User talk:Buch-t

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

Welcome[edit]

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Buch-t!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Bahasa Banjar | বাংলা | Català | Нохчийн | Čeština | Cymraeg | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Ирон | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Scots | සිංහල | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

File:Alfa Romeo 1961.JPG[edit]

Hi, I think this is Alfa Romeo 2000 model, what do you think, it doesnt looks like 1900 model. I changed its category rgds --Typ932 (talk) 17:02, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

It is 2000 model. --Buch-t (talk) 08:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:De Tomaso 2011 schräg.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


File:De Tomaso 2011 Heck.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

File:--Phebus 1900.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:--Phebus 1900.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)‎ | +/−

Bulwersator (talk) 10:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrol given[edit]

Commons Autopatrolled.svg

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 16:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Wenn[edit]

wir Glück haben, wird die Störy-Sammlung in absehbarer Zeit in Einbeck zu sehen sein. Daruf freut sich - wenn's stimmt - --192.53.103.200 13:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Hoffen wir es. Es sollen allerdings immer nur einzelne Exemplare in Einbeck ausgestellt werden; und die Masse bleibt leider im Depot in Störy. --Buch-t (talk) 16:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Quadricycles[edit]

Hello. According to this video,[1] those vehicles have both engines and bicycle pedals to propel. They are just motorized four-wheel pedal cycles, aren't they? Such motorized quadricycles should be categorised to Mopeds and Quadricycles. Or I may make a new category Category:Motorized quadricycles instead. -- (talk) 13:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello 丁.
I have looked in the video. The car in the video had pedals. But not all cars in the Category:Quadricycle had pedals.
I found in de:Moped 1930s, and in en:Moped 1912 as the oldest year; not earlier. I found in both articles that there are a cc-limit, almost 50 cc or 100 cc. The cars in the Category:Quadricycle are older and had bigger engines. 3 reasons that this cars cannot be Mopeds.
The origin of this type of car is a motorized one-person-tricycle with the addition of a front axle and a front seat for one passenger. The origin is not a four-wheel pedal cycle with an additional engine. I don't know if there were four-wheel pedal cycles without engine in the time of 1900.
In Category:Quadricycles I found: English: A quadracycle is a four-wheeled human-powered vehicle.
I wrote the German article de:Quadricycle a few days ago. I found a great chaos with the use of the name of quadricycle in different wikis and I have made a clear separation. Look at my edit on nl:Quadricycle. I want a clear separation between den motorized Quadricycle and the unmotorized Quadricycles/Quadracycles in some wikis. It is not helpful for the clear separation when we put the Category:Quadricycle into the Category:Quadricycles. So I do not want this. --Buch-t (talk) 16:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Please don't be confusion, I've never put Category:Quadricycle into Category:Quadricycles. I had done only Category:De Dion-Bouton Quadricycle, File:Automoto 1899 schräg.JPG and File:Automoto 1899.JPG because all of them have cycle pedals. Now I have made Category:Motorized quadracycles. History is not the point, please don't hide the fact that they are a kind of pedal cycles. -- (talk) 13:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not happy with this. You put the category Motorized quadracycles in the category Quadricycles ignoring the description: English: A quadracycle is a four-wheeled human-powered vehicle. --Buch-t (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
I have a suggestion on renaming Category:Quadricycles. If you have any opinion, please write it on Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/07/Category:Quadricycles. -- (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Disk_vehicles[edit]

RomanM82 (talk) 17:41, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I do not care if the category name is "DISK" or "DISK VEHICLES" or "ZBROJOVKA DISK".
Zbrojovka was the manufacturer, I agree. The Category:Automobile manufacturers of the Czech Republic is incorrect for Disk.
Disk was the brand for the car. Found in several encyclopedias about automotive brands written by George Nick Georgano, Halwart Schrader, David Burgess Wise and Marián Šuman-Hreblay. Therefore I want to add the Category:Vehicles by brand for the Category:Zbrojovka Disk. --Buch-t (talk) 16:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Chorzow Jan 2014 049.JPG[edit]

Hi.

In the future please look at the other pictures in the category you're moving "unidentified" vehicles to. The vehicle on this picture is a ZSD Nysa 522 T, not an FSC Żuk. Visually Żuk and Nysa are very different.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 14:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, my fault. --Buch-t (talk) 16:46, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover![edit]

Commons File mover.svg

Hi Buch-t, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

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

Deutsch | English | 한국어 | മലയാളം | Русский | Українська | +/−

Alan (talk) 19:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit summary[edit]

I have no problem with you moving File:Montesano, WA - unidentified open car.jpg to File:MG TD in Montesano, WA.jpg if you are confident of the identification, but how can you call the prior filename "completely meaningless"? It's not like it was "DSC4891" or some such. - Jmabel ! talk 01:12, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jmabel, OK, "completely meaningless" war not right. Next time I will use [[Commons:File renaming#reasons|File renaming criterion #5]]: Correct obvious errors in file names (e.g. wrong proper nouns or false historical dates) I think that unidentified open car is an error when the car is identified. --Buch-t (talk) 17:22, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
No question that once it was identified a name change was in order, but the name was not meaningless, and was certainly not "wrong" or "false" when I wrote it. Again, no problem with the change in content, just with the edit summary. The correct criterion would be #3, because once the identity is known saying it is unknown is misleading. - Jmabel ! talk 02:52, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Ok, #3. --Buch-t (talk) 17:22, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Continental Mark II[edit]

Okay, I get it. The Continental Mark II wasn't a Lincoln. As of now though, there's no "1956 Continental automobiles," or "1957 Continental automobiles" categories. I have been planning on 1956 and 1957 Continental Mark II categories, though. ----DanTD (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

You can create categories for "1956 Continental automobiles" up to "1960 Continental automobiles". --Buch-t (talk) 15:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Museums...[edit]

Front of Flipper I with 2 wheels
Back/rear of Flipper I with 2 wheels

Hi!

Sorry for those mistakes but where are the cars? Can't see no one on pics... Can't see any cat' looking like "Automobiles in the museum of Somewhere"...

Have a good Sunday. --Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 02:08, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Llann.
  1. It is necessary that we have car pictures on common for saying that a car museum is a car museum? Sandringham 1, Sandringham 2, Vestry House, Kezmarok. That are museums with cars.
  2. Why do you think that the Category:Flipper I should be in category:Three-wheeled automobiles? I can see 4 wheels.
  3. Yesterday I put Category:Craigievar vehicles, Category:Bramham vehicles, Category:Harper vehicles, Category:Rex (Sweden) vehicles, Category:Mascot 100 vehicles in Category:Three-wheeled automobiles and removed single pictures from that category. Why do you reverted? Now there are the Craigievar picture and the Craigievar category in Category:Three-wheeled automobiles.
  4. I think that the Mini Outspan has 4 wheels, but it is in Category:Three-wheeled vehicles.
  5. In Category:Citroën 2CV in museums are some pictures made at Detling Show, Bremen classic motorshow, Oldtimer Show. Shows are not museums. What do you think about?
  6. In Category:Citroën 2CV in museums are some pictures of pedal cars. I think that pedal cars should not be in any car category.
Regards --Buch-t (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Buch-t. Thanks for corrections.
  1. There's no pics of car so, for me, it is not and I'm not a soothsayer...
  2. Flipper, 4 Wheels, my bad.
  3. All vehicles made by Craigievar, Bramham, Harper, Rex and Mascot were 3-wheeled ? There's only one pic of each brand. Did they each made only one unique vehicle? Reverted...
  4. Here I really can see 4 wheels, but it's not the same on the Commons pics...
  5. I think : if you know where those 2CV's pics were taken feel free to move them in Category:Citroën 2CV in vehicle meetings Face-smile.svg
  6. In the name pedal-car there's pedal but car too... And it's a 2CV pedal-car, so...
Have a good week. --Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 16:00, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
3. Craigievar: One-off, no German article. The other de:Bramham, de:Harper (Automarke), de:Mascot 100, de:Maskinfabriken Rex made more cars, all 3-wheeled. I have also created Category:Fram-King today and removed some single pictures from the category.
4. I have pictures of the Mini Outspan HOB 446 L: 4 wheels. --Buch-t (talk) 16:40, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
3. Thanks a lot for these informations.
4. I read the plate but no mention of the number of wheels but I agreed seeing the link above.
There's still a lot of work in all those cat's so fare well, we'll meet again! --Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 20:56, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

@Llann Wé²: All vehicles in Category:Mochet vehicles and Category:Volugrafo vehicles have 4 wheels. --Buch-t (talk) 10:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year![edit]

Feu d'artifice - 328.jpg
All the best for 2016 !!!.
--LW² \m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 18:00, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

IP vandal...[edit]

HI Butch.

I've got the same ptoblem with this IP who spoiled almost 100 pictures of cars (2CV, Dyane, ...) deleting years or cats...

I guess we can ask to block him, no?

--LW² \m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 15:12, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Llann, I don't know. My main problem with the Simca-picture was the deleting of my user-category. --Buch-t (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

stoneleigh, more data and pictures for you[edit]

Dear Buch-t. I am very pleased to see a white stoneleigh chummy. I have been doing research on the stoneleigh. I own UM60nn the RED one when you search Google images "car stoneleigh siddeley"

we Neil Cooke and Frank Cooke thought there were only three left. you appear to have a picture of one we dont know about.

The ones we know of are: 1) the green car in http://www.collection.archivist.info/searchv13.php?searchstr=Osmaston+Rd+Rolls+Royce+open+day+PD which is kept at the RR museum Derby. 2) The Dutch earlier three seat version 1922, ask these chaps http://www.armstrongsiddeley.info/#/autos/fotos for a picture its is really different of the three seater stoneleigh. I have pictures of this too. 3) my red car. I can supply you with free use pictures, for mine and the green car. the dutch club can do the same for the three seater.

could you let us know were you found the white chummy in your picture. Thanks


Incidentally the 14/4 was a completely different car 14 = horse power, the stoneleigh chummy has only 9 horses under the bonnet. Very many thanks Neil

you can contact me via my facebook,or my father via the dutch club I have set up to watch the page. Neil Cooke and Frank Cooke

Stoneleigh 1923.JPG
Hello Neil.
I made the picture 2004 at Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust in Derby. Registration PW-1818. It must be the green car. I think I was there during the restoration.
It will be fine when you load more pictures of all the Stoneleigh cars to wikipedia. Into the Category:Stoneleigh vehicles.
I do not use facebook. Regards --Buch-t (talk) 08:58, 11 March 2017 (UTC)