User talk:BrightRaven

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

Contents

Image:Hainaut_Modern_Arms.svg[edit]

Hello. I contact you because I have a problem with this image: I cannot see the lines of partition. I guess it's a display problem, although I have the last version of Mozilla Firefox. Can you confirm me that the lines are correct in the original image? The arms should look like this : [1] Thank you for your answer. Regards, BrightRaven 21:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I usually don't draw lines of partition, but in this case I should have, because it's not obvious that it's a quartered shield. I will add them. Ipankonin 11:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

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, BrightRaven!

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 05:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Categorisation in Belgium[edit]

Hallo, thank you for your great efforts and improvements. It is important to know that in Belgium, we only categorise at two levels: country and city/town/village. Although some town/villages/... are belonging to a city, their churches/city halls/castles/people/ ... are are categorised directly at the Belgian level. --Foroa (talk) 19:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Vair et bandé[edit]

Ton avis est totalement faux, ton interprétation de ce que sont partitions charges, couleurs etc a sérieusement besoin d'être affiné. Merci de remettre hors de doutes ces blasons parfaitement corrects. --Ssire (talk) 21:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

identity confirmation[edit]

Hello, If you can confirm that this diff was performed by you and not by a random person. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/w/index.php?title=Commons:Graphic_Lab_School/Images_to_improve&diff=prev&oldid=19769883
Thanks in advance. Confirm it by replying while being logged under your account. Esby (talk) 11:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Coats of arms by blazon[edit]

Bonjour,

Comme tu le vois, je me suis donné à fond sur Category:Coats of arms by blazon. Si tu as des idées/conseils, ils sont les bienvenus.

Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 10:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Plus je cherche, plus je trouve !
Petite astuce que moi j'utilise : le mot magique PAGENAME.
Par contre, je viens de me rendre compte que j'avais placé de nombreux blasons dans Category:Lions in heraldry au lieu des sous-catégories.
Petite question : je pense renommer Category:Cercelée in heraldry en Category:Cross moline in heraldry, qu'en penses-tu ?
Et sinon, sais-tu faire fonctionner Catscan ? (chez moi, il mouline mais ne donne aucune résultats...)
Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 14:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
J'ai été demandé sur le projet héraldique anglophone, wait and see.
Catscan marche finalement (mais rame pas mal), ça peut-être utile pour croiser les catégories sur les formes et celles sur les couleurs.
Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 09:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Effectivement, j'ai fait un peu trop vite (surtout que la Croatie est passé de "argent et gueules" à "geules et argent", confusionnant tout ça). Hésite pas à passer et corriger derrière moi (je ne suis pas un grand spécialiste de l'héraldique).
Je suis parti à faire les catégories par nombres de meubles (Category:2 roses in heraldry et Category:3 roses in heraldry), je pense continuer (avec les étoiles notamment). Qu'en penses-tu ? Que faire des blasons qui possèdent deux fois deux étoiles ? On les mets dans deux ou quatre étoiles ? (pour le moment, je fais plutôt le premier, ce qui me semble plus logique héraldiquement mais plus contre-intuitif...)
PS : j'ai entamé une discussion sur fr:Discussion Projet:Blasons sur le nommage des fichiers.
Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 08:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
PPS : je suis un peu perdu dans les chefs. Est-ce que un chef est forcément un semé (Chef de France semble dire que non) et dans cas cas, est-ce que File:Blason Rennes.svg peut aller dans Category:Chiefs ermine in heraldry ? Idem pour les chefs à 4 ou 5 fleur-de-lys, chef de France ou pas ? Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 10:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, dans ce cas, il faudrait plutôt Category:Chiefs with ermine spots in heraldry ? (question théorique ; pas sur que ce soit justifié du point de vue du nombre de blasons concernés)
Même chose pour les abeilles du "chef d'empire" ? (là, il y a potentiellement plus de candidats).
Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 15:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Blason et catégorisation[edit]

Salut,

Je me posais un peu la même question. Par exemple, quand un blason contient 2 étoiles car il est écartelé avec deux blasons contenant 1 étoile chacun, dois-je catégoriser dans 1 ou 2 étoiles ? (pour l’instant, j’ai juste pas catégorisé les blasons composés).

Donc, je suis d’accord avec toi, les catégories actuelles ne sont pas assez fines pour bien catégoriser. Par contre, pour les noms je ne sais pas. Je dois dire que je ne suis pas vraiment convaincu par la forme de tes noms. Plutôt que Category:Jerusalem (COA element), je verais Category:Coats of arms composed with the jerusalem cross. De mon côté, je commence à réfléchir à une modèle qui catégoriserait directement à partir du blasonnement (mais il y a du boulot).

Pour la croix grecque, a priori je suis pour mais je te suggère de d’abord en discuter avec le créateur de la catégorie (Ludger1961 (talk · contribs)).

Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 10:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

"Hello. I noticed you have added multiple categories to the File:Arpad coa.svg. Imho, these categories are not appropriate because they are too general. Actually, "files should only be in the most specific category that exists for certain topic" (see Commons:Categories#For more appropriate categorization). By the way, I noticed you upload many coats of arms. Maybe you could categorize them in a better way, when uploading them. If you need some help about the categorization of coats of arms do not hesitate to ask me. Best regards, BrightRaven (talk) 10:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)"

I can't nothing about the categories. Firstly, because my English is bad. Secondly, I don't know too much things about coats of arms. I'm making pictures for the http://hu.wikibooks.org/wiki/Heraldikai_lexikon I'm just drawing. If you can help me, thats good. If you have enough time, you can see my pictures and please sort them correctly. I'm sorry, I can just drawing.

Madboy74 (talk) 13:47, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

File:NewGerb Almaty 2010.jpg[edit]

Salut, BrightRaven!

I updated the category changes made by you - Almaty city is not a part of Almaty province, the city is even not the capital city of Almaty province! BR, --Ds02006 (talk) 17:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Armorial Wijnbergen.jpg[edit]

Hi BrightRaven. Nice job on adding notes to File:Armorial Wijnbergen.jpg. That'll be really useful to many people.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 10:23, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry)[edit]

Category discussion notification Many subcategories of Category:Or (heraldry) have been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which they should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created some of those categories, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for discussion 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.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

--ŠJů (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Saxon Arms on British COAs[edit]

I have sources, including Boutell's which states otherwise, where is yours? Sodacan (talk) 15:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

'Boutell's heraldry': "...in the Shield of Saxony-Barry of ten or and sa., over all a chaplet of rue vert" Page 109. And now yours? Sodacan (talk) 16:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid if we are going to properly get into this, then we cannot base anything on opinion (I don't have an opinion myself, one way or the other), my sources however are modern and states quite clearly so. Lets go and find more and then comeback soon then we can see who has more sources, since I am quite curious to know the truth. The alternatives for the 'right/or wrong' blazon have been made and is just sitting on my desktop, when we come to a conclusion I will be ready. So bring me your arguments, so we can end it once and for all. Best Regards, Sodacan (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Edwin Henry Landseer - Queen Victoria and Prince Albert at the Bal Costumé of 12 May 1842.JPG

(Sorry to jump in) - I thought it would be quite easy to find an answer to that just looking at contemporary reliefs and paintings of coats of arms of members of the British Royal House, but it is proving to be more hard to find such images at Commons than I initially thought.

Incidentally, I've found this intriguing painting (right). What are those coats of arms on the back of the seats, and why they do not ressemble the royal coats of arms of both of them, and why the Wettin coat is absent? --- Darwin Ahoy! 17:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what is going on with that painting, it looks like France (ancient) quartering England and impaled with something (Flanders?) I think the painting will only complicate things. Sodacan (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, that was enough to understand the painting and the COAs. It's a masquerade, so they were dressed as Edward III and Filipa de Hainault. That's where those coats of arms come from, though they seem to be standing in front of each other seat in the painting. This painting does not help in your question, indeed, sorry for the intermission.--- Darwin Ahoy! 17:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, the Victorians and their Gothic fetish! I should have known. And Thank you, by the way for the categorisation (correctly) of so many images, it is such a great improvement from before. Marvellous work indeed! Sodacan (talk) 17:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Sources of "Or and Sable"[edit]

  • 'The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales' by Sir Bernard Burke (of Burke's Peerages fame) (1878), in his description of the COA of the Prince of Wales: barry of ten or and sa., a crown of rue in bend vert, for SAXE-COBURG.
  • 'The Royal Heraldry of England' by Pinces and Pinces (I use this alot) (1974), Description for Prince Albert: Or and Sable, for Ernest I and II (Albert's father and brother, respectively): Barry of ten or and sable. The book also have images of the Garter stall plates of Prince Albert, Prince Ernest II, Albert Edward Prince of Wales, Alfred, Duke of Edinburg and Leopold, Duke of Albany all showing: Or and sable.
This plus both Boutell and Fox-Davies, is my main argument. As you can see this is where I might have gone wrong (or right). Is it possible that Boutell himself got it wrong? and just spread it down to all the others? Anyway here is my case, no opinions, just sources (wish I have more images to show off though). Sodacan (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for intervention one year later. May I add to the confusion ? I have found two sources in old pictures:
I'm sorry it will not help...--Jebulon (talk) 15:21, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Contemporary images of Albert coat of arms[edit]

Well, I finally succeeded in my quest for contemporary images of Albert's COA, and found those interesting representations among the pictures of his memorial, though they do not answer your questions, but rather complicate them. Both COA are from the same time and were part of the memorial commissioned by Queen Victoria, so they must be accurate. However, both of them present two different versions of the COA, one with barry of ten or and sable and without the cadency argent (some say "white") three point label on the British COA, and another with barry of ten sable and or, and with the cadency label.

I'm not an expert of this, but could it be that the first is the kingdom's COA and the second is his personal COA? --- Darwin Ahoy! 19:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid to say this but the 'Or and Sable' one, is wrong, Prince Albert's arms in the UK quarter (1 and 4) has a label of three points with a cross gules in the middle label, the first example does not have this, the second 'Sable and Or' however does. Great find, but still doesn't answer nothing. Sodacan (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As a side note, this book "The church heraldry of Norfolk: a description of all coats of arms on brasses, monuments, slabs, hatchments, &c., now to be found in the county. Illustrated. With references to Blomefield's History of Norfolk and Burke's Armory. Together with notes from the inscriptions attached" (1887), Author: Farrer, Edmund, [2] describes at least three different variations of Saxony's barry of ten:

  • sable and or, p. 6 XXVII (Prince Albert COA?)
  • or and sable, p. 191 V 2
  • sable and argent, p. 262 I, coat of arms of Princess Helena, p. 207 XXXIX, COA next to the one of Queen Victoria)

Everyone is noted as "Saxony", without any comments saying there's n error in the colours (he placed such comments in other instances of coats of arms occasionally). I know this is not a proper source for this matter, but may be of some help.--- Darwin Ahoy! 20:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


Now, maybe this would be of some help, finally. See "The book of public arms : a complete encyclopædia of all royal, territorial, municipal, corporate, official, and impersonal arms" (1915) by Fox-Davies, Arthur Charles, pages 698-707 [3]:

  • Sable and or: Kindom of Saxony, Duchy of Saxe-Altheburg, Duchy of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, Duchy of Saxe-Meiningen-Hildburghausen, Duchy oh Anhalt, Liechteinstein
  • Or and sable: Saxony (province of Prussia), also the same in the COA of Prussia, p. 632

Here "or and sable" is only applied to the COA of Saxony when it refers to the province of Prussia. This difference could have been the source of all confusion, or is it something that was only defined after that (the book is from 1915)?--- Darwin Ahoy! 21:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

  • "Genealogy simplified and applied to the illustration of British history", 1843, Archibald Barrington, p. 89 [4], describes Albert's CoA as "barry of ten, sable and argent".
  • "Lectures on heraldry", 1844, Archibald Barrington, p. 187, specifies the Saxony quarter in Albert COA as "ten barry or and sable".
  • A Complete Guide to Heraldry, Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, 1909, describing prince Leopold COA: "quarterly with the arms of his illustrious House [' Barry of ten sable and or, a crown of rue in bend vert '], the Royal Arms in the first and fourth quarters", then says it was followed by Queen Victoria to his husband CoA (this was already mentioned by Bright Raven)

Some Saxe CoAs:

Old CoAs of Saxe[edit]

Or and sable[edit]

Sable and or[edit]

Wiki-de apparently says that before 1817 Saxony-Anhalt (corresponds to the Prussian Province of Saxony) used or and sable, as in the coat of Ballenstedt, origin of the House of Anhalt. Then in 1817 (Province of Saxony was created in 1815) it started being sable and or. Then in 1864 it was fixed on or and sable, to avoid confusion with the Kingdom of Saxony coat of arms, wich was sable and or. This is confirmed here.

As you can see above, both versions "or and sable" and "sable and or" were used prior to the formation of the Kingdom of Saxony, but whatever they were, the coat of arms of the Kingdom of Saxony became "barry of ten sable and or" by 1815 with Frederick Augustus I, the first king, and remained so until today.

Now, looking at the examples above, it seems possible that there could have been a distinction between Ernstine and Albertine, the former using or and sable, and the later sable and or. I don't know if it was so, and couldn't find any explanation for those variations. In any case, it would explain the "or and sable" in Prince Albert COA. It's also possible that by 1840 the traditional CoA of Saxony was still "or and sable". This seems to be confirmed in Boutell's 1868 "Heraldry, ancient and modern", when he says that "the ancient arms of Saxony were or nd sable" (page 285).

It's hard to explain, however, why Leopold would adopt "sable and or". It could be that the info by Fox-Davies was inaccurate - he placed it between squared brackets, which seems to imply that it was his own comment and not nothing actually written. See here and here the coincidence alluded to by Fox-Davies, it only says "the arms of His illustrious House" without actually defining them). However, it doesn't seem to be the case, as the arms were indeed registered in the College of Arms as "sable and or" in 1818, at least according to this 1830 book: [5] (On the other hand, the same notice in this 1818 bulletin doesn't include the description of the Saxony arms. Was the 1830 version apocryphal?). The register was made in 1818, almost at the same time that the tinctures for Saxony (Kingdom) were settled at "sable and or". I wonder if they were adopted in the CoA of Leopold as a diplomatic identification with the Kingdom of Prussia, but here we are, of course, within the realms of supposition.

Or maybe the order of the tinctures was somewhat aleatory back then. Maybe in 1815 the fashion was "sable and or" for Saxony, while by 1840 it was again "or and sable" in an attempt to revive the "old CoA of Saxony" ("Saxony moderne").

After all I've researched, I still couldn't come to a certain conclusion about this, though "or and sable" seem to be, by far, the most common version in the literature for Albert's CoA and "Saxony moderne". I'll start cataloguing all the Saxony derivatives according to the barry and order of tinctures, and we'll see what comes out of it.--- Darwin Ahoy! 08:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Your effort for trying to solve this problem is impressive. Thank you for that. I understand that there is no simple solution: nor barry of ten or and sable, nor barry of ten sable and or can be simply considered as wrong. So I suggest to remove all the barry of ten or and sable from the Category:Disputed coats of arms. Thank you again for your help. BrightRaven (talk) 17:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm glad I could help, even if no definitive conclusion could be reached. Katepanomegas also has found a royal decree from 1880 which establishes the Saxony tinctures in the Belgian Royal House coats of arms as "or and sable" (which does not mean they were that way before the decree, of course). I'm puzzled by all the flip-flopping with the tinctures of Saxony during the 19th century, but sadly couldn't find any meaningful explanation for that in the available literature. However, the above reference to "or and sable" as being "the ancient colours of Saxony" seems to point to some kind of "return to origins" fashion starting sometime before mid 19th century, as opposed to "sable and or - Kingdom of Saxony" fashion of 1815 which was afterwards perhaps perceived by some as an unwanted heraldic innovation.
In any case, both versions seem to have been used in the early times of the Saxon duchy. There's a very comprehensive study available at Google Books, Der sächsische Rautenkranz: heraldische Monographie (1863) which, while dealing primarily with the Saxon cranceline, sheds some light into the Saxony bars/barry issue, including some nice plates at the end of the book which would be good to have here at Commons. Unfortunately I don't read German, and could only grasp what is written there using Google translate, but it seems to be quite interesting, and includes document based dispelling of the myths surrounding the vert cranceline, including the one about Barbarossa which can still be found in profusion nowadays, even in official websites and heraldic studies.--- Darwin Ahoy! 20:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi ![edit]

Yes, I worked in 1997 with the Sellier's team, as a "nègre". My first essay maps are not choosed by the team, other versions are definitively choosed. I have old prints of these maps on paper and scan it. Anne le Fur knows my uploads. May I upload these maps with another licence, or change the licence ? Thanks,--86.211.214.122 17:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

hotcat[edit]

please use the ++-sign (on the left), which allows to change, remove or add multiple categorys. --Akkakk (talk) 11:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Removed category:Emblemata[edit]

Stop it, please! Pictures like "File:Rot an der Rot St. Johann Emblem 03.jpg" belong to Category:Emblemata. Thanks, --Hermetiker (talk) 10:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, an emblem consists of three components usually: "Lemma" (or "inscriptio"), "Icon" (or "pictura") and "Epigramm" (or "subscriptio"). In the picture of "Rot an der Rot" is the Lemma: "POST FATA SUPERSTES", the Icon is the mythical bird Phoenix and the Epigramm consists of the words: "Dem Phönix gleich aus Grabes Gruft Er sich und uns zum Leben ruft". It is irrelevant, whether the Emblem is in an "emblem book" or in a church as a fresco (in the majority of cases emblems are in books). Sometimes the Epigramm is missing like in the picture of "Weißenau". This emblem only consists of Lemma and Icon, but belongs to Category:Emblemata, too. Category:Emblemata cannot be a subcategory of category:Printmaking or category:16th century books! It doesn't make sense. Kind regards --Hermetiker (talk) 09:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I would propose the following: Category:Emblemata is reserved only for Emblem books. For emblems in churches, monasteries etc. we create Category:Applied Emblemata (or something like that). Kind regards --Hermetiker (talk) 19:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I think Category:Emblem books would be more explicit and avoid any confusion. - OK, and Category:Emblemata is reserved for emblems in churches, monasteries etc.? --Hermetiker (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Seated Buddha, India, Kusana period, 2nd-3rd century C.E., grey schist, Honolulu Academy of Arts.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 16:37, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


Pour ce qui est le collage de La Romántica Banda Local[edit]

Bonjour¡ BrightRay: (il fait deja beaucoup que je ne écris pas en francais, escusez-moi)

J'ai reÇue votre appel-mail, bien sûre. Je suis novice (recrue) au Wikipedie et alors peut être j'aurai fait quelque chose mauvaisement. Moi, je m'excuse sincèrement. La Romántica Banda Local etait l'agrupattion musicale dans celle-que j'avais chanté a ma jeunesse. Le collage en conflict, je l'avais fait moi même avec les covertures des cinq singles que nous avons publié dans une petite discographique (aujourd'hui disparue). De plus, des photos et les dessins sont'ils faits par moi et ma famille (il fait deja temps): mon père des photos et ma soeur les dessins. Elle est encore une grande peinte¡ Cependant je nes sais pas si les covertures ont de droits apres 30 années. Nous n'avons recue pas d'argent pour notres photos et dessins. Et c'est tout ce-que je peut vous dire. Salut¡

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you for adding rotation requests in my recent uploads. Actually I was doing that. I saw some images had already requested. Wondered. :) Thank you friend. :) SuryaPrakash Talk... 13:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Quarterly x and y[edit]

Bonjour. Je reste perplexe quand tu écris coat of arms whose blazon is exactly "Quarterly gules and argent". J'y ai mis des blasons de ce type mais qui comportent des meubles. Doivent-ils retourner dans Quarterly shields ou ont-ils droit à cette catégorie ? Question valable pour d'autres écartelés... Cordialement, ℍenry (Babel talk !) (Francophone ?) 18:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Le problème d'une catégorie stricte est qu'il n'y aura guère de blasons dudit modèle, comme actuellement dans Category:Quarterly argent and gules d'autant qu'entre nous, il est plutôt improductif de redessiner un blason qui existe déjà : pour le moment, il ne devrait en fait n'y en avoir que deux, l'écu allemand et l'écu français, non ? Sinon, c'est faisable et ça désengorgerait les autres cat dont celle que je découvre : Category:Counter-quarterly shields ! Tu vois que je ne suis pas très doué en blasonnement engliche ! En fait, c'est dans Category:Quarterly or and gules (Loupes) et dans Category:Quarterly gules and or (Baigneaux) que j'ai versé des blasons - Tu peux modifier si tu veux, n'est-ce pas ! -. Cordialement, ℍenry (Babel talk !) (Francophone ?) 12:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Bonjour. Le but étant d'alléger les catégories très encombrées et de classifier au mieux, le nombre de fichiers éligibles aux catégories définies ne doit pas être d'une importance capitale (sauf si ce nombre est zéro !). Le mieux, à mon sens, est de créer ces catégories strictes ou exactes quitte à revenir en arrière si ça ne donne pas les résultats escomptés. Si tu as besoin d'aide, n'hésite pas à m'appeler. Autre sujet concernant les catégories, j'ai commencé à mettre quelques traductions comme dans Category:Flax in heraldry ou Category:Beehives in heraldry. Qu'en penses-tu ? Autre truc, je ne sais pas bien faire la différence entre Category:Gorses in heraldry et Category:Genisteae in heraldry, genêt et ajonc, ça se ressemble terrible ! Cordialement, ℍenry (Babel talk !) (Francophone ?) 13:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Europa statue Bruxelles.jpg et File:Statue Europe Bruxelles.jpg[edit]

Bonjour BrightRaven Il se trouve que je suis à la fois l'auteur des photos et de l'oeuvre que l'on m'avait demandé d'envoyer à wikipedia.J'ai fait une rectification pour l'auteur de Romain44 pour Bernard Romain ce qui a alerté votre vigilance et bravo pour votre defense des droits d'auteur mais j'ai abandonné mes droits sur cette oeuvre, ne voulant pas faire un commerce d'une oeuvre représentant la paix.Désolé pour l'erreur car je ne maitrise pas tres bien la procedure .Si vous désirez une trace écrite je peux eventuellement vous l'envoyer. Mon mail personnel est removed address Bien cordialement Bernard Romain

Bonjour,
Merci pour votre message et désolé pour ces demandes de suppression. Pour que ces images soient gardées, il faut que vous envoyiez un e-mail à permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org qui respecte ce modèle. En effet, il nous faut une acceptation non équivoque d'une des licences autorisées par ce site. Merci pour vos contributions à Commons. Cordialement, BrightRaven (talk) 07:59, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:BigBen20120703p23.jpg[edit]

Do you know who is Fastily? Amitie 10g (talk) 04:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

What is tank and what is not[edit]

Please, don't add APCs, tank destroyers etc. to Tanks in Royal Military Museum, Brussels! Thank you beforehands. Ain92 (talk) 15:26, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

adding cats to deletion request[edit]

Please always place these cats inside a noinclude tag to prevent transcluding the cats into higher-level deletion request pages (daily/monthly overviews). --Denniss (talk) 11:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your notice and for correcting the concerned pages. BrightRaven (talk) 07:57, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Billeté[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Billeté has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Kiltpin (talk) 14:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

File:MarleneAguilar 06.jpg File:Tbw 400px.jpg File:The Key Cover 'red'.jpg[edit]

Greetings Sir,

Please be advised that I have personally asked Miss Marlene Aguilar if I could use her photographs for Wikipedia including the cover of her books. She agreed.

I am one of her soul children. Her supporters call her She Dragon. I am part of a group of freedom fighters who belong to She Dragon's Army.. have been in her home several times. Recently, on October 9, 2012 I protested with her in public in front of the Supreme Court against Cybercrime Law.

I just spoke to her on my mobile phone now and she says she is willing to write a letter of authorization for me allowing me to use the photographs I posted on Wikipedia. She added that she is willing to email you or call you on the phone. Also, if it please you, you may call he mobile phone +639209073521. She may also be reached via Skype - marlene.aguilar23.

Thank you! Jeryco Amor Mora

File:MarleneAguilar 06.jpg File:Tbw 400px.jpg File:The Key Cover 'red'.jpg[edit]

the photograph is Marlene Aguilar herself. .and She is the one who give me the permission to upload it and use it in her Article. I am the Graphic Artist of Ms . Marlene Aguilar and i am the one who made the bookcovers.. thank you

Canal Albert[edit]

Je ne comprends pas cette obsession à détruire des photos, qui sont depuis bientôt 6 ans sur la wikipedia et dont personne directement concernée (héritier) n'a réclamé la destruction. Si l'on continue ainsi, il n'y aura bientôt que des natures mortes sur la Wikipédia. J'ai l'impression que vous essayez d'être plus catholique que la pape en matière de copyright. Je ne vois pas en quoi l'auteur ou ses héritiers pourraient être lésés, que du contraire, cela fait la promotion d'artistes depuis longtemps oubliés. Je ne suis pas juriste, mais je voudrais bien des preuves juridiques plus concrètes comme quoi la publication sans but lucratif de cette photo serait interdite. A chaque fois qu'il y a un événement à cet endroit, la presse publie des photos de ce monument et personne n'a jamais réclamé.--Flamenc (talk) 15:48, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Commons est une base de données d'images libres, pouvant également être utilisées pour des buts commerciaux. C'est le principe de base de Commons. Je ne fais qu'appliquer les principes de Commons. Si vous n'êtes pas d'accord avec ses principes, vous pouvez tenter de les remettre en cause. Ça ne sert à rien de se plaindre pour ce cas particulier. BrightRaven (talk) 07:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
J'ai lu la loi sur le copyright belge (pas une lecture facile pour un non juriste) et je n'y ai rien trouvé qui justifierait l'effacement de cette photo, qui ne montre pas uniquement la statue, mais je vous dis, je ne suis pas juriste: loi sur le copyright belge. Je propose de demander l'avis à l'organisme (SABAM) en question la semaine prochaine. Non pas pour cette seule photo - je n'ai aucun lien émotionnel, même si je l'aime bien - mais pour la juste cause de l'information libre. La loi est ce qu'elle est et même si je la trouve en certains aspects injuste, ce n'est pas ici qu'on pourra la changer. Ce n'est pas non plus une raison pour aller plus loin que la loi. Aussi a-t-elle été rédigée au début des années 90 quand Wikipedia n'existait pas encore et l'internet était tout jeune.--Flamenc (talk) 13:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
« …loi22 qui dispose que "Lorsque l'œuvre a été licitement publiée, l'auteur ne peut interdire: 1°(…); 2° la reproduction et la communication au public de l'œuvre exposée dans un lieu accessible au public, lorsque le but de la reproduction ou de la communication au public n'est pas l'œuvre elle-même".” Ça me semble donc très clair : le but de la photo est d'illustrer le début (ou la fin) du canal Albert et de sa confluence avec la Meuse, et pas l'oeuvre elle-même, donc pour moi, la photo est licite.

J'en conclus aussi que c'est l'auteur (ou je suppose ses héritiers) qui doivent faire la démarche pour interdire une publication. Quoiqu'il en soit, j'apprécie la discussion, j'apprends beaucoup. --Flamenc (talk) 14:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion Requests for File:Escaleras Instalaciones.jpg , File:Campus arqueologico.jpg , File:Logo Museo Negro Intro.jpg[edit]

Hi! I'm writing this message because I disagree with your decission of start Deletion Requests for my pictures. I have to say that I have permission of the museum for update all pictures as mine and that means that I haven't committed any copyvio. That's why I'm asking you to cancel those Delete Requests. Thank You.

Fralucru (talk) 09:08, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion request for files uploaded by Maksim Sundukov[edit]

Hi,

Regarding these files: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Maksim_Sundukov Yes, I put these files on multiple wallpaper sites and also I found some copies where I didn't put them. I can give you any kind of proof that these are my photos, just let me know. I keep all RAW and TIFF originals.

Maksim Sundukov (talk) 0:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Closed DRs[edit]

When you add a category such as "Undelete in ..." or "... FOP cases" to a closed DR, it would be helpful if you both marked the edit as minor and added a a one or two word summary. Thanks, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

File:MSC Rossella.jpg[edit]

Hi BrightRaven, the File MSC Rossella.jpg is not an exact duplicate from MSC Rossella (7438582302).jpg. The File was optimized with Photo Shop. Regards --Rolf H. (talk) 12:28, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Maria gabriela isler ven.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Maria gabriela isler ven.png 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Polarlys (talk) 09:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

User:BrightRaven[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg User:BrightRaven 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 user page, 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Rohan von Indien (talk) 17:33, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Wat Rat Praditthan?[edit]

Hi.

You seem to have quite a knowledge of Ayutthaya temples.

But I doubt, that you can see Wat Rat Praditthan (On most maps it is written Wat Ratcha Praditsathan? Do we talk about the same one?) from Wat Mahathat. Isn't it rather Wat Ratchaburana, that is just north of Wat Mahathat?

Wat Rat Praditthan also doesn't seem to have such a prang like Wat Ratchaburana (see: http://www.ayutthaya-history.com/Temples_Ruins_Rachapraditsathan.html)

--hdamm (talk) 17:00, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Deleted files[edit]

Hello,

I retored one image to be able to verify the video licence, but I don't see where it's mentionned CC BY. Thank you to let me know. Benoit Rochon (talk) 15:51, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Right... C'est fait. Par contre, je le nom du fichier "Fagot" me semble déplacé, non? Benoit Rochon (talk) 16:49, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Map of SEATO member countries.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Map of SEATO member countries.png 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Antemister (talk) 16:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Stop destroying Wikipedia[edit]

Stop destroying Wikipedia with nonsense delete request like this. You're not making Wikipedia better.--__ wɘster 00:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

France_Departement_1801.svg[edit]

Bonjour, Pourriez-vous ajouter un e final à Seine inférieure. Merci. Cordialement. --Alain Schneider (talk) 10:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

COM:MDR[edit]

Merci pour l'info et bonne soirée

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for this[edit]

This was a very good idea and extremely helpful. I wish I had thought to do it. By the way, I only now just realized that you are not a native English-speaker - your English is excellent and well beyond the EN-3 on your user page. Regards, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png I wanted to apologize. I am new to this and didn't realize there is a proper protocol when there is a dispute so I took the moral high ground. I researched it and now I know different. Please accept this beer as a white flag. Sorry for the inconvenience. Vergiotisa (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

File:David François Mellinet MRAHM.jpg[edit]

Bonjour BrightRaven

Le problème avec David, c'est que l'on trouve énormément de fausses attributions (ça fait l'objet d'un chapitre dans le catalogue David de 1989), soit pour faire passer des tableaux anonyme pour des œuvres du maître (pour faire monter la cote), soit parce que le style peut de près ou de loin faire penser à David. Dans ce cas précis, aucune des sources sur David (Schnapper, Bordes, Hautecœur, Lévèque, Lee, Nanteuil, Michel etc.) ne le mentionne ni même ne publie l'image du tableau. Donc aucune des sources sur David ne fait cette attribution ni meme ne signale son existence. Je constate que le style diffère des portraits de David (plus habitué à faire des portraits de face), et s'apparenterait plus au style de son élève Georges Rouget qui a fait des allers-retour entre Paris et Bruxelles à l'époque pour aider son ancien maître en exil, et qui a fait beaucoup de portraits d'officier généraux de l'Empire, mais je ne me risquerait pas à tenter quelque attribution que soit. Cordialement Kirtap (talk) 14:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

J'avais justement créé une catégorie category:Circle of Jacques-Louis David pour répertorier les tableau d'attribution douteuses ou erronées. Il serait plus correct de mettre "entourage de Jacques-Louis David" car une seule source pour attribuer ce tableau, et qui n'est pas spécialisée sur David, est insuffisante (la source prétend aussi que le musée détient un portrait de Napoléon par David, or aucun portrait de Napoléon par David ne se trouve en Belgique, ils sont aux Etats-Unis, en France, en Allemagne, et en Autriche). L'attribution doit faire consensus chez les spécialistes de David qui font autorité, or aucune de ces deux sources n'est spécialisée sur David. J'ai refais une vérification dans l'ouvrage récent de Philippe Bordes Jacques-Louis David, Empire to exile, et aucune mention de ce portrait n'y figure, meme pas le nom de Mellinet. David a fait un portrait du général Meunier (son gendre), je me demande si certains ne font pas une confusion. Cordialement Kirtap (talk) 12:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
L'institution qui possède le tableau, n'est pas une autorité, de plus c'est un musée militaire et non d'art, d'autant qu'il est commun pour les musées qui possedent un tableau de l'attribuer abusivement à un artiste reconnu, ça attire les visiteurs, sur ce point le musée n'est pas une source fiable car il n'est pas indépendant. Le minimum est qu'un historien d'art qui fait autorité soit au moins cité pour confirmer l'attribution, ici ce n'est pas le cas, qui fait cette attribution ? Qui est le conservateur responsable ? Est il notoire dans les études davidiennes comme Antoine Schnapper ou Régis Michel ? Le point de vue est minoritaire. Si tu connais un livre sur David qui mentionne ce tableau et qui l'attribue à David, on pourrait réviser le jugement, mais faute de confirmation par un tiers qui fait autorité, pour l'instant l'attribution est douteuse. Par exemple dans cet ouvrage sur David Jacques-Louis David: New Perspectives aucune mention, pas plus dans celle là Jacques-Louis David: Empire to Exile (que j'ai déja cité), idem dans celui-ci, David Pour la peinture et je n'ai retenu que des ouvrages récents. Cordialement Kirtap (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Deletion request for images uploaded by Jonesy352[edit]

Hello

I would much appreciate it if you would put my pictures back on Wikimedia Commons. I'm not sure how or why they are affecting you, but if they aren't bothering you, put them back!

What isn't yours you have no right to touch - it's like taking something from your flatmate's room, and then throwing it in the bin!

Please reconsider this

Jonesy352

Butterfly door[edit]

hi BrightRaven, I don't understand what you mean, but you are free to delete this foto. --Theodorakis2013 (talk) 16:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Dear BrightRaven, the photos were taken by the artist to my knowledge and he has duly sent the authorization to permissions@commonswikimedia.org between June 29th and July 3rd, 2012. I have copies of the authorizations if required. Please let me know. Thank you! 1967A

Nikolay Boyadjiev Paintings[edit]

Hello, BrightRaven

I'm writing to you with regarding to the paintings of Nikolay Boyadjiev. I want to ask how did you decide that the paintings are possible copyright violation ? That guy is my grandfather and the painting are mine ...

What should I make to keep that paintings without deleting them ?

Your sincerely, Kaloyan Petrov

-Bg parr (talk) 11:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Lito Mayo's Gallery of Work[edit]

6/21/2014

To the Administrator:

   I would like to request a motion to undelete the following files that I have uploaded for Lito Mayo's page which were all the found items in "Gallery of Work" section of the artist's stub:


File:Shell 1976.tif File:Untitled Native Face 1976.tif File:Maskara 2 (1976).tif File:Mukha (Face) 1976.tif File:Butiki (Lizard).tif File:Insekto (Insect) 1976.tif File:Hayop (Animal) 1976.tif File:Temptation 1976.tif x

   Please restore these items. The images are essential to the academic integrity of the wikipedia page for Manolito Mayo. I am giving permission to use these images publicly in Wikipedia.

I am the owner of the copyrights of these works by my father, Manolito Mayo. When he passed away, I have been granted all the legal rights to share, publish, or use all or any portions of his works. I inherited the sum of all his works when he died in May 4, 1983 in the Philippines.

   Furthermore, I will be adding new images by the Lito Mayo in the future to broaden the scope of his influential works. 


Regards,

Michael Mayo --Audioboss (talk) 18:44, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion request for images uploaded by beastriker[edit]

Thank you, BrightRaven (talk), we've sent confirmation information to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, concerning artist Olga Tolstikova's works. The permission is available, so is there anything else can do to confirm the author's permission?

Sincerely, Ivan Matveev aka beastriker (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Beastriker).

No: if you have followed this procedure, it should be OK as far as copyright is concerned, but I also wonder whether these images fit with Commons' scope. Best regards, BrightRaven (talk) 15:27, 23 June 2014 (UTC)