User talk:Auntof6

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


Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Auntof6!

Rd232 (talk) 14:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paintings by country - deja vu[edit]

Hi Auntof6. You have made an edit that make sweeping changes to the way paintings by country are organised. Maybe you are not aware that there are at least three lines of categorizing paintings by country, being by country of origin, by country of location and by the depicted country. You seem to assume that this is just about country of location, but the World is not that simple. Please revert your edit. If you do not agree on the way paintings by country is set up, we have forums to discuss that, and your comments there will be welcome. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 07:11, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rsteen: I am aware of that. Would you please give me an example of the edit I made that looked like I thought it was only country of location? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again: This one: Revision as of 06:25, 5 August 2020 by Auntof6 (talk | contribs) (removed Category:Paintings; added Category:Paintings by location). After that, users can not directly access Paintings by Country from the Paintings category - except by taking a detour around "location". And as stated, location is just one of the three dimensions in the category structure. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 10:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. Your lack of response indicates that either
a) You were actually not "aware of that".
b) You were aware of it, bút could not be bothered.
c) Some other reason?
The category system concerning "paintings by country" is still broken on account of your edit, so please revert it. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 11:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rsteen: Thanks for the nudge. I have undone my edit.--Auntof6 (talk) 19:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for being so civil. The edit you undid was, however not the one in question. But assuming you meant to, the work has been done for you so this matter can be closed. Hope you agree. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 05:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rsteen: Sorry. Next time, if there is a next time, it would help if you give a link to the diff instead of just giving the edit summary. But, yes, I'm fine with whatever you did. Cheers. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Sorry to bring this up again, but we are back at the discussion in August 2020. Have you changed your mind since then? (Revision 585613499, August 25, 2021, 10:49). Cheers Rsteen (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rsteen: Did this fix it? (Notice that I gave a link to the change in question. Please do the same in return, as requested above, if you want me to look at something. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:13, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. Thanks so much. Yes it is fixed. Please note that the omission of the link was not caused by ill will, it just demonstrates my technical inabilities. The best I could come up with was the number of the revision. Cheers Rsteen (talk) 03:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vifs remercîments[edit]

Thank you for your very useful recategorization work! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Archaeodontosaurus: De rien! While we're on the subject, I noticed the many painting categories that each contain only one file. It seems to me that a category isn't needed for only one file, so I was thinking of bringing them up at Commons:Categories for discussion to suggest that they be deleted. What would you think of that? --Auntof6 (talk) 07:28, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is to allow one to make a link with Wikidata, but also to go to more relevant categories where the subject is quickly found. This is important for a label like VI. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know.[edit]

[1] [2]. Regards --A.Savin 13:21, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Auntof6, if I have done something wrong please let me know. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 15:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Krok6kola Rope bridges are a type of suspension bridge. I have put the suspension bridge category back. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Sorry for my mistake. Krok6kola (talk) 17:56, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Krok6kola No problem. We're all constantly learning. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:42, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Village Pump[edit]

Hello, regarding the misidentified image, please see also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rex Whistler (1905-1944) - Lady Caroline Paget (1913–1976), Later Lady Duff - 1176330 - National Trust.jpg. De728631 (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@De728631: Thanks. Would the same issue apply to any of the other files in Category:Portrait paintings of Lady Caroline Paget in National Trust places? They're all by the same artist. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, thank you for notifying me. I have added them to the deletion discussion. De728631 (talk) 21:14, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:San Francisco files needing cleanup[edit]

When removing files from Category:San Francisco files needing cleanup, please make sure that you've fully cleaned up the file before removing it from the cleanup category. That means not just categorization, but also a useful filename and description. A number of files that you've removed from the category, like File:San Francisco (37575113714).jpg, have poor filenames and no description. It's totally fine if you only want to add categories, but in that case please leave the files in the cleanup category. Thanks, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:52, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: I would have liked to do that, but there was no indication of exactly why they were put in that category. The only thing I saw was some {{Uncategorized}} templates, so that's what I took care of. You can tell me to check the filenames and descriptions, but 1) if they need something else, that isn't indicated, and 2) my interpretation of Commons:File renaming is that file renaming is discouraged.
However, I will grab all the ones I changed and check at least that they have good descriptions. If I see any obvious bad file names, I'll fix those (such as one I saw that said the image was a cable care when it was actually a streetcar). If there's any other kind of cleanup they need, how would I know? -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:23, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added {{Files needing cleanup}} to the category; hopefully that clarifies the types of cleanup that are needed. As a rule of thumb, a filename must identify the subject of the file, and usefully distinguish it from other files about the subject. The latter part is particularly relevant here; a filename of "San Francisco" or "Golden Gate Bridge" is utterly useless when we have thousands of images of each. If a filename isn't sufficient to allow easy identification of the file, then the benefits of renaming it far outweigh the downsides. With one or two exceptions, every file currently in the category has a useless filename and needs to be renamed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]