User talk:DanielPenfield

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, DanielPenfield!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | تۆرکجه | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | भोजपुरी | 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 | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk | occitan | Ирон | polski | português | português do Brasil | rumantsch | română | русский | sicilianu | Scots | سنڌي | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | українська | اردو | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 粵語 | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  Esperanto  français  galego  íslenska  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  suomi  Tiếng Việt  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  ქართული  বাংলা  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−


Hello, DanielPenfield!
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) 10:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Counties[edit]

[1]: Freeport is in Nassau, not Suffolk. - Jmabel ! talk 14:57, 15 June 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 marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 06:25, 12 October 2012 (UTC)



беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | français | italiano | മലയാളം | Nederlands | русский | slovenčina | српски (ћирилица)‎ | srpski (latinica)‎ | svenska | Tagalog | українська | +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Dear DanielPenfield,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world!

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
Wiki Loves Monuments logo
Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 01:11, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States[edit]

LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svg

Dear DanielPenfield,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States. The images you uploaded will help illustrate Wikipedia articles on historic sites in the United States. We are delighted to share the winning images and our top 10 finalists with you.

Click here to read our press release and view the winning submissions »

We invite you to continue uploading images to Wikimedia Commons and we hope you will return for Wiki Loves Monuments again in September 2014. For more information about Wikimedia Commons, please visit our welcome page. For more information about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, please click here. Once again, thank you for sharing your images and participating in our contest.

User:Mono

Organizing Team

Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States


العربية | català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | galego | magyar | italiano | Nederlands | polski | română | svenska | ไทย | українська | +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey.

Dear DanielPenfield,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time.

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
Wiki Loves Monuments logo



العربية | català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | magyar | Nederlands | polski | svenska | ไทย | +/−

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear DanielPenfield,

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!

In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.

And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
Wiki Loves Monuments logo

File:WXXIAMFMTVHeadquarters.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:WXXIAMFMTVHeadquarters.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!

Levdr1lp / talk 07:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

File:BrowserToolbarsInInternetExplorer11.png[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:BrowserToolbarsInInternetExplorer11.png 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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the 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 | British English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Codename Lisa (talk) 20:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

File:StumbleBarInChrome.png[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:StumbleBarInChrome.png 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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the 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 | British English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Codename Lisa (talk) 20:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Please remain calm and collegial[edit]

català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  galego  magyar  Nederlands  polski  português  svenska  suomi  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  עברית  +/−


Dialog-warning.svg
It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks!

Using an asterisk in the middle of the vulgarity you are using to refer to other editors does not make it acceptable. Revent (talk) 17:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Using insults in the deletion log as User:Hedwig in Washington did in File:BrowserToolbarsInInternetExplorer11.png is not acceptable. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 06:10, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Even Hedwig (or someone) insulted you or your upload, just be calm and civil. Always assume good faith. You can report Hedwig at COM:AN/U. But don't forget to be civil at all times when reporting an user. Poké95 09:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

COM:OVERCAT[edit]

DanielPenfield, you don't seem to understand COM:OVERCAT as it pertains to the situation you posted about on my talk page. Category:Albany County, New York is a larger geographic area than Category:Albany, New York and it includes locations which are not part of Category:Albany, New York - thus, COM:OVERCAT does not apply to this situation. If, for example, you created a category that was Category:Road signs in Albany, New York which was a sub-cat of both Category:Albany, New York and Category:Road signs in Albany County, New York, then COM:OVERCAT would apply, but you have not done this. Famartin (talk) 10:43, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

@Famartin: Feel free to use the {{Reply to}} template on the talk page where the discussion originated instead of feeling obligated to duplicate the discussion here. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 18:30, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Is Audra Pinkerton on the U of Rochester faculty?[edit]

Regarding this change, I thought she was a marketing person for the U of R, but this information is several years old, so you might be right if you have more recent info.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:40, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Good catch! -- DanielPenfield (talk) 01:04, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States – Results![edit]

LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svgThis user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2017}} to your userpage!
Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States - Logo (text under).svg

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States during the month of October! The United States contest saw over 1,400 people (the most of any nation this year) contribute over 8,000 great photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the United States and its territories. Hundreds of these photos are already being used to illustrate pages on various Wikimedia projects.

We're excited to announce that our national judging process has concluded, and that we have selected the winners of Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States! These photos are recognized for their photographic quality, artistic merit, and their encyclopedic value as illustrations of unique historical sites. We were amazed by all of the uploads, and regret only being able to formally recognize the top 10. That being said – congratulations to our national winners and their amazing shots! Our 10 winners will be sent to the international Wiki Loves Monuments jury, who will then select the winners of the international contest. If you're interested in seeing the winners of the other national contests, you may do so at Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 winners.

If you would like to view all the photos submitted for the U.S. this year, you may do so here.

Finally, we have also created a feedback form for all U.S. participants to fill out. The survey is optional and anonymous, and only takes a minute or two – we hope to use the feedback to organize better events in the future!

A quick thank you to our national jury, as well as Commons editors who have helped categorize and place photos for the event. And finally, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments and helping to preserve our history through photography - we hope to see you again for future Commons photography events!

~Kevin Payravi & Nikikana, from Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States (16:26, 15 November 2017 (UTC))

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

WMF Surveys, 18:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 01:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

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

WMF Surveys, 00:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Rockefeller Center ice rink[edit]

There are two reasons for not including the rink in Category:Winter in New York City. (It's the winter part, not the NYC part, that's the issue: it's already in another NYC category.)

  • The rink exists year-round, not just in winter, and not just when it has ice. There are images in the category such as this one, which shows the rink in April (which is in spring, not winter), when the ice had melted.
  • Even if you want to look only at the time when the rink has ice, that's not just winter, either. According to its official website, this year it opens in October, which is in autumn, not winter. In fact, we have non-winter images of the rink with ice, including this one that was taken in October.

For these reasons, I don't think the rink category as a whole belongs in a winter category. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:30, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States – Back for 2018![edit]

LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svgThis user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2018.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2018? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2018}} to your userpage!
Wiki Loves Monuments 2018 in the United States - Logo (text under).svg

Hello! Last year you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States. Thanks to people like you it was a great success, with over 1,400 people contributing over 8,000 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2018 in the United States, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information. The event runs similar to last year with some small but exciting changes: improved state guides, an interactive map, and a larger prize pool! Like last year, you'll be able to upload your photos of any registered historical site in the United States through the end of September (even if the photos were taken before this month).

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 11:45, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Paolo Monti photographs of Manhattan[edit]

Dear DanielPenfield, thank you for your fixes in the Paolo Monti collection; please take a look to File:Paolo Monti - Serie fotografica (New York, 1965) - BEIC 6361487.jpg because it similar to File:Paolo Monti - Serie fotografica (New York, 1965) - BEIC 6361487.jpg. You may confirm or not the buildings. Thank you. --Marco Chemello (BEIC) (talk) 09:05, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@Marco Chemello (BEIC): As you probably have noticed by now, User talk:Jim.henderson quickly made a positive identification. Thanks for the encouragement. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 12:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Irfanview Image category[edit]

Can you please explain why you removed the Category tag? — Ineuw talk 02:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC) - Sorry, it was my mistake. I understand why. — Ineuw talk 02:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Category:Schools_in_Bronx_County,_New_York[edit]

Category discussion warning

Schools in Bronx County, New York 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!


čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  italiano  magyar  polski  português  sicilianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  ไทย  日本語  עברית  +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 07:12, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Categorising images - Sydney Showgrounds[edit]

Hi there. Thanks for all your great work on categorising images. I'm looking at a few dated from November 2018 where a number of images photographed by Sam Hood during the 1930s were categorised at occurring at Sydney Showground (Olympic Park). However, the showground during the 1930s were located at Paddington and only moved to the Olympic Park in the early 2000s after the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000. I have added a new category for the Paddington site and there is no work for you to do; however I thought you should know. Many thanks and keep up the great work. Rangasyd (talk) 06:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Nowruz and Commons[edit]

Hi. I know Nowruz very well; I'm from Turkey and lived in other places where Nowruz is celebrated. I also know very well our "box in box" categorization system. Therefore I recommend you not to revert my edits until you also learn the system. Having written about my person I am expecting not to see edit summaries like "celebrated in many countries--see ..." about a festivity thay I also celebrate. I will add Nevruz eggs and semeni pictures here soon." Best. --E4024 (talk) 12:23, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@E4024: Exactly what this "box in box" categorization system that you claim exists? Is that your baby-talk name for COM:OVERCAT? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 12:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Could be. I try to be as simple as possible when trying to make people undertand things that otherwise may seem complicated. Good-bye. --E4024 (talk) 12:38, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@E4024: Could you use your adult voice, then, and state which of these "Big Boxes" your so-called little boxes (namely Category:Holidays in Iran, Category:Festivals of Iran, and Category:Iranian ceremonies) already belong in?:

Template[edit]

Hello, just out of curiosity, what issue was this this template (which name was highly ambiguous btw) born to fix? I find the utility of a template of the states of the U.S., or of the countries of a single U.S. state, but don't see what need this one is aiming to satisfy. Thank you and best regards, -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@Blackcat: It sounds like you should have looked around to answer your own question:
Regarding your "highly ambiguous" complaint: In what way is it ambiguous? Is it because you believe that New York City contains cities as New York State does? Is there some other "New York" entity that you believe contains cities? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 23:42, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
As for the last point, the main category is Cities in New York (state). The other templates, in order to keep consistency with the naming style, should be named "cities in the United States by month", etc. etc. That apart my question was aimed to know what issue that template solved as I don't see a feasible use of it. It's not a matter of sensitivity, is that I don't see the point in using navboxes beyond a certain level of detail. Regards, -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 10:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Blackcat:
Your claim My response
As for the last point, the main category is Cities in New York (state). No it isn't. It's Category:Cities in New York and it's been named that way since 2004 presumably because there are enough reasonable editors who know that (state) is a completely unnecessary disambiguation for "Cities in New York". That's right, there will in fact never be a "Category:Cities in New York City". Also, you can pretend that a) There exists a navbox (or even template) naming MOS for WikiCommons and b) This fictional navbox (or template) naming MOS for WikiCommons contains a requirement that all navigation templates for a category be named exactly the same as the category (beyond namespace), but as of this writing no such navbox/template MOS exists and no such navbox/template naming requirement exists.
The other templates, in order to keep consistency with the naming style, should be named "cities in the United States by month", etc. You can pretend all you want that there is a "naming style" for navboxes/templates on WikiCommons, but there is none as of this writing. Note that instead of continuing to browbeat me into naming things according to your vague whims, you could do something constructive like make a proposal that describes your tastes and preferences in detail at COM:CD.
I don't see the point in using navboxes beyond a certain level of detail I like how you use vagueness effectively here. Exactly what level of detail? Did you even bother to search the Template namespace for "cities" to see how many templates attempt to provide navigation for cities-related categories? Or is it emotionally safer for you to blame a single editor over a single template instead of making a detailed proposal at COM:CD?
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 19:02, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States – Back for 2019![edit]

LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svgThis user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2019}} to your userpage!
Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in the United States - Logo (text under).svg

Hello! Last year you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments 2018 in the United States. Thanks to people like you it was a great success, with over 1,900 people contributing over 10,000 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage. If you haven't seen the winners yet, be sure to check them out here.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in the United States, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information. Just like last year, you'll be able to upload your photos of any registered historical site in the United States through the end of September (even if the photos were taken before this month).

If you've traveled and taken photos of monuments in non-US countries, you can see if those countries are also participating here.

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2018, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:16, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

File:MorganManningHouseWMHSPlaque.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:MorganManningHouseWMHSPlaque.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!

108.177.6.59 05:46, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 01:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2019 – Last day to enter![edit]

LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svgThis user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.
Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2019}} to your userpage!
Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in the United States - Logo (text under).svg

September 30th is the last day to upload photos for Wiki Loves Monuments! We're thrilled that the United States has almost reached 4,000 contributions so far this year. Of these images, ~370 (~9%) have already been used to help illustrate Wikipedia articles and pages on other wiki projects, which is fantastic.

If you've already made a photo contribution this year, thanks so much! If you have any last-minute photos of U.S. historical sites to upload and enter into the contest, today's the day to do it. Check out the United States event page for more information. Judging will take place throughout the month of October, after which the top-ten national finalists will be announced in early November.

If you've traveled and taken photos of monuments in non-US countries, you can see if those countries are also participating here.

As always, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 20:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Need help from NYC categorizers[edit]

Off To Work (135539591)

@DanTD, Jim.henderson, Tdorante10: File:Off To Work (135539591).jpeg is a photograph looking down a street toward One World Trade Center and 7 World Trade Center in Manhattan. I've tried Google Maps Streetview of Fulton, West, and other streets in Lower Manhattan looking south or southwest, but I can't seem to figure out which street is depicted. Since you all are skilled categorizers of photographs depicting scenes in the Greater New York City area, do you recognize which street it is? Thanks in advance for your help. DanielPenfield (talk) 05:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I often use the 6th Avenue bike lane, and will be at that corner Friday evening on my way to my astronomy club. The narrow field of view makes it a bit tricky; it might perhaps be north of 14th Street but I placed it south. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
I'll transfer it to the appropriate borough for the time being, or maybe just to the slightly less generic "Lower Manhattan" category. ----DanTD (talk) 13:12, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
UPDATE: I just recognized a rather historic library in the background off to the right. ----DanTD (talk) 13:17, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I had formed a suspicion that this was 6th before blowing up the picture, panning around it, and finding that distinctive tower in midground. After that it's a matter of judging the distance by the relative apparent heights of that tower and the background ones. Yesterday morning in Boston the small screen of my laptop (Wikiconference North America) was making it a bit difficult; I'll give it another shot this week on the big home screen to be sure. Maybe something useful will show up in foreground. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:57, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you both for making quick work of that! -- DanielPenfield (talk) 18:04, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks![edit]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at Wikimedia Commons.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019! Please help with this survey.[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear DanielPenfield,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team 12:32, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Category:Efficiency[edit]

Category discussion warning

Efficiency 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!


čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  italiano  magyar  polski  português  sicilianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  ไทย  日本語  עברית  +/−

Localhost007 (talk) 10:10, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 Participant Survey (Reminder)[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear DanielPenfield,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team 03:41, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Desenfoque (141668967).jpeg[edit]

Hi, when you edited this page it showed up with the tag "undo" with the summary undo unhelpful categorization. Except it wasn't an undo? I'm not sure why you made that summary, since you added two more specific categories, rather than restored the original category. epicgenius (talk) 13:53, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Also with this edit. I appreciate it, but did you know you can use HotCat to more accurately categorize the images? Every time you undo my edits, it sends me a notification, and I'd rather avoid this. epicgenius (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Moving images into already-overcrowded categories is not helpful--see Commons:Categories#Modularity principle. In other words, for the edits you mention above, I believe you would benefit from feedback so that you can improve your categorization techniques in ways that uphold the principles set forth in Commons:Categories#Principles. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 15:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer, now I understand the reason for the undo. I was unsure of the categories for these two images (I thought the first one was a model of the Manhattan skyline, not a skyline itself, and I didn't recognize the second). That's why I moved it to the generic parent category. epicgenius (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Good point--I have added Category:Tilt-shift miniature faking to the image. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 16:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Pier 1, or Pier I?[edit]

I don't really think the pier on the Upper West Side at 70th Street in Manhatan is named "Category:Pier 1 (Manhattan)." In fact I've seen enough evidence to indicate that it's actually "Pier I" (as in the letter "I"). Therefore the category should be renamed. ----DanTD (talk) 16:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Category:Ueno Park in 2014[edit]

2 questions/comments: (1) for a place, don't we usually name these along the lines of Category:2014 in Ueno Park instead? Or is this inconsistent, and I just happen to work mostly in a few regions where we go that way? (2) You have a nonexistent parent category Category:Parks in 2014. - Jmabel ! talk 16:48, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

@Jmabel: 1) My observation is that it depends on the size of the place. If it's "big enough", then it's Category:2014 in Continent/Country/Region/Province/State/City. If it's "small enough", then it's Category:Site in 2014. See for example Category:Washington Monument in 1884, Category:Central Park in 2020, Category:Brooklyn Bridge in the 2000s, Category:Times Square in the 2010s. This is similar to the distinction between countries and cities in the Romance Languages (e.g., Je voyage en France/Je voyage à Marseille, Viaggio in Italia/Viaggio a Firenze, Viajo en España/Viajo a Barcelona). 2) Can you be patient? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 17:12, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Huh. OK. - Jmabel ! talk 17:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Categories by year[edit]

Before quoting Commons:OVERCAT, please learn that moving files of places and buildings to categories by year and removing the parent category is not proper categorization, per Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2018/08#Overdiffused_categories, as besides the year, it should shown what is depicted. Tm (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tm: You are more than free to do just that. I am not preventing you from subcategorizing anything. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 17:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
You are removing the parent category and, in effect hidden uncategorized images, so you are really preventing anyone from moving to proper categories. It is not bad to create categories by year, as what is bad is removing any chance of someone moving this files to subcatgories like i did here. Tm (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
@Tm:
Your claim My response
You are removing the parent category and, in effect hidden uncategorized images Where is this alleged hiding? Your edit contains the exact same categories--name for name, hidden or otherwise--as mine does with the exception of the COM:OVERCATted Category:Ueno Park. Are you falsely assuming that because you personally can't be bothered to look in Category:Ueno Park in 2019, therefore nobody else can be bothered either? Isn't that both presumptuous and arrogant?
what is bad is removing any chance of someone moving this files to subcatgories Histrionics aside, your accusation is a patent falsehood. Nobody is "hiding" anything. Moving an image to a more specific category is exactly what fulfills the goal set forth in COM:Categories#Modularity principle. Furthermore, if you truly were interested in proper categorization, Category:Ueno Park wouldn't have contained 165 images (as it did when I started) or contain now, as of this writing, 148 images. You and everyone else has had all the chance in the world to diffuse this category for years to your personal tastes and yet you haven't. And the minute someone else rises to the occasion, you're pretending that doing so would prevent anybody and everybody from the God-given right that they (and you) haven't exercised and won't exercise. That's right, I expect this category to be just as crowded 10, 20, 30 years or more into the future.
like i did here Yes, you were able to categorize exactly two images ( [2] and [3]). The remaining 148 that you couldn't--or wouldn't--move to more specific categories more than demonstrates that nobody cares enough the massive uploads of images from Panoramio, Flickr, 500px, etc., etc. to actually take the effort to categorize them. That's right, the very images you seem to want to defend from being "hidden" (your definition of "hidden" being not stuffed into the top level category with hundreds of other images from Panoramio, Flickr, 500px, etc., etc. as the images aren't actually hidden from anybody) will still be in the same spot 10, 20, 30 or more years from now, despite you "saving the day" from the "tragedy" of moving these long-neglected images into "by year" categories.
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 22:46, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2018/08#Overdiffused_categories is pretty clear. By year does not replace location categories, and even if i moved just two images, there were two more than you, just saying. Tm (talk) 00:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Your claim My response
Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2018/08#Overdiffused_categories is pretty clear. By year does not replace location categories If you truly believed the spirit of that discussion, you would immediately "rescue" all of the images you ignored for years by subcategorizing them further, sparing no expense. And yet, you've managed to do a grand total of two. Two. I can't imagine a better way to demonstrate that preventing your alleged "tragedy of hiding" isn't really that important to you. It will be all the more laughable in ten years at which point it will be clear that you haven't returned to carry out the mission you wanted me to believe is so critical.
and even if i moved just two images, there were two more than you, just saying. You don't seem to quite understand that I don't really believe your claim that moving images into a "by year" subcategory forces a hardship on the thousands of editors clamoring to categorize the long-neglected images in Category:Ueno Park (who apparently are also too lazy to descend into the "by year" categories at least according to you).
Failed to respond from above
You are removing the parent category and, in effect hidden uncategorized images
So, you're not even going to try to defend your slanderous accusation?
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 00:34, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Let me just quote Commons:Overcat:
"The categories (or galleries) you choose for your uploads should answer as many as possible of the following questions:
what? / whom?: what or whom does the file show? What is the main subject? What are the noteworthy features of the image? For instance Category:Automobiles, Category:Felis silvestris catus or Category:Jimmy Wales
where?: where was the image taken? What is the location of the subject? What is the location of the camera? This is especially important for pictures of places. E.g. Category:Basin Street, New Orleans
also use {{Location}}
when?: when did the depicted events happen, or when was the image created? When was the image taken? This is especially important for historical images. An example would be Category:Warsaw in September 1939, Category:April 2010 in Northern Ireland"
Enough said. You can create categories to when, but dont move files from where to when. Tm (talk) 18:50, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Your claim My response
Enough said. Not only does your quote fail to support your demand, it's actually from COM:Categories#Categorization tips which is two sections above COM:OVERCAT
You can create categories to when, but dont move files from where to when. You don't actually have the authority to make demands in what is ostensibly a volunteer project. If you want this outcome, you will have to take responsibility for it yourself. The fact that you've been able to subcategorize a grand total of nine images from Category:Ueno Park in over 36 hours now plus the fact that you're now making a demand tells me that you're starting to realize that this requirement that you yourself imposed is a) labor intensive and b) worth the effort really for only the best images (99% of photographs contributed to Commons being from photographers who can't seem to hold their cameras still, can't seem to hold their cameras level, can't seem to shoot in optimal lighting conditions and in a way that minimizes shadows, can't seem to be able to remove obvious obstacles obscuring their subject, seem oblivious to the concept of subject isolation, or more fundamentally seem to be completely unable to ask themselves why they're shooting the subject that they end up shooting).
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

False accusation of a new crime[edit]

  • "…photographers who can't seem to hold their cameras still…" You've done this to many old Seattle images by professional photographers, and it seems to me to be a problem for exactly the same reasons raised by Tm. - Jmabel ! talk 15:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Another vague claim that is unsupported. If you can't be bothered to provide multiple examples that demonstrate your claim, I am going to assume this is yet another baseless slander. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 17:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
@DanielPenfield: You mean like you demonstrated that "99% of photographs contributed to Commons being from photographers who can't seem to hold their cameras still…": nothing at all like a "baseless slander," I suppose? Sorry, I'm not interested in providing detailed evidence for someone who feels free to shoot from the hip while demanding I work with the precision of a surgeon. -- Jmabel ! talk 03:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@Jmabel:
Your claim My response
You've done this to many old Seattle images by professional photographers OK, if I make the following substitutions:
  • "many" → "exactly one"
  • "Seattle" → "Kansas City"

I arrive at [4].

and it seems to me to be a problem for exactly the same reasons raised by Tm. Under the criminal theory advanced in [5], it's a "crime of hiding" to move image A.jpg from Category:B to Category:B in YYYY without simultaneously assigning it a subcategory of Category:B. In order for your new criminal complaint to actually constitute a "crime", you'd have to advance the theory that simply placing A.jpg into Category:B in YYYY is a crime even if A.jpg never started in Category:B to begin with and regardless of whether you added multiple other categories in the same edit or edits with which you placed A.jpg into Category:B in YYYY. In other words, you're attempting to broaden the definition of what constitutes the "crime of hiding" set forth in the original allegation/slander. Compare for example [6] versus [7].
(Absence of any links whatsoever to back up false accusation) Let me point out that not only have you failed and continue to fail to provide links to support your accusation, you apparently took the liberty of changing both the details of both quantity and place to make it difficult for anyone else to verify your accusation or demonstrate that your accusation is false.
You mean like you demonstrated that "99% of photographs contributed to Commons being from photographers who can't seem to hold their cameras still…": nothing at all like a "baseless slander," I suppose? The problem with your counterclaim is that it's just so easy to find images that aren't worth wasting one's time to categorize. Examples from Category:Ueno Park include:

Blurry

Camera not level

Obscured subject

Clipped subject

Abysmal subject isolation and lighting conditions

Inclusion of distracting elements

Too much sky

What is the subject?

Simultaneously overexposed and underexposed

Images with that appear to be COM:DW and are therefore not something Commons can host

Sorry, I'm not interested in providing detailed evidence for someone who feels free to shoot from the hip while demanding I work with the precision of a surgeon. You leveled an accusation. Accusations require proof. Readers who would like to verify for themselves that you leveled a false accusation (namely "You've done this to many old Seattle images by professional photographers, and it seems to me to be a problem for exactly the same reasons raised by Tm") are invited to review my last 120 contributions at the time you leveled your false claim: [8]. (I'm guessing that the edit that serves as the basis for the false claim is [9]). Alternately they can review the entirety of my contributions at Special:Contributions/DanielPenfield to find this "crime of hiding" which you allege (and for which you refuse to provide proof).
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 05:07, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Looks like I was wrong about Seattle, it was User:Ricky81682; same pattern, I'd had this argument with him a year ago, sorry for the confusion about whom. But see my remark above about Ueno Park in Tokyo, similar issue. - Jmabel ! talk 16:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Continuing the original accusation[edit]

COM:Categories#Categorization tips is pretty clear, and it is you that "fail to support your demand", not me. And saying "You don't actually have the authority to make demands in what is ostensibly a volunteer project." is really funny and surreal when a few days before you demanded that "If you truly believed the spirit of that discussion, you would immediately "rescue" all of the images you ignored for years by subcategorizing them further, sparing no expense.". Dont see the double standard that you demand from others, what others dont demand from you. Also, refuse to listen to other people with the same complaint, but instead accusing said others of slander, without proofs is pretty ironic and will close any venue of reasonable discussion. Tm (talk) 18:11, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

CfD: College athletics programs[edit]

Hi, I have started a discussion to rename a large collection of categories, one or more of which you may have created or edited. Please see the discussion thread at Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/04/College athletics programs for details. Thanks, IagoQnsi (talk) 04:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I undid part of some of your recent changes[edit]

You replaced the metacat template with the catcat template on the following categories:

However, these are indeed metacategories, so I put the metacat template back. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Auntof6: The {{CatCat}} vs. {{MetaCat}} looks like the proverbial distinction without a difference. Also, using metacat instead of MetaCat results in a redirection. Why wouldn't you use {{MetaCat}} directly? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 06:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
The difference between {{CatCat}} and {{MetaCat}} is that the subcats in a metacat are grouped by a specified criterion/topic. The ones I changed are examples of that. Categories that use catcat should contain only categories, but for a different reason. Examples of this type of category are Category:People by name and Category:Categories of France. (Note that categories that specify "by name" -- as well as certain other criteria -- can be metacats or not, depending on how they're used. I can explain further if you want.) --Auntof6 (talk) 11:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Can you describe precisely in what way {{MetaCat}} is "meta"? It appears to me to be closer to a GROUP BY of images by some criterion other than image name. It also fails the analogy "if metadata are data about data, then metacategories are categories about categories". Even COM:Naming categories#Categories by CRITERION avoids the use of "meta". In other words, I suspect the template is difficult to use because it's poorly named to begin with. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
And as far as using the redirect, redirects are often used. You're welcome to use them or not, as you choose. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:14, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Let me fix that for you: You're welcome to use them or not, as you choose until some aggrieved editor who is used to getting his or her own way 100% of the time complains that you're forcing him or her to wait an additional X microseconds by using the redirect at which point you're no longer welcome. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

People wearing gas masks in %COUNTRY_NAME% vs. Gas masks of %COUNTRY_NAME%[edit]

Hello, I noticed you created a bunch of categories yesterday. Thanks for the Category:People wearing gas masks in the United States and its subcategories, those are all very useful to manage hundreds of similar pics from the US DoD!

However, I would advise against including the created categories in Category:Gas masks of %COUNTRY_NAME%, consider Category:People wearing gas masks in Kuwait: not a single pic currently included in it features a gas mask of any local force, hence I removed the non-existent category. Do you think you could check all your categories and fix that everywhere?

P.S. I have no idea whether this photo was made in Poland or Romania, but probably not both ;-) Ain92 (talk) 23:10, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

In other words, somebody used the false equivalence that
Category:Gas masks of {{COUNTRYNAME}}
is somehow the same as
Category:Gas masks from {{COUNTRYNAME}}
. Great. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 23:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
  • In my understanding, both gas masks produced in a country (whether designed there, produced under a license or even made as a knockoff) and gas masks used in country's military are gas masks of this country. However, both have little to no (depending on the country in question) relation to gas masks actually worn by people in that country.
  • On the one hand, most countries in the world produce no gas masks and don't upload photos of gas masks (or any other equipment) of their military and security services to Commons. That's why most photos we have on Commons from those countries are photos of US military wearing US gas masks.
  • On the other hand, most countries in Europe, quite to the contrary, either produce gas masks or at least have designated a foreign mask for their military (e.g. CAT:ARF-A gas masks in Portuguese service).
  • But no country exists in which people don't wear foreign masks at all: even from Russia, where there's a cheap supply of local masks, and only them are used by the military, police, security services and EMERCOM, we have photos of (much more expensive) foreign masks worn by civilians. Ain92 (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
    • OK, I'm starting to proceed with these edits myself. Ain92 (talk) 19:12, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Using your categories shouldn't require a whole research activity.
Category:Gas masks in {{COUNTRYNAME}}
means literally "located in".
Category:Gas masks from {{COUNTRYNAME}}
means literally "originating from".
Category:Gas masks of {{COUNTRYNAME}}
means literally "related to in some way" and likely is the parent of both
Category:Gas masks in {{COUNTRYNAME}}
and
Category:Gas masks from {{COUNTRYNAME}}
. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:54, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We currently categorize no military equipment with "from" (perhaps for a reason, although I've never investigated why), and I'ld prefer to keep that consistent. The current consensus in prepositions usage is that, e. g., Category:Soldiers in France is not related to Category:Soldiers of France in any way. Also see Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/08/Category:Soldiers by country of location – some Commons users even want to get rid of in—of distinction! If you want to create "Gas masks in %COUNTRYNAME%" categories so much, you don't need to rename anything for that, just build that system independently of the current one (there is actually quite old Category:Gas masks in London, but it's the only exception AFAIK). IMHO, ain't broke. Ain92 (talk) 22:29, 10 September 2020 (UTC) P. S. And some degree of research is needed regardless of the prepositions if we need to identify gas masks so that they could illustrate Wikipedia articles and not just to populate categories.
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment
Your claim My response
We currently categorize no military equipment with "from" (perhaps for a reason, although I've never investigated why) Likely the first person to create a gas masks category used "of" because that was what came to mind first and everyone else simply followed suit.
The current consensus in prepositions usage is that, e. g., Category:Soldiers in France is not related to Category:Soldiers of France in any way. And yet Category:People in France is a subcategory of Category:People of France, as is Category:People in China/Category:People of China, as is Category:People in India/Category:People of India, as is Category:People in the United States/Category:People of the United States, as is Category:People in Brazil/Category:People of Brazil, etc., etc.
The current consensus in prepositions usage is that, e. g., Category:Soldiers in France is not related to Category:Soldiers of France in any way. If this consensus exists explicitly, where is it written down? If it's not written down, it's more likely that the categorical relationships are the result of piecemeal editing, not deliberate design.
If you want to create "Gas masks in %COUNTRYNAME%" categories so much, you don't need to rename anything for that, just build that system independently of the current one (there is actually quite old Category:Gas masks in London, but it's the only exception AFAIK). True, but irrelevant to the discussion of how inaccurately "Category:Gas masks of ZZZ" categories are named.
Also see Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/08/Category:Soldiers by country of location – some Commons users even want to get rid of in—of distinction! Yes, if you define "some" as "exactly one, but two want to keep Category:Soldiers by country of location as is".
And some degree of research is needed Ideally, no degree of research should be needed. And yet, you chose a subcategory name that requires effort to figure out that to you, "of" means "from" only.
if we need to identify gas masks so that they could illustrate Wikipedia articles and not just to populate categories Commons images are not restricted to Wikipedia—see COM:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. It is both self-centered and self-serving to require visitors to be power-users able to discern nuance in category names.
(Complete and utter silence on the most obvious failure of the current naming) The only way to know presently that Category:Gas masks of the United States really means "Gas masks from the United States" is to examine all 77 images (as of this writing). How does User:Ain92's false equivalence work when there are 777 images in Category:Gas masks of the United States? What about 7777?
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 23:07, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
  1. First of all, I have to note that I strongly disagree with your understanding of what is usually meant by "from". Most people would never call a gas mask from France in Portuguese military service a mask from Portugal, thus "of" currently doesn't mean "from".
  2. "[E]veryone else simply followed suit" — that's exactly what's called consensus in our terminology (we even have flowcharts in Category:Consensus explaining that).
  3. "[T]he most obvious failure of the current naming" I, unfortunately, struggle to understand, that's why I was silent. =( If a new user doesn't understand some principles of categorization (which happens all the time because they, to be fair, often leave something to be desired), that user may ask questions at the help desk. Ain92 (talk) 23:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Your claim My response
First of all, I have to note that I strongly disagree with your understanding of what is usually meant by "from". Most people would never call a gas mask from France in Portuguese military service a mask from Portugal, thus "of" currently doesn't mean "from". And yet the subcategories of Category:Earthenware by country of location are Category:Earthenware in Australia, Category:Earthenware in Bangladesh, etc. and the subcategories of Category:Earthenware by country of origin are Category:Earthenware from Chile, Category:Earthenware from France, etc.. Same with Category:Drawings by country of location and Category:Drawings by country of origin, etc.
thus "of" currently doesn't mean "from". This directly contradicts your statement above that "both gas masks produced in a country (whether designed there, produced under a license or even made as a knockoff) and gas masks used in country's military are gas masks of this country"
Most people would never call a gas mask from France in Portuguese military service a mask from Portugal, thus "of" currently doesn't mean "from". You used the "from" and "in" prepositions yourself in your description. The intersection of "Gas masks by country of location" and "Gas masks by country of origin" is likely, for example, "Gas masks from France in Portugal", but there are other possibilities that don't require the visitor to read User:Ain92's mind to use properly.
"[E]veryone else simply followed suit" — that's exactly what's called consensus in our terminology (we even have flowcharts in Category:Consensus explaining that). No, consensus connotes the result of a prior discussion as is depicted (not "explained" as you state) in the first step of File:Consensus flow chart.svg. I assume that since you dodged the question you admit that there was no explicit discussion and therefore no "consensus".
If a new user doesn't understand some principles of categorization (which happens all the time because they, to be fair, often leave something to be desired), that user may ask questions at the help desk. Yes, you could require visitors to endure all manner of somersaults, handsprings, and other acrobatics just to find the images they want, or you could just as easily choose to name categories accurately.
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 00:04, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
  1. I have no idea what's the convention in earthenware categories, I don't edit in this topic at all. Within military equipment one could expect some consistency, but across all Commons… Anyway, I'ld rather avoid far-fetched analogies of this kind whenever possible, taking into account w:WP:OTHERCONTENT and w:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
  2. We don't know where photos currently in Category:ARF-A gas masks in Portuguese service were made, it's specified nowhere and Trudent Junction 2015 MILEX took place in four countries (Portugal, Spain, France and Italy). "In Portuguese service" in no way means "in Portugal", since militaries get deployed in various locations outside home country, of which the US military is the best example.
  3. Your thesis is plain wrong, see w:WP:Silence and consensus (that's why the flow chart you linked found practically no use BTW).
  4. Your proposal is no more accurate than the current, but rather vice versa, which is best shown by the aforementioned example with French masks in Portuguese service somewhere outside Portugal. Ain92 (talk) 00:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

COM:ANV[edit]

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | español | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Nederlands | português | русский | sicilianu | svenska | Tagalog | +/−


Gtk-dialog-info.svg
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at COM:ANV#DanielPenfield. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

--Kai3952 (talk) 14:07, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Category:Remote views of Ellis Island[edit]

Why have you been removing Category:Remote views of Ellis Island from numerous photos of mine? Your edit summary "correct cat" is not illuminating: all it does is convey that for some unspecified reason you disagree with the category. - Jmabel ! talk 14:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Note that "numerous" means "exactly five" here. What is your definition of a "remote view"? In the absence of a written definition, I applied the "reasonable person" standard ("Would a reasonable person looking for a remote view of Ellis Island agree that these are 'remote' views?"). See for yourself:
Photos that I believe a reasonable person would not find "remote" and therefore I removed Category:Remote views of Ellis Island:
  • Ellis Island 01A (9434602023).jpg
  • Ellis Island 02A (9437374282).jpg
  • Ellis Island 03A (9434590367).jpg
  • Ellis Island 04A (9434584615).jpg
  • Ellis Island 05A (9434580145).jpg
  • Photos that I believe a reasonable person would find "remote" and therefore I left them in Category:Remote views of Ellis Island as they were:
  • Ellis Island (hospital buildings) 01 (9434617799).jpg
  • Ellis Island (hospital buildings) 02 (9434612663).jpg
  • Ellis Island (hospital buildings) 03 (9437384990).jpg
  • Ellis Island seen from Brooklyn Heights 01A (9423326122).jpg
  • Ellis Island seen from Brooklyn Heights 02A (9423321144).jpg
  • Statue of Liberty & Ellis Island 01 (9439922375).jpg
  • -- DanielPenfield (talk) 00:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

    File:Ellis Island 02A (9437374282).jpg doesn't seem any more or less remote than File:Ellis Island (hospital buildings) 03 (9437384990).jpg. I personally have a rule of thumb of not removing categories added by other experienced users -- especially to their own photos -- unless it is to further refine the category. Saves a lot of edit warring. I'm not going to revert you, but I think this is a bad way to do things. - Jmabel ! talk 01:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

    Graves in <country> by name categories[edit]

    FYI, I just changed the metacat template in all these categories to the catcat template. The reason is that these are not metacategories. If they were, the subcategories would have names like "Graves in <country> of people named Robert Andrews".

    The "by name" categories can be confusing because they are used in two different ways, and one of those ways is as metacats where the other is not. For an example of a "by name" category that is a metacat, see Category:Hotels by name. Each subcategory there is for any and all hotels that have the specified name. An example is Category:Hotels named Central. The subcategories in the graves categories are each for only one specific person, so they are not metacategories. If you would like more information on this, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

    Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2020 – Last day to enter![edit]

    LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svgThis user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020.
    Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2020}} to your userpage!
    Wiki Loves Monuments logo

    Hi there! Kevin from Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States here. I know it's been a tough year for everyone, and I hope this message finds you well.

    You are receiving this message as a participant in last year's Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in the United States. First, a recap: We concluded with over 5,200 great photos of U.S. historical sites made possible by contributors like you. If you haven't yet seen, last year's U.S. winners are viewable here, and the international winners here (including multiple from the United States!).

    Second, as you may have seen from the banner notices on Wikipedia, this year's Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in the United States has been running through October instead of September in consideration of the pandemic and the hectic start of the fall season. Despite the challenges of the year, we're thrilled that the United States has surpassed 5,000 photo contributions so far.

    October 31st is the last day to upload photos for the U.S. competition this year. If you've already contributed, thank you so much - and it's great to have you again this year! If you haven't yet contributed but are interested in participating again, you're invited to join us during these last couple days. Check out the United States event page for more information. Remember that you are welcome to upload and submit photos of historic sites that you've taken any time in the past, not just this month.

    As always, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

    Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019! Please help with this survey[edit]

    Wiki Loves Monuments logo

    Dear DanielPenfield,

    Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2020, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again for a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 200K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world.

    You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey.

    Please fill in this short survey and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2020.

    Kind regards,
    the Wiki Loves Monuments team, 08:21, 14 November 2020 (UTC)