User talk:KaterBegemot

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

in general[edit]

"Your" maps are exact copies of Cornelsen maps... you colors, signatures, symbologies and content are 1 to 1 copies. I guess it is an clear copyright infringement. Your additions and modifications are microsocopic. Expect a letter from the contracted lawyers of the Cornelsen Verlag GmbH soon. --91.23.15.237 11:44, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello my friend, you seem very new to historical cartography and i truely believe that you only have the one mentioned atlas. Please visit a library and take a look in atlases like the "Atlas zur Geschichte" (VEB Hermann Haack) or the "Ploetz Atlas zur Weltgeschichte" before posting wild accusations on the internet. You will see great similarities. You'll also get an impression of the color tradition in cartography (red for Great Britain, green for Russia and so on) - the next thing you don't seem to know or care about. Several historical years of my map series aren't even depicted in the Cornelsen atlas and several details like the occupation of northern France in 1871 or downfall of monarchies in certain countries in 1848 aren't depicted in other atlases at all. Have a good day and please don't bother me with anonymous defamations again. That's just cheap. --KaterBegemot (talk) 23:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Europe in 1914[edit]

Hello KaterBegemot, I want to congratulate with you because your maps are very valuable. That being said, I read your bio but I can't help myself from telling you that I think, in the future, a map of the Europe in 1914 would be very great and would close the circle of the historical period your series of map have dealt with. In that way there would be a final view before the so called short twentieth century and after the two balkans war! —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.13.236.47 (talk) 23:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Disk. zu Karte[edit]

Hallo, siehe diese Diskussion. Besten Gruß Ziko (talk) 14:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Hallo, danke für den Hinweis! Update folgt bald. --KaterBegemot (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Europe Map of 1836[edit]

Hi! First off, I really like your high-quality maps. They are incredible. Thank you so much for the work. I was wondering if it was possible to create a map of Europe in 1836? I thought that would be a nice intermediate map between 1815 and 1848. Thank you! PS Note: On your 1815 map, Kingdom of Bavaria is simply labelled as "K. of" - I thought I would bring that to your attention. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.223.6.47 (talk) 13:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I made a long Wikipedia break but now i'm back and translating my other historical maps of Europe. Yes, i already thought about creating a map between 1815 and 1848, but there were no big territorial changes in that time. Why would you choose 1836 (since the independence of Belgium and Greece happened earlier)? The abbreviation "K. of" for "Kingdom" is used in other historial atlases too (Penguin Atlas of Recent History, Philips New School Atlas of Universal History). I don't see an error here. --KaterBegemot (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
I don’t think the abbreviation was the issue. The word “BAVARIA” is missing on the 1815 map in English, so it literally just says “K. OF”. That aside, I’d also like to thank you for this excellent series of maps. —Altales Teriadem (talk) 03:18, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the hint and your kind words! Map updates are coming in the next days. I've already translated the last maps of the series into English, but i want to upload them when the other corrections are made. Maybe i find some other errors before uploading. --KaterBegemot (talk) 23:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Europe 1848 map en.png[edit]

Hi, KaterBegemot!
I'd like to translate this excellent map into Russian. Could you provide me with a version without text. Well, if you did it with a vector graphic, then the best option would be the SVG source. --Kaidor (talk) 21:05, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Kaidor, thank you very much for your kind words! I really appreciate your nice maps and infographics that you have made for the Wikipedia. But i personally don't want to publish the SVG files, since i consider releasing the maps in a commercial history atlas. Probably i will release the source files at some point. I suggest you to translate the texts into Russian and send me the information as a text or simply an overwritten map file, so i can publish a Russian version and mention you as the translator. How about that? Actually i would find it very nice to have the whole map series translated, if you are interested. --KaterBegemot (talk) 21:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
ОК. I asked a colleague to help me with the translation. When we finish it, I'll give you a link. --Kaidor (talk) 12:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. By the way it is not necessary to translate simple city names. --KaterBegemot (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
I have some questions for you:
  1. What means «Rep. of Andorra»? Andorra has never been a republic, as far as I know.
  2. Maybe I'm wrong, but you likely should check the English spelling of the following toponyms: Benevent — Benevento, Tarent —Taranto, Dünaburg — Daugavpils, Bukarest — Bucharest, Nish — Niš --Kaidor (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Andorra is an interesting case. Most of the historcial atlasses i have available at the moment are stating "Republik Andorra": Putzger (Cornelsen Verlag), Atlas zur Geschichte (VEB Hermann Haack), Der große Atlas zur Weltgeschichte (Orbis Verlag), Großer Historischer Weltatlas, Bd. III (Bay. Schulbuchverlag). Even a very recent German publication, the Informationen zur Politischen Bildung 231/2014 uses "Republik Andorra". Some just say "Andorra", but these are the ones that are using country names only or have no consistent caption system (like Philips New School Atlas of Universal History from 1928). There are a lot of books available that are talking about the "Republic of Andorra" (like this, this or this). But it seems, it's a little complicated, since another page states "El gobierno de Andorra no puede ser definido ni como república ni como monarquía: consiste en un Consejo de 24 miembros, elegidos por los jefes de las familias terratenientes." (Source). How about just using "Андорра"? I'll take a look at the city names later. Have a nice day! --KaterBegemot (talk) 19:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, Andorra is very unusual example. Officially a principality, but a republic in fact. Since we capture the formal state of affairs on the map, and it is called the Principality on all Russian-speaking maps, I think it is necessary to write Княж. (Княжество — Principality). --Kaidor (talk) 05:38, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Княж. seems to be okay in this case. I've already started replacing the English texts with Russian ones and finish the map in the next days. --KaterBegemot (talk) 21:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

The meaning of the phrase «Quickly suppressed by Moldav. troops» (Table, №11) is unclear. What Moldavian troops are spoken about? --Kaidor (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Government troops of the Moldavian principality. Stated in 1848: Year of Revolution by Mike Rapport. --KaterBegemot (talk) 20:39, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
In nо one of the sources did I find mention of TROOPS. Everywhere is mentioned either the police, or simply "government forces". I suggest translating Quickly suppressed by Moldav. Troops as "Быстро подавлено правительством."
I think you have a different understanding of the word, but "troops" can also be used as in "police troops" etc. It just says, that it was crushed by official Moldavian forces /troops. --KaterBegemot (talk) 22:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Excellent! Unfortunately, I too late found a couple more shortcomings. 1. The sign "~" has not been removed above the word Пеньон-де-Велес. 2. The word "Молдавия" lacks the last letter. 3. In the table, in punk 11 nevertheless translate "Quickly suppressed by Moldav. Troops" as "Быстро подавлено правительством" (Quickly suppressed by government). 4. Can it be possible to write the word "ШВЕЙЦАРИЯ" completely?

Hello Kaidor, i'll edit it in the next days. Best regards, --KaterBegemot (talk) 21:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license has been found on File:Judensau magdeburg magdeburger dom ernstkapelle.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted. Deutsch | English | español | فارسی | français | italiano | മലയാളം | Nederlands | português | Tiếng Việt | +/−


Dialog-warning.svg

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Judensau magdeburg magdeburger dom ernstkapelle.jpg, has been reviewed by an administrator or reviewer and found available on Flickr under the license Noncommercial (NC), No derivative works (ND), or All Rights Reserved (Copyright), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. Unless the Flickr user changes the license to one that Wikimedia Commons accepts, the file will be speedily deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as BY (CC BY) or BY SA (CC BY-SA) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. Once the license on Flickr is changed, you may replace the {{Unfree Flickr file}} tag with {{flickrreview}} so that an administrator or reviewer can review the image again. Elisfkc (talk) 15:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

I've sent a first permission of the picture's author to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and they sent me a mail that they need a permission with the name of the file, the number of the ticket and the license etc. I've told the picture's author about it and i am waiting for a response. Now you've deleted it. The picture's description in English and German alone took me over half an hour. That's incredibly frustrating. --KaterBegemot (talk) 18:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Europe in 1812 and 1815[edit]

Hello KaterBegemot ! I really like your maps, they're very nice and quite exact ! Your work is impressive, congratulation ! I've used and inspected two maps particularly : Europe in 1812 and Europe in 1815. I remarked a few inaccuracies and incoherences. In all maps: the already-said problem of Andorra's name. In Europe in 1812 : The states of the Confederation of the Rhine are not depicted, unlike their of the German Confederation. Kingdoms of Bavaria, Westphalia, Wurttemberg, Saxony could be represented, it can be nice. Furthermore, The annexation of the austrian part of Poland by the Duchy of Warsaw in 1809 could be precised in light color. In Europe in 1815 : Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is represented in white, and not in green like Kingdom of the Netherlands, while Duchy of Holstein is pink like Denmark. Kingdom of Saxony is too big at the west, including parts of prussian Saxony, Principality of Reuss and Grand Duchy of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach.

I'm so sorry if I could be tactless, and if I did any errors, I'm french and I have not a very good English level. In fact, I'm preparing a french translation of these maps.

Thank you to read me!

Hello AkaneoMT. Thank you very much. Okay, let's see: (1) Andorra is no problem for me, since virtually all German history atlases name it "Rep. Andorra". Since people seem not to believe me or haven't more than one historial atlas, so they can compare, i made photos of 9 different atlases (one of them is an English one, all expect of one show a 1812 map) -> Link. The last picture is a very recent map, that was made for an official German institution. Other atlas like the "Atlas Historique de la France Contemporaine" doesn't show Andorra at all and others (like a Hungarian and a Turkish one) just label it as "Andorra" (for small countries that's often the case). Furthermore I wrote some other things about the situation of Andorra in the other discussion. Just "Andorra" would also be okay in future translations of the map, but i wouldn't prefer that idea.
(2) Europe in 1812 is the first map i made for the series. Maybe i'll change my mind, but i think it's better for the sake of clarity to let it be like it is. I also didn't draw rivers and so on. I think about it.
(3) Thanks for the hint about the "annexation of the austrian part of Poland". I'll add it in the next version of the map.
(4) You are right, Luxembourg was "within the German Confederation [...] being at the same time a part of the Netherlands". It will be in a lighter green in the next map version.
(5) I'll take a look at Saxony later.
Thank you for the hints! And i appreciate that you want to translate the map. I know the maps were released under a free license, but it would be very nice if you could provide the translations, so i can edit the map myself. It gives me some kind of a bad feeling to "lose" my maps and later see weird fonts or colors etc. in it later :/ BTW Your English is fine! :) --KaterBegemot (talk) 23:31, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, a short note: Luxembourg was never a part of the Netherlands, just the Dutch king was the Luxembourg Grandduke at the same time. Ziko (talk) 08:41, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Hallo Ziko, danke für den Hinweis. Der obere Satz aus der englischen Wikipedia (Luxembourg) sagt dann etwas falsches: " The Congress of Vienna formed Luxembourg as a Grand Duchy within the German Confederation in personal union with the Netherlands, being at the same time a part of the Netherlands and ruled as one of its provinces, with the Fortress of Luxembourg manned by Prussian troops.[27]" Ich schau mir das mal genauer an. Beste Grüße und geruhsame Feiertage, Alexander --KaterBegemot (talk) 17:35, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Ich habe seinerzeit dies geschrieben über Limburg und teilweise eben auch Luxemburg. Ich kann mal schauen, was in en.WP verändert werden muss. Danke, schöne Feiertage auch dir, Ziko (talk) 20:14, 23 December 2017 (UTC)