User talk:Arnaud Palastowicz

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Arnaud Palastowicz!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

File:KRAKÓW, AB. 158.JPG[edit]

Może warto zmienić nazwy tych plików? Możesz wnioskować o zmianę nazwy poprzez wstawienie szablonu {{rename|nowa nazwa|numer kryterium|słowne wytłumaczenie w kilku słowach}}
Numer kryterium można znaleźć na stronie Commons:Zmiana nazw plików. Pozdrawiam, miłego dnia Wieralee (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea for the new file name. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Falu red[edit]

Hi! I like your enthusiasm about red buildings! However, falu red is not a colour but a certain type of paint, containing iron ochre, silica and zinc. Vivo (talk) 12:42, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Surreal Barnstar Hires.png The Surreal Barnstar
Vielen Dank das Du meine Unwissenheit bei den von mir gemachten Bilder mit Deinem Wissen verknüpfst und somit meine Bilder sehr aufwertest. Herzlichst Ra Boe watt?? 12:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Ich freue mich über die Anerkennung meiner Arbeit. Gruß Arnaud

Moin Arnaud, sehr sehr gerne. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 22:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Gardenology photos[edit]

Hi Arnaud, thanks for the fantastic work you've been doing categorizing the photosǃ I know there are a number of photos that need to be deleted, you don't need to notify me each time. Please save your time for your great categorizing work. Thanksǃ --RaffiKojian (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Notify is automatic. Wasn't me. Face-smile.svg --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 17:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover![edit]

Commons File mover.svg

Hi Arnaud Palastowicz, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{speedy}}. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Deutsch | English | 한국어 | മലയാളം | Русский | Українська | +/− lNeverCry 04:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Rotklee und Großes Immergrün[edit]

Hallo, Du hast hier die Kategorie "Vinca major" entfernt. Warum? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 01:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Weil ich neben dem Klee nur ein Storchschnabelgewächs erkenne. Selbst wenn die durchschimmernden blauen Blüten am rechten Rand Vinca major sein sollten, halte ich es für immens übertrieben, die Vinca Kat zu setzen. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 10:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Categorising Panoramio uploads[edit]

When putting Panoramio uploads into correct categories, please also put them in (at least) the correct location (country, province, region) category per its location coordinates. So please do not place a file into the general Category:Streams but into, for instance, Category:Streams in Russia. Otherwise, we'd need to make a new Category:Uncategorized images of streams for all these uncategorised images of streams. Thank you. - Takeaway (talk) 17:21, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Bad filenames[edit]

Hello. I noticed that you have added a few files to Category:Images of plants with bad file names. I don't understand what is bad with File:Roscoea tibetica 001 GotBot 2016.jpg or File:Rittersporne (Delphinium) am Weg im Naturschutzgebiet Brand IMG 2712.jpg. Could you please clarify what's the problem? Regards Averater (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

This is no Roscoea tibetica. Roscoea tibetica looks like this.
This is Lupinus. No Delphinium and no Rittersporne on this pic.

Greetings! --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 20:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Aren't there other categories for misidentified plants? The category for bad filenames seems to be filled with autogenerated filenames. For the lupus one a request for rename would probably suffice. For the other I don't know what to do until I (or someone else) have identified the plant. That is why I have categorized it as unidentified and left it without any species category. If you feel that it need to be clarified by the filename until it is identified please request a rename. Though it is stated that it is unidentified in both the categorization and the description. --Averater (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Here is a category for misidentified plants. The Lupinus is already identified. I will likely change the file name. Files with a wrong species in the filename should absolutely be in the Category:Images of plants with bad file names, so the renaming is later not forgotten. They can of course also in the Category:Misidentified plants. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
The Roscoea is already in the misidentified category (a subcategory) and is not forgotten. I don't understand why a bad category choice would do anything other than make someone remove the improper category. If I would clean up in the bad file name category I would simply remove the ones above from the category with no further action. In the category for misidentified plants I would check the species on the other hand. --Averater (talk) 19:32, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
  1. The Roscoea is not in the Category:Misidentified plants. The Category:Unidentified Plants in Botaniska trädgården i Göteborg is not a subcat of Misidentified plants. But Roscoea should be in the Category:Misidentified plants.
  2. I see no bad category choice. I see only bad file names (Rittersporne and Roscoea).
--Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 22:20, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Ah. But that seems to be a unused and rather useless category. The category for _Un_identified plants seems like a better choice (and was the one I meant). Especially as this is unidentified and not misidentified. Bad file names do imply that there is something wrong, as in the other names (example: "553H0191 06.JPG"). These stand out and really seem (and are) out of place. --Averater (talk) 17:07, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  1. The Category:Misidentified plants is not unused and not useless. The category exists, so I use it. (I admit there is little activity.)
  2. Roscoea is misidentified which shows the filename (and until yesterday the description).
  3. The filename "553H0191 06.JPG" is bad because it's meaningless. The file name should describes what the image displays.
--Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
So fix it with {{rename}}.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:29, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Limnophila pictipennis[edit]

hello. Why this edit?--Pierpao.lo (listening) 16:16, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Limnophila is a genus of plants, no insect. Limnophila pictipennis must be put in cat of insects. I don't know the upper cat to Limnophila pictipennis. Anybody must add the right upper cat. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 16:22, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Done thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 18:10, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


I'm not sure I understand this. Are you planning to add Category:Facades in the United States to every building exterior in the country? It seems to me that the category has mainly been useful to characterize a facade without a building, or a facade where the original building behind it was replaced by another building. If it's applied to every building exterior, it seems to me it becomes useless. - Jmabel ! talk 15:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I put remarkable facades in this category, with ornaments or facades where the architectural style is recognizable. Not every building. Some architects look for beautiful facades as inspiration and so can look into this category. It's definitely not useless. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 16:27, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

"Architectural sculptures"[edit]

[1]: is "Architectural sculptures" really useful here? Category:Reliefs in Washington (state) is certainly useful here, but Category:Building ornaments and Category:Architectural sculptures in the United States seem largely redundant to that. The vast majority of reliefs are on buildings; if you really feel a distinction needs to be made here (I wouldn't), why not "architectural reliefs" subcats? "Sculpture" may be technically accurate for a terra cotta bas relief, but I can't imagine anyone searching for it along those lines. - Jmabel ! talk 15:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, "Architectural sculptures" is redundant. Seems to be all reliefs relate to architectural objects (also reliefs on trash bins, lamp posts, monuments, chests, and cabinets). The Category:Building ornaments is not redundant. Not all reliefs are building ornaments. Trash bin or lamppost don't be a building.
I will not create a new category "Architectural reliefs". This category would be useless. Seems to be all reliefs relate to architectural objects. So the existence of the Category:Reliefs is sufficient. - Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 21:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Today I found a relief which is no relate to architectural object: File:Centro de Memória do Corpo de Bombeiros 01.jpg --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 22:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Unidentified plants (low quality)[edit]

Hello, Please stop re-creating. See the relevant consensus at the CFD. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

This cat ist not empty. --Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 19:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


Gamasonwright (talk) 06:02, 26 February 2018 (UTC)