User talk:Auntof6

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

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Auntof6!

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

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team![edit]

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Suppression de catégories non consensuelles[edit]

Bonjour Auntof6. Je ne suis pas d'accord avec tes modifications récentes sur les catégories d'églises (exemple sur une catégorie que j'ai créée). Le fait qu'elles soient catégorisées à l'intérieur de chaque département par saint patron est certes utile, mais ne doit pas empêcher la recherche qui se fait principalement par commune, ce qui arrive si on supprime les catégories « Churches in (nom du département) ». Je pense que toutes les catégories des églises de ce département devraient se retrouver soit dans la category:Churches in Hautes-Pyrénées, soit dans Category:Monuments historiques in Hautes-Pyrénées (churches), en plus de la catégorie spécifique au saint patron. Avant de créer la catégorie d'une église, je regarde d'abord si elle existe dans ces deux catégories, car il arrive de temps à autre qu'elle ne soit pas rattachée à la commune concernée (suite à erreur de commune ou oubli de lui affecter la catégorie de la commune).

De plus, dans l'exemple cité, tu t'es planté en lui attribuant la Category:Saint Peter churches in Hautes-Pyrénées alors que l'église est déjà rattachée à la Category:Saint Peter in chains churches in Hautes-Pyrénées. Père Igor (talk) 13:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

@Père Igor: My French is not good enough to be sure I understand everything you said. If I reply in English, will you be able to understand? --Auntof6 (talk) 00:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
No. Père Igor (talk) 09:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/11/Category:Images including source code in their description[edit]

Just an FYI. CFD was initially done wrong, so you didn't get a notice. - Jmabel ! talk 00:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/12/Category:Church of the Holly Apostles Peter and Paul-Topcider[edit]

Hi Auntof6, thank you for moving and closing this CfD request. In the future please be so kind to remove the CfD template if it's done. Best, --Achim (talk) 09:00, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

So sorry! I will remember that in the future. Thanks for the reminder! --Auntof6 (talk) 10:08, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


Please be a bit more careful when editing templates. You made at least 12.000 files disappear in Category:IGESPAR with known IDs. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 17:34, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Category changes[edit]

Hello, I appreciate the changes you are making to the file namespace. However, making twelve edits to one file just changing categories, is not appropriate. You need to find another form of semi-automation like AWB or VFC, either may be a better solution. if you are going to continue this. If needed, you can also enlist the help of a bot at Commons:Bots/Work requests. Riley Huntley (talk) 06:27, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

@Riley Huntley: I see your point. I usually do minimize edits in cases like that, but this one was worse than I've seen before: there was a set of files that all had 20 or so categories, most redlinked and in Spanish. Many of the categories were duplicate, just a different form of the words (for example, if the names had been in English, they could have been something like HYDROSEEDING, HYDRO SEEDING, hydro seeding, hydroseeding, seeding, hydroseeders, etc. -- all on each file). I was working with a category at a time instead of a file at a time. Until I consolidated the categories, I didn't know what the categories needed to be. In any case, I'm through with that particular batch. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:40, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Good to know, I've experienced similar before. Sometimes too, you don't realize how many times you've edited the same page until you see your contribs. Have a good weekend! Riley Huntley (talk) 06:42, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
You're doing it again. Riley Huntley (talk) 07:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes I am. When the issue is the categories and not the files, sometimes that happens. What problem, exactly, is this causing? --Auntof6 (talk) 07:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't see why you don't use a different program, which would be just as effective, but do it in less edits. It shouldn't require six edits per page to complete one task, it floods otherwise. Riley Huntley (talk) 07:57, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
It might be just as effective, and almost as accurate, but it would take more time to do the setup. I'm not doing that many sets of them. In this last case, I came upon the categories individually while looking through Special:WantedCategories -- I wasn't looking at the files themselves, so I didn't see that there were multiple ones. In any case, I don't think what I've done is that much compared to the total number of changes being made. Might I suggest that you use the "Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist" option on the recent changes tab in your preferences? that way, each file will show up only once. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:07, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
I am not speaking of flooding recent changes on-wiki, but rather off-wiki in IRC counter vandalism network channels. If you're not doing many sets, then ignore my messages. Have a good weekend! Riley Huntley (talk) 08:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)