common category for all this administrative units, where I (and all others) can easily find them all in alphabetic order. And I would like to give the subcategories names with appended exact administrativ name: for instance Mladost‎(Municipality), Category:Lozenets (Neighbourhood). What do you think? You can answer me in bulgarian (I have no bulgarian keyboard). --Bin im Garten (talk) 16:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem is more difficult than what you think :) Given that English in not official in BG, the administrative divisions on all levels are a complete terminological mess. District here in BG context I have only used in the sense of 28 administrative divisions of the whole country (област, having a district centre, a big town, and usually several smaller towns and numerous villages). I haven't met "district" as a subdivision in the frames of a single town. On the contrary, some области have chosen to name themselves districts, and others -- regions. In the meanwhile, English Wikipedia names all these as "provinces". See the diversity:

• Blagoevgrad -- Region / District -- http://www.bl.government.bg/en/2009-08-11-19-58-22
• Dobrich -- Region -- http://dobrich.government.bg/
• Haskovo -- ?? -- http://hs.government.bg/en/
• Gabrovo -- ?? -- http://www.gb.government.bg/
• Kardzhali -- Region -- http://kardzhali.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=29
• Kyustendil -- ?? -- http://vmnassociates.com/kustendil25/
• Lovech -- District -- http://www.lovech.government.bg/section-14-contacts.html
• Pazardzhik -- ?? -- http://www.pz.government.bg/news.php
• Pernik -- Region -- http://www.pk.government.bg/
• Plovdiv -- District -- http://www.pd.government.bg/index.php?page=oblasten-upravitel&hl=en_US
• Razgrad -- District -- http://www.rz.government.bg/en_index1.html
• Shumen -- District -- http://oblastshumen.government.bg/en/index.html
• Silistra -- District -- http://www.ss.government.bg/
• Sliven -- District -- http://www.sliven.government.bg/en/
• Sofia -- Region -- http://www.sofoblast.government.bg/
• Stara Zagora -- Region -- http://www.sz.government.bg/index.php
• Targovishte -- Region -- http://www.tg.government.bg/index1.html
• Varna -- Region -- http://www.vn.government.bg/en/index.htm
• Veliko Tarnovo -- Region -- http://www.vt.government.bg/index.php?setpsitelang=2
• Vidin -- Region -- http://en.vidin.government.bg/094/60-16-16/index.html
• Yambol -- ?? -- http://yambol.government.bg/stk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=179&Itemid=88

On the level of towns only,I believe that only the several biggest cities like Sofia and Plovdiv have sophisticated administrative subdivisions. I see for Sofia Municipality 24 districts -- http://sofia.bg/en/display.asp?ime=council and these actually comprise 38 "settlements" (населени места), 4 of which are separate towns: Sofia, Bankya, Bujovo and Novi Iskar, and 34 villages. On the contrary, of these 24 districts those which cover Sofia are subdivided in what you say neighbourhoods (or quarter, or living estate?)... квартали in Bulgarian. For instance, Izgrev District where I live comprises 3 квартала: Izgrev, Iztok and Dianabad... Lozenets District comprises квартали Lozenets, Vitosha (not to be mistaken with Vitosha District) and Hladilnika. So, it's a real mess. And has to be sorted out sooner or later, but better have it sorted simultanously here and in English WP. And we have to consider both official websites/documents. For what you suggest, it's probably best to have the explanatory noun together with the name. Unfortunately, I don't have as much time as I'd like to make a thorough research right now. So if you would like to discuss it, probaby the BG WP Village Pump is a good starting point: bg:У:Р. →Spiritia 10:00, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I raised the question for Sofia there: bg:У:Р#София. With the names for the provinces I dont see the problem (at least for de:WP): in german Wikipedia we call them all Oblast (very easy); община is "Gemeinde". --Bin im Garten (talk) 16:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Archeology in the Center of Sofia

Since 2 years there are archological findings in the very center of Sofia on exposition. We should have a special Category for this - File:Sofia Center walk with free sofia tour 2012 PD 028.jpg. Or do we have allready? How could we name this Category?

• Category: Archeological findings at Independence square ? (but in front of ZUM is not Independence square)
• Category: Archeological findings in the center of Sofia ?
• Category: Archeological findings in roman Serdica ?

--Bin im Garten (talk) 17:35, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Your options 2 and 3 are rather general, and not enough informative. Option 1 somehow misses to mention that the place is it's Sofia / Sedica. There might be "Independence" squares elsewhere. The project's official name (see here) is "Ancient Cultural and Communication Complex Serdica". If this seems to you too long, how about Category:Archaeological Complex Serdica or Category:Serdica Archaeological Complex? →Spiritia 17:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I liked Category:Archaeological Complex Serdica most. --Bin im Garten (talk) 10:09, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Old Sofia

I would like to copy all pictures from www.stara-sofia.com/ and upload them on Commons (only the pictures that are older than 70 years). Would this be a copyright violation? The guys from stara-sofia.com didn't take the pictures themselves, they just scanned them. For me it is the same like with the pictures in Category:Samokov History Museum. These pictures are taken from the museum-staff. Nobody asked them, wether they agree "there photographies" of the old paintings to be used in Commons. They are even not very happy with this (I spoke personaly with them). Maybe the guys from stara-sofia.com are ready to sell there pictures (in higher resolution) for Commons. Though I doubt that they will sell most of there pictures for a reasonable price, would you try to contact them and to ask for there price? I personally would participate with two thousand Lewa. --Bin im Garten (talk) 10:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Freedom of panorama in Bulgaria

Hi again Spiritia, how about freedom of panorama in Bulgaria? Not at all!? Commons:Freedom of panorama/table. Can you give me a link to the bulgarian law? Untill now I found only regular deletion activities in Category:SS. Cyril and Methodius National Library. What is your advice? To take no pictures of "modern" buildings? To include the neighbouring buildings also in the picture? To ask the architect for the CC3-copyright? The longer I think, the more I realize that this has terrible consequences for my photos on Commons. I have seen this with pictures from Moscow: some "activists" start slowly and after their first "victories" they start with mass deletion requests. I would appreciate when you inform me (preferrably on my german discussion page) when you see deletion discussion about bulgarian pictures (because of No-FOP). Then I could copy them to the german Wikipedia. There they don't care about bulgarian No-FOP (en:Lex loci protectionis). --Bin im Garten (talk) 12:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Accept my apologies but I have several really urgent things to do, both here and off-wiki, before I can devote the due time to answer to your questions. In the meanwhile, enjoy the holidays! :) →Spiritia 18:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Marshal-Baghramyan-Yerevan.jpg

File:Marshal-Baghramyan-Yerevan.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!

Takabeg (talk) 14:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Plovdiv-Konstantin-Stoilov-house-plaque1.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Plovdiv-Konstantin-Stoilov-house-plaque1.jpg. 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. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 08:50, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Plovdiv-Konstantin-Stoilov-house-plaque2.jpg. 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. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 08:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Plovdiv-Konstantin-Stoilov-house.jpg. 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. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 08:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notifications, obviously they were due to an incidental omission of mine, repeated three times in a row. That's because I'm still quite used to the oldest file upload form that allows use of the Back browser button, keeping the input data in the text box from the previous upload. →Spiritia 11:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Nikolcho Tsvetkov Bakardzhiata, Hristo Tsonev Latinetsa (1878).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Nikolcho Tsvetkov Bakardzhiata, Hristo Tsonev Latinetsa (1878).jpg. 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. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

JuTa 20:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Paris-in-1981-050.jpg

File:Paris-in-1981-050.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!

Jean-Fred (talk) 15:22, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Ярослав Любомиров Калицин

Hello. I have written an Hebrew article about kalitsin who was the deputy of Alexander Belev. I understood there is an on going project with the Bulgarian National Archives. he was tried by the special court after WW2 and sentenced to 15 years. Maybe you can trace a photo of kalitsin?, perhaps photos from the court sessions? thanks [4] Assayas (talk) 17:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)