User talk:Berdea

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

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, Berdea!

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").

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.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:50, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Catégorie:Lomener[edit]

Dear Berdea, I see you've created "Catégorie:Lomener". However, all namespaces on this project are in English (see the language policy). I have added the template {{speedy}} to request deletion of "Catégorie:Lomener". ;) Please ask any questions you might have. Yours sincerely, Mathonius (talk) 00:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes I make a mistake and I have asked for the deletion of this "Catégorie:Lomener". Thanks--Berdea (talk) 00:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Erreurs[edit]

Bonjour, merci pour le signalement, j'ai essayé de revoir la situation en faisant entre autres les renommages. Vérifiez que ce soit ok, sinon dites le moi. Merci. Sebleouf (talk) 10:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Merci pour les renommages. Apparemment tout a bien fonctionné. Il reste une image à renommer (erreur de chapelle) et depuis votre message, j'ai refait quelques erreurs avec des demandes de renommage à la clef. Merci en tout cas pour votre aide.--Berdea (talk) 10:57, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Tableau de Maurice Gottlob 2.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Tableau de Maurice Gottlob 2.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Merci de vérifier aussi les plans que vous avez photographiés pour cette chapelle, ils sont eux aussi probablement sous droit d'auteur. --Miniwark (talk) 20:47, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Comment puis-je vérifier que les photos prises des différents plans peuvent versées dans Commons. Ils ont été prises en présence de la conseillère municipale en charge des travaux de restauration. Bien cordialement.--Berdea (talk) 22:05, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Église_Sainte-Catherine_du_Cannet_-_Panneau_de_présentation.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Église_Sainte-Catherine_du_Cannet_-_Panneau_de_présentation.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Sebleouf (talk) 14:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished[edit]

Logo Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 català | dansk | Deutsch | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | français | galego | magyar | Lëtzebuergesch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | русский | svenska | +/−

Dear Berdea,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help.
You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Map of participating countries of Wiki Loves Monuments 2011
Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 20:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Saint-Barthélémy de Mougins - Présentation.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Chapelle Saint-Barthélémy de Mougins - Présentation.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Wknight94 talk 14:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Élévation.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Élévation.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Wknight94 talk 14:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Projet de restauration 2.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Projet de restauration 2.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Wknight94 talk 14:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Pathologie.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-Vie de Mougins - Pathologie.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!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Wknight94 talk 14:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Trescat Lorient 1903-1703.gif[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 08:58, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R1 Announcement[edit]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open![edit]

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2012 Picture of the Year contest.

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement[edit]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open![edit]

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement[edit]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results[edit]

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Berdea,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Villahermosa del Río.jpg[edit]

Bonjour, hélas pour cette nomination je ne suis pas sur que l'on puisse revenir en arrière, moi je n'ai fais que confirmer les résultats du robot. Mais un des administrateur qui fréquente la page (Jee ou A.Savin par exemple) pourrait certainement mieux te répondre. Par contre une solution pourrait etre de la nominer une deuxième fois. Meme processus mais il faut mettre /2 après le nom du fichier comme ceci : Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Villahermosa del Río.jpg/2 tout en expliquant bien la raison qui te pousse à nominer cette image une seconde fois, en l'occurence qu'elle ait toutes ces chances au meme titre que les autres. L'erreur est humaine après tout. J'espère t'avoir aidé. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 19:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Maps of Catalonia[edit]

Category:Maps of Catalonia es una subcategoría de Category:Geography of Catalonia, que ha su vez es una subcategoría de Category:Catalonia, por lo que añadir en Category:Catalonia a Category:Maps of Catalonia es una inclusión reiterativa.--JT Curses (talk) 15:14, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Edicions arbitràries?[edit]

Bona tarda, Berdea: He observat que fa unes setmanes estàs fent edicions de pobles de Catalunya com aquesta de la Granada. Et detallo a continuació les incorreccions que hi veig:

  • Elimines la categoria "Populated places in Alt Penedès". No s'han de treure categories posades per altres editors a no ser que siguin òbviament errònies, que no és el cas. L'editor Jtcurses ha esmerçat molt de temps i esforç per organitzar aquesta categoria. No la destrossis.
  • Afegeixes la categoria "Municipalities in the province of Barcelona". No cal, perquè ja té la de "Municipalities in Alt Penedès" que penja de l'anterior. Has posat una categoria redundant.
  • Canvies la posició de les coordenades deixant-les en primer lloc. Per què? No has observat que TOTES les categories de pobles de Catalunya tenen en primer lloc la descripció (amb l'enllaç a la Viquipèdia), ID del monument o espai protegit (si s'escau) i finalment les coordenades? Respecta, si us plau, les edicions dels altres i evita modificacions tan arbitràries com aquesta.

Ja no em poso en la clau d'ordenació de les categories "Cultural heritage monuments in ...". Tu hi poses "Monuments". Jo hi tenia un espai en blanc perquè volia que la categoria quedés en lloc preferent a la categoria del poble. En aquest tema (i en altres) ja no sóc bel·ligerant. He tirat la tovallola.

Tornant a les categories dels pobles, crec que hauries de revertir les edicions que has fet amb anterioritat. De les coordenades ja me n'encarrego jo.--Isidre blanc (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

La Category:Municipalities es una subcategoria de Category:Populated places by type, o sigui també subcategoria de Category:Populated places, de manera que, seguint el model de les categories superiors, es correcte que Category:Municipalities in Alt Penedès sugui subcategoria de Category:Populated places in Alt Penedès i, si els municipis són inclosos en les dues categories, seria redundant. Aquí, no només a Catalunya, també a Espanya, les categories de municipis i de "llocs habitats", no s'han fet servir sent una subcategoria una de l'altra, sinó que unes s'han fet servir per als municipis i l'altra per a les entitats menors de població (aldeas, pedanies, etc.), el que no sembla correcte tenint en compte el model de categories principals.--JT Curses (talk) 19:49, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Les meves edicions no són arbitràries. Per contra, que es poden escoltar bé impugnats (disculpi el meu català que no es mol bo) :
Sincerament. --Berdea (talk) 09:48, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Les categories no serveixen perquè es pugui veure que un municipi pertany a una província, sinó per classificar. Això, en tot cas es pot fer en el text de descripció (afegint si no existeix). Però no es poden fer inclusions redundants, que un arxiu o categoria estigui inclòs alhora en una categoria i en una subcategoria de la mateixa, encara que estigui diversos nivells per sota. El d'incloure les localitats menors en "Populated places", també és redundant si "Municipalities" és una subcategoria de l'anterior, perquè ja estan incloses en les categories concretes de cada municipi i, per tant, incloses en "Municipalities" i "Populated places".--JT Curses (talk) 19:07, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi ha una altra raó perquè no es pot penjar "Municipalities" de "Populated places": hi ha molts municipis (a la província de Lleida n'he comptat 25) que no són llocs habitats. Per exemple: aquesta edició de Jtcurses de Castellet i la Gornal, no està bé, ja que hi ha posat la categoria de "Populated places.." sense ser-ho (Castellet sí que ho és, i la Gornal, també, però Castellet i la Gornal, no). En canvi, aquesta edició de la Granada és correcta i hauria de ser la definitiva, puig que és una vila i municipi ensems. Encara hi ha el tercer cas: una vila que no és municipi, exemple Category:Sant Genís (Jorba) que va només a "Populated..". Abans d'embolicar la troca, es mantenien les categories de "Municipalities.." i de "Populated.." per cada província per separat. No es barrejaven. En la primera només municipis i en la segona qualsevol ciutat, vila, poble o nucli habitat (fos o no un municipi). Tal com es pot veure encara a les províncies de Tarragona i Lleida. Si es volen desglossar per comarques, penso que caldria mantenir el mateix criteri. Suposo que és el que pretenia fer en Jtcurses.--Isidre blanc (talk) 22:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Je me permets d'ajouter un autre argument : les habitants d'une commune sont habitants à la fois d'une comarque (avec le conseil comarqual comme administration locale) et d'une province (avec la députation comme administration locale). Même si toutes les comarques appartiennent à une province (sauf la comarque d'Osona), il peut être intéressant de bien marquer cette double appartenance. Par ailleurs c'est vrai qu'avoir toutes les communes dans une seule catégorie simplifie de travail de recherche et modification sur Commons.
Permetin-me afegir un altre argument: els habitants d'un municipi viuen al mateix temps en una comarca (amb el consell comarqual com el govern local) i en una província (amb la diputació com el govern local). Fins i tot si totes les comarques pertanyen a una província (excepte la comarca d'Osona), és interessant per a marcar clarament aquesta doble pertinença. A més, és cert que tenir totes les ciutats en una categoria de treball simplifica la recerca i la modificació en Commons.--Berdea (talk) 10:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

J'ajoute une observation. Considérez-vous utile d'ajouter dans la catégorie liée à une commune (voir par exemple la Category:Mollet del Vallès), un encadré avec le blason, le drapeau et l'emplacement dans la comarque. On trouve ces informations dans l'article sur Wikipédia et cela me semble inutile de les remettre sur Commons, d'autant que blason, drapeau et emplacement sont déjà catégorisés. Qu'en pensez-vous ?
Afegeixo una observació. ¿Es considera útil afegir en la categoria vinculada a un municipi (veure per exemple la Category:Mollet del Vallès), una caixa amb l'escut, la bandera i la ubicació en la comarca. Trobem aquestas informacions en l'article en la Vikipèdia i sembla inútil de tornar los à posar a Commons, especialment pel que el escut, la bandera i la ubicació ja estan categoritzats. Que en penseu ? --Berdea (talk) 10:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Si quieres hacer las cosas en Wikmedia según las normas establecidas, no se puede incluir una página o archivo de manera redundante en una categoría y una subcategoría de esta, excepto en categorías especiales consensuadas y anecdóticas, por lo tanto incluir una categoría de municipio en la categoría de la comarca y en la de la provincia, sólo se puede hacer cuando la comarca no está incluida en la provincia por que no hay coincidencia en el territorio, tal como pasa, como tu dices, con Osona, pero tambien con Selva, Cerdanya y alguna más. En cuanto a lo de incluir banderas, escudos, etc. en administraciones territoriales es algo que yo recuerdo se hace desde que yo conocí la Wikimedia. Porque la manera de dar información a quien accede a la wikimedia es a través de los encabezados, no de las categorías, cuya función es clasificar y para que sea funcional no puede contener redundancias. Obviamente, la Wikimedia no es la Wikipedia y esa información tiene que ser básica, no desarrollar temas, pero tampoco puede forzar a navegar a otros lugares, Wikipedia incluida, para obtener un dato básico, como, en el caso de un territorio administrativo, serían la descripción, simbolos y localización, con los enlaces necesarios para acceder a la Wikipedia en caso de querer profundizar en la información. La Category:Mollet del Vallès ¿crees que no cumplía con todo esto? ¿crees qué, desencuadrando la maquetación, situando las descripciones por delante de todo los demás y con otra plantilla, sin encajar con la tabla de los símbolos, y haciendo el encabezado ocupe muchísimas más líneas y escondiendo más las subcategorías y los archivos contenidos debajo de la pantalla (no todo el mundo accede con grandes resoluciones de pantalla), es lo correcto?
WikimediaMollet1.png WikimediaMollet2.png
--JT Curses (talk) 14:06, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Si us plau , en català ! --Berdea (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)--Berdea (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Blason Es famille Beratarrechea (Baztan).svg[edit]

c'est quoi le problème avec ce fichier ? --Chatsam (talk) 17:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Il n'y a aucun problème avec ce fichier, j'ai simplement rationnalisé les catégories en créant la catégorie Category:Coats of arms of families of Baztan qui permet de distinguer les blasons familiaux des blasons de la commune. Par ailleurs tous les fichiers de type svg sont bien à classer dans une catégorie adéquate Category:SVG coats of arms of families of the Basque Country. Concernant le missing permission, je pense qu'il s'agit d'une erreur de manipulation qui a été corrigée dans ma modification suivante. --Berdea (talk) 22:54, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Re:Vitoria-Gasteiz[edit]

Ok, thank you. Un saludo. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 03:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)