User talk:Fadesga

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Fadesga!
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 | 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)‎ | +/−

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. INeverCry 00:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Churches of Montevideo[edit]

Hi, thanks for the positive feedback. I did a round yesterday and got the ones around Canelones, Soriano and the one near Entrevero, but the first one, Canelones & Minas is almost impossible to shoot with a normal lense. I will wait for a winter day, when the trees have no more leaves and I might be able to get something worth uploading. I will try to get the two in Prado today. The main thing with Wikipedia is to establish notability. I think you are doing fine, but for some we may hear about notability. For the one in barrio Lavalleja, I happened to find a page that shows that the Philarmonic orchestra uses it for concerts. Such things count for notability, if you can find some refs. Cheers. Hoverfish (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Here's the reference to the concerts of the Municipal Orchestra at San José. --Fadesga (talk) 03:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

TUSC token efa287b4d2ee0b9e9f1ad83b0ca88298[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Monumento a Perpetuidad[edit]

El nombre correcto no es "a la". Es "a". Creé la categoría correspondiente. La otra hay que borrarla. Saludos. --Fixertool (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Vi que agregaste la categoría "Graves in Uruguay" y está bien. Pero me gustaría algo más específico. Es una fija que para el Monumento a Perpetuidad van a subir muchísimas fotos. Ni que hablar para los cementerios de Montevideo y tal vez algún otro. ¿Qué te parece que se puede hacer? Gracias desde ya. Saludos. Fixertool (talk) 21:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

No tengo dudas de eso. Mi pregunta era más específica y tenía que ver con cómo llamarlas. Serán creadas por departamento y dentro de ellas por cementerio, si corresponde. Saludos. --Fixertool (talk) 22:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Disculpame la cháchara. Dale un vistazo a Category:Graves in Spain. Está encarado de otra manera. No todas las "graves" (mausoleos, panteones, tumbas, etc.) están en cementerios. Estamos a tiempo de encararlo así, si estás de acuerdo. Saludos. Fixertool (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
De paso, ya que creaste artículos de cementerios en inglés, yo voy creando algunos artículos de monumentos importantes que no estaban y que tendrán muchas imágenes (Meseta de Artigas, etc.). Entre ellos el es:Monumento a Perpetuidad de Paysandú. Por si en algún momento te da por llevar otro cementerio al inglés, en este caso un monumento historico nacional. Saludos. --Fixertool (talk) 22:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Question about Heritage Sites[edit]

Hi Fadesga, as you see I am working parallel to you in categorizing heritage sites and I rename many sites that had no meaningful name. I see the uploader was fast in picking up and now we are doing optimum speed. One thing about what belongs where. Do you have a list of the National Heritage Sites of Uruguay. I only have the one for Montevideo provided by the IM (http://www.montevideo.gub.uy/sites/default/files/articulo/guia_arquitectonica_y_urbanistica_cuarta_edicion.pdf). However I see that many other sites that are not really "Monumento Histórico Nacional" are included. For the moment I am for letting them there, till we split all the categories correctly, but then we should clean each category so that only National Heritage Sites are inside and this category is in a more general one of (say) "Landmarks of Soriano", or similar. I have not checked yet if there is a standard pattern in other countries. Another thought is that if we make smaller specific categories, like separate ones for each Site, maybe we should still leave the parent category for each department so that it acts like a index page. This detail may be of practical value, as one comes to (say) "Cultural heritage monuments in Montevideo" and then has to open one by one all the specific ones to see that whole panorama. Or maybe the solution should be to make a selection into a special page for each department, but with so many super-good images we are getting it will be hard to decide on inclusions. Sorry for being overly verbose, but I hope to coordinate with you so we don't waste any time. Cheers. Hoverfish (talk) 22:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks a million for these links. Very helpful indeed! Hoverfish (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Fadesga, as I was categorizing, I came across a series that is falsely marked as Faro de Punta Brava (ID 019-156), while the title has it in Rio Negro. They are mostly from this uploader, starting with Frigorifico, though some are correct. Do we set the ID correct? I will place them in category Rio Negro, but I am not sure what to do with the ID. Cheers. Hoverfish (talk) 21:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I am working with AWB, which means I only see the description of the file and according to it I place the department category. I don't see all the images. So in some cases where they have the description wrong, I may have categorized wrong. But if I see the title conflicting with the description, I check the image too. And where in doubt I leave them in the general category of Uruguay. Regards. Hoverfish (talk) 22:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Categorías[edit]

Estimado Fadesga, primero felicitarte por el tremendo laburo que te has mandado durante el concurso WLM. Tenía una sugerencia para categorías: te iba a comentar si no te parece razonable ir incorporando las categorías que creas correspondientes de monumentos y sitios históricos que tienen código en las listas de WLM dentro de su categoría correspondiente por departamento, por ejemplo, Category:Aduana de Oribe entraría dentro de Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Montevideo. A su vez a cada fotografía dentro de la primera categoría que iría quitando la categoría mas general. Lo hice con las fotos de la Aduana de Oribe para que veas a lo que me estoy refiriendo. Te parece adecuado?. Si es así, te recomiendo la herramienta para ver que una galería de imagenes que tienen el mismo codigo de monumento. Abrazo!--Zeroth (talk) 02:05, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

No me queda tan claro que solo deban categorizarse las que se encuentran en esa lista oficial. Entiendo que esas listas definen lo que son los "Monumentos Históricos Nacionales" que me parece que se asemeja mas a la categoría (donde Uruguay aún no existe) de Category:National historic sites by country. Las que estamos manejando aquí son mas bien monumentos o sitios de interés por departamento y no me parecería mas categorizar todo lo que participó en el concurso WLM en ellas.--Zeroth (talk) 02:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Si, ya empecé :) --Zeroth (talk) 03:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Fadesga, I just saw this: [1] and I will place back the general category for Colonia. I think we should keep these department categories in all monuments for the time being. Best regards. Hoverfish (talk) 18:19, 2 October 2013 (UTC) Ops, I see you are removing more general categories: [2]. I will keep putting the department ones, but it is easier to simply substitute the word Uruguay with a department so if you remove the category it takes me very long to do this. Please leave the "Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Uruguay" while you add the specific ones. Thanks. Hoverfish (talk) 18:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

OK, I have added department categories in all "Wiki Loves Monuments" files, where the parent was removed, and now I have left only unknown photos in the Uruguay category. I will keep depopulating the general category as soon as more photos enter. I also notified an admin who is in the WLM project about having subcategorized to departments in Uruguay. I am very glad to see that you started additional categorization for specific monuments. I will follow suit. Cheers. Hoverfish (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I see Zeroth is removing all the department categories. So I have nothing else to say. I thought it would be useful to have them in an overcategory, and I wouldn't have wasted so many hours if I knew they would be undone. I give up. Hoverfish (talk) 00:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Categorías 2[edit]

Hola de nuevo Fadesga. Quería hacerte una consulta antes de seguir creando categorías. He visto que varias de las que has creado tú, tienen la forma "Lugar, Localidad", como "Parroquia San Isidro Labrador, Las Piedras". Podrías indicarme alguna política o estandard que pida que el nombre de la categoría contenga además el lugar?. Te pregunto esto porque he visto que la aclaración referida a la localidad muchas veces no esta agregada por una cuestión de desambiguación (ej. no existe mas de una categoría titulada "Parroquia San Isidro Labrador"), si no por algún motivo que no alcanzo a comprender. Saludos, --Zeroth (talk) 04:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Gracias por la respuesta Fadesga. Mi consulta se refiere específicamente a los edificios, lugares, etc. que no tienen nombres iguales en distintas partes del mundo. Entiendo que la categorización no se hace en función de que hipotéticamente existan sitios y construcciones del mismo nombre en otras partes del mundo, si no en función de las que se han subido a commons. En forma análoga a los artículos de Wikipedia, no agregas la localidad o alguna otra aclaración al nombre de los artículos solo porque posiblemente existan en otras partes del mundo, si no que si se comprueba que sí existen y luego se crean los artículos, se desambiguará en ese momento. Pienso por ejemplo en Cuartel Centenario de Bomberos, Category:Parque José Batlle y Ordóñez, Montevideo o el Hotel del Prado, Montevideo por mencionar algunos, pero en general he visto que de casi la totalidad de categorías que tienen agregados en el titulo a modo de aclaración, no existe ninguna otra categoría de mismo nombre.--Zeroth (talk) 11:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use content[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use content. Fair use laws vary from country to country, and uses that are acceptable under US law, for example, may not be acceptable in many other countries with more restrictive rules.

Also, fair use is only applicable in a few limited contexts. The use of a media file in one context may be considered fair use, while the use of the same file in another context may constitute copyright violation. In particular, fair use does not extend to the collection and distribution of media files in a media database such as Commons. Therefore, Commons cannot legally rely on fair use provisions.

Non-free content that may be used with reference to fair use may be uploaded locally to projects which allow this.


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português do Brasil | русский | svenska | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Motopark (talk) 03:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Ancient_Montevideo[edit]

Jmabel ! talk 15:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Garmendia[edit]

What is your source, please, for this categorization? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 01:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Pedro Figari - Pelando la pava, 1925.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm in the process of cleaning up Category:Ancient Montevideo. I'm wondering how you know that File:Pedro Figari - Pelando la pava, 1925.jpg shows Montevideo. It could really be anywhere and the artist lived in Buenos Aires at the time. --rimshottalk 20:25, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Bots[edit]


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover![edit]

Commons File mover.svg

Hi Fadesga, 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 | +/−

-- ~riley (talk) 17:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Bosque Arrayanes setiembre 2011 01.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Bosque Arrayanes setiembre 2011 01.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 | 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)‎ | +/−

Banfield - Amenazas aquí 12:27, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

¿Qué tal?, Commons no es un repositorio de imágenes personales, como pareciera ser la que nominé (no está en uso en ningún proyecto, no ilustra nada en particular y sólo aparecés vos en una foto de viaje, a mi entender). Sugiero que leas COM:NOTSOCIAL para más detalles sobre lo que menciono. Saludos, Banfield - Amenazas aquí 12:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Hola de nuevo, podés hablarme en español, este es un proyecto de múltiples idiomas. Los argumentos para la permanencia de tu foto deberías dejarlos en su correspondiente consulta, que es donde se discute si se borra o se conserva. Saludos, Banfield - Amenazas aquí 13:08, 9 June 2016 (UTC) PD: El enlace con la política que me dejaste es de la Wikipedia en inglés, que nada tiene que ver con este proyecto, Commons, que tiene sus propias normas. Banfield - Amenazas aquí 13:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Lawrence Venuti-01.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Lawrence Venuti-01.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 | 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)‎ | +/−

74.71.17.61 13:22, 23 September 2016 (UTC)