User talk:TSRL

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, TSRL!
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)‎ | +/−

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, TSRL!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

All categorised now.TSRL (talk) 09:12, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Up to date again.TSRL (talk) 07:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
And again.TSRL (talk) 11:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Once more.TSRL (talk) 08:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Typo correctedTSRL (talk) 14:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Armstrong Whitworth Argosy 59.jpg[edit]

Hi there TSRL. Could you confirm when this photo was taken? I wonder if it might be 1959 but I note that it says it was 12 September 1958. Could you confirm the date and add it to the appropriate category please. I assume it will either be Category:1958 Farnborough Airshow or Category:1958 Farnborough Airshow. Cheers. Adambro (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the typo: it was indeed 1959. I must have missed the categories for this one at least and will sort, though I'd not heard of the one you mention. As a newcomer to Commons, I've normally been putting things like Category:1950s aircraft, Category:Armstrong Whitworth aircraft, Category:Transport aircraft etc, i.e. aircraft not place. It's hard to know where to stop with categories, but if you think the Farnbro' label is useful I'll add it sometime. BTW, why do you type :Categories ...? The shots are building on my home gallery. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 19:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
To answer your question about the : in :Categories, it is used to link to a category instead of putting this site in the category. Now the reason I write you. Why you don´t use the deepest categories available? For example File:Buccaneer 62.jpg where you use the cats : 1960s aircraft, Blackburn aircraft, Carrier-based aircraft and Strike aircraft. Instead of these I just categorised the picture with the cat Blackburn Buccaneer. All Buccaneer are Blackburn aircrafts, carrier-based etc. so these cats have to added to the main cat Blackburn Buccaneer instead to every single picture.--D.W. (talk) 13:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. I'd not appreciated that many individual aircraft types had categories of their own, but I'll use them from now on when they have them. That will look neater and save typing. The next deepest level, the manufacturer e.g. Blackburn Aircraft is not much help: perhaps one should always create the type category, though lots of uploaders don't.TSRL (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I guess another good reason for going this way is that the type category set gets improved. I'm about to add Carrier based to the Blackburn Aircraft category set. Actually the Buccaneer ws already quite well described but other aircraft e.g. the Blackburn Skua are not, at present.TSRL (talk) 17:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, some of the type categories could have some more categories describing their main features (you could also sort them into categories from the numbers of engines or color of the plane, put to do it perfectly is very hard ;-)) Categories are created just if needed, so when you already have a few picture to put them in there. Aside, on commons there is this photo, very similar to yours. Now we can also add the year of the picture instead of a range from 61 to 70, or did they show this refuelling also in other years?--D.W. (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, my pics of XN694 and XJ571 are certainly 1962, but AirBritain (just Google 0n XN694) shows two other photos of the same pair, one from 1962 and the other from 1961. Sea Vixens certainly did buddy-buddy in 1961: there's a mention in Peter Cooper's Farnbro' book but there is also another photo in the Flight SBAC 1961 edition (on line). This shows a different pair of aircraft, as far as I can tell from the image XJ808 and XJ802. There is no reason why they should have used the same pair on each day, of course, though for that reason I was a bit surprised to find the same pair performing in both years. Anyway, it seems that "Sea Vixens refuelling arp.jpg" (a much better shot than mine) could have been 1961 or '62. I don't know if they refuelled at later shows; once a routine has appeared a couple of times it may get missed out in reviews of later shows. Might be worth a look at the show eds of Flight for 1962, 1964 and 1968.TSRL (talk) 15:34, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
After another look I think the Flight photo serials are probably XJ608 and XJ602, but the point is unchanged.TSRL (talk) 19:29, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I see it is not as simple as I thought before ;)--D.W. (talk) 23:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Blackburn Type D.jpg[edit]

My suggestion with this image would be to upload the original and simply note in the description that wing in the foreground is part of a different aircraft. It's just when I first looked at the photo I was confused about what is was showing and I think it would be less confusing to me and probably others to have a wing of another aircraft as part of the shot because that can be expected when taking photos of subjects in confined spaces. Adambro (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Followed your suggestion. Simple is often best. One day it will be calm enough for it to fly and I'll get a better shot.TSRL (talk) 17:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Auster AOP9[edit]

Please see my reply to you on my Talk Page - Arpingstone (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:CLWCurlew.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:CLWCurlew.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:CLWCurlew.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

D.W. (talk) 21:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:Willoughby_Delta_8.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Willoughby_Delta_8.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

D.W. (talk) 00:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:Willoughby_Int.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Willoughby_Int.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Willoughby_Int.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

D.W. (talk) 00:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:CardenBAux3a.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:CardenBAux3a.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:CardenBAux3a.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

D.W. (talk) 00:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:CardenBAux2a.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:CardenBAux2a.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:CardenBAux2a.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

D.W. (talk) 00:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:CardenBAux1a.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:CardenBAux1a.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:CardenBAux1a.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

D.W. (talk) 00:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

File:G-IZII.jpg[edit]

G-IZII.jpg

Hi TSRL,
Just stumbled across your in flight image of the File:G-IZII.jpg. As it's quite a low luminance image I wanted to ask whether you would mind if I balanced the contrast a little?
You're free to revert any changes, of course :-). Waiting for your Go/NoGo. --
ElHeineken (talk) 09:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free. It was a low luminance day and I quite liked the threatening light for my full sized print; but for WikiP purposes maybe brighter would be better.TSRL (talk) 10:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done Thanks for your reply. Feel free to object if you're not comfortable with the changes. --
ElHeineken (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


Short Cockle[edit]

Thanks for the extra note on dating the photos. It's always good to tidy these up. 8-) Andy Dingley (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Aviation Wikiproject on Commons?[edit]

Hey mate, I've had an idea of starting an Aviation WikiProject on Commons. I have created a page at User talk:Russavia/Proposal where I hope that if other editors think this is a good idea, we can all come up with ideas, etc. Please keep all comments on that page for time being, and if you know of other editors on Commons or on other language projects who might be interested in commenting, coming up with ideas, etc, please let them know of the discussion. Let's see if this could be a workable project. russavia (talk) 01:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Orao IIC.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 10:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Red link categories[edit]

Hi, I have just been dealing with various red link categories on the images you have uploaded in the past few days. I'll be obliged if you can please avoid adding categories that don't exist, unless you are about to add them minutes later. In the category system, red links are definitely to be avoided, because they don't show up in the category trees, and they may conflict anyway with existing categories that often differ from categories and article names on en:WP. For example, here we have Caproni as manufacturer, below which is Caproni airplanes. Now that of course should be Caproni aircraft, but I for one am put off by the large number of sub-cats that need amending, so it remains an anomaly. MTIA, PeterWD (talk) 09:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC) OK. I'll try to look out for this.TSRL (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Just another small observation: the Author field is for the author of the image file, not the author of the source, per Commons:First steps/Quality and description.MTIA, PeterWD (talk) 17:07, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Air 100[edit]

Hello. First sorry for the delay, I've just seen your message. I think a sharpened picture would be sufficient for an infobox until an other picture of this plane copyright free will be available, so you can upload it on WP. I have checked in my library of picture but unfortunatly I have no other picture of that glider. Best regards. Duch.seb (talk) 09:57, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

File:FIAT A.60 HP 135.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 20:38, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorted, I hope.TSRL (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:SchoettlerA.tif[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:SchoettlerA.tif. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:SchoettlerA.tif]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

JuTa 11:23, 7 July 2013 (UTC)


I have added the appropriate permission. My oversight.TSRL (talk) 20:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:T.30B Prefect.JPG[edit]

Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Slovenščina | Svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:T.30B Prefect.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.

Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 15:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


Afternoon Jarekt. Thanks for spotting that. I loaded the wrong image and forgot to delete it. I've marked it for speedy deletion.TSRL (talk) 16:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:Airbrakes and spoilers[edit]

TSLR,

You created category Category:Airbrakes and spoilers, apparently intended for airbrakes and spoilers in gliders only? There already exists Category:Air brakes (aircraft) and Category:Spoilers (aircraft wings), so perhaps a better way would be to create a new Category:Air brakes (gliders) as a subcat of both Category:Glider detail and Category:Air brakes (aircraft). Category for glider spoilers could be created in a similar way. MKFI (talk) 22:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the idea of a subcat. I'd prefer, though, to have just one, called say Category:Air brakes and spoilers (gliders). There are two main reasons for lumping them together. The first is that, if you go along with Martin Simon's definition of spoilers as upper surface, typically mid-chord flaps then rather few gliders have had them. Martin knows as much as most about gliders, having flown and redesigned them as well as understanding the aerodynamics of both full scale aircraft and low Re models. Second, there is not universal consistency about the distinction between spoilers and airbrakes. As a (rather obscure) example, the Merville SM.31 had "upper and lower surface spoilers with gap" according the The World's Sailplanes vol II, (1963) p.84 but "retractable air-brakes" according to Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1964/5. They are not claiming a different feature, just using a different categorisation; I'd be inclined to call them Schempp-Hirth airbrakes. Having two sub-categories would just lead to confusion and pedantry. Things may well be different for large, modern powered aircraft. Cheers, TSRL (talk) 09:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Creating a single Category:Air brakes and spoilers (gliders) that would be a subcat of both Air brakes and Spoilers would work. You may want to remark on the above explanation on the category talk page. The current Category:Airbrakes and spoilers is not good however as the name gives no indication that it is intended for gliders. MKFI (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll move it to Category:Air brakes and spoilers (gliders) and see if I can do the sub-cat thing. Thanks,TSRL (talk) 20:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC) All done,TSRL (talk) 16:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Oktoberfest 2009[edit]

Sorry. I can not provide more info about that plane. It is an undentified glider for me.--Jordiferrer (talk) 17:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back, anyway.TSRL (talk) 08:54, 21 March 2014 (UTC)