User talk:Michael Barera/archives/2018
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 2010s: 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 |
| 2020s: 2020 2021 2022 2023 |
This Month in GLAM: December 2017[edit]
| ||||||
How about an image of a Powerglide transmission?[edit]
I just noticed that you have uploaded quite many images of automatic transmissions, but I haven't found any images of Powerglide on Wikimedia Commons. I thought perhaps you have a picture of a Powerglide transmission you could upload, or I hope so. ––Nikolas Ojala (talk) 01:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for asking, Nikolas, but I'm sorry; all the photos I have of transmissions were taken at the Ypsilanti Automotive Heritage Museum, and I literally photographed everything that they have. It is mostly Hydra-Matic transmissions, which were built in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Again, I'm sorry that I haven't taken a picture of a Powerglide transmission. I've also checked the Creative Commons Search, but I can't find any free images of Powerglide transmissions via it, either. Again, I'm sorry I can't be of any use on this query. Nonetheless, have a nice weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 01:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
|
Category:Life_Sciences_Institute 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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! |
Jochen Burghardt (talk) 16:26, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: January 2018[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: February 2018[edit]
| ||||||
File:Afriko-meza.png[edit]
Hello.
Can you add South Sudan in the map File:Afriko-meza.png as well as in other Esperanto maps where it is missing?
I am adding South Sudan (as well as Montenegro and other possible missing updates) in the PNG maps in Category:Maps needing South Sudan political boundaries and then remove this category after updating them. There were close to 1100 maps since I started to update these files, now it is reduced to 760 maps, but there is a long way to go.
Unfortunately I don't know how to edit SVG maps and complicated PNG map myself, that is why I asked you.
Thank you.
Maphobbyist (talk) 16:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
- I'm so sorry, Maphobbyist, but I don't know how to edit maps. I just transferred that map from Esperanto Wikipedia to Commons many, many years ago. Again, sorry for the inconvenience. Michael Barera (talk) 04:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Repository: The New York Public Library. Science, Industry and Business Library. General Collection Division[edit]
Hi Michael. This repository contains a collection of images of some General Motors automobiles. A new user, User:Zcarstvnz, disagrees with the identifications on the institution's images and is changing the file names within Wikimedia to suit the Zcarstvnz preference.
What is the best way to approach The New York Public Library and find out if they are aware of the wholesale mistakes there may be in their identification of their images. I mean I think it needs to be checked that the mistake is by their donor and not by the Wikimedia editor. I suspect the problem relates to the definition of "model years" but I'd like to know how to confirm this with NYPL. Can you help? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
- I think the most productive thing to do would be to contact NYPL directly. I'd start by filling out this form on their website. In my experience, archives/libraries are appreciative of patrons/users correcting mistakes in their documentation, even if they are mildly annoyed by having a bit more work to do. Hope this helps; let me know how it goes. All the best! Michael Barera (talk) 04:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Michael, I did and they responded (Manager Metadata Services NYPL Digital) almost immediately and asked for a list of corrections which they would send to subject specialists at their Science Industry and Business Library. In view of the large quantity I just sent links to two examples in Wikimedia and now await a response. Many thanks Michael, Eddaido (talk) 06:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: March 2018[edit]
| ||||||
Trees[edit]
Hi Michael,
I’m deep in trying reconciling some category trees for horse-drawn carriages. Sometimes they seem to have different kinks for the same trees in different countries. Kinks not links.
My particular reason to write is to ask if you can tell me should:
- Road vehicles in Ruritania
- be fed by
- 1.Horse-drawn carriages in Ruritania
- or be fed by
- 2.Horse-drawn vehicles in Ruritania (I am confident it is HD vehicles to R vehicles but there may be a subtlety I’ve missed, I miss/overlook subtleties)
Asking because Armenia, Bangladesh, France, Germany, Iran, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom all get their road vehicles from carriages and not vehicles. And then there are other countries like India which gets its vehicles from vehicles (that makes more sense to me)
Should I change Armenia, Bangladesh, France, Germany, Iran, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom etc to match India? Should I make no change? Do I have to go to categories for discussion?
I've tried to use vCat but it is too clever for me
Trust this finds you as it leaves me etc ;-)
Eddaido (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
- Looking at the examples you gave me, Eddaido, I think that you're exactly right. I believe the example provided by Category:Horse-drawn carriages in India is the correct one:
- Category:Horse-drawn carriages in India, which is nested inside...
- Category:Horse-drawn vehicles in India, which is nested inside...
- Category:Road vehicles in India, which is nested inside...
- I would apply this category hierarchy to all the categories that you're working on. If you'd like help making the changes, or anything related to them (such as adding navigational templates), please let me know...I'd be happy to chip in! As always, happy editing! Michael Barera (talk) 05:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Michael, there's nothing quite like being told you got it right! I'll go on up to vehicles, maybe beyond. I got into the subject through the categorising of carriages and stuff. Then thought I'd better see where they all fitted together and here I am, otherwise no clear plan of action. I began with the limited field of countries which already had categories for horse-drawn carriages. There are plenty more countries I need to review (and most of them I expect to have horse-drawn carriages its just they don't know about their category yet, if you see what I mean) and I'll go there next. Any contributions you make will be most gratefully received, specially the navigational templates. Best, Eddaido (talk) 10:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- And now another one. Carts may be drawn by horses, donkeys, mules, deer, oxen, cows, bullocks, dogs, goats, zebras, ostriches and the like. All Animal-powered. They may also be pushed by humans (barrows selling things etc) and pulled by humans (rickshaws). But they're all carts aren't they.
- Now, forgetting all that and starting with just:
- Category:Carts of India, which is nested inside both:
- Now, forgetting all that and starting with just:
- Might that be right? I mean not only correct but sufficient. (i.e. should there be any more included?) There is currently a great deal of variation depending on the country concerned and if the above is correct there will need to be a lot of changes.
- Consider e.g.:
- Category:Carts in Australia (or should that be of ?)
- Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 10:26, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- Consider e.g.:
- I think that the "Category:Carts by country" and "Category:Road vehicles in India" (or equivalent) categories are definitely the two essential ones, which should be used at a bare minimum. I don't think there is any problem with the additional categories the Australian case has, but I wouldn't feel obligated to create parallel categories to those "animal-powered" and "trailers" categories for other countries.
- Also, if my understanding is correct, carts of a country would imply they were made in said country, while carts in a country would imply they were simply used/photographed there. I'm pretty sure this is how the automobile categories work. Unless you're getting into "carts by manufacturer" categories, I'd standardize to carts in countries; if you do have manufacturers involved, then I'd recommend a parallel series of carts of countries to accommodate them.
- Hope this helps. Happy editing! Michael Barera (talk) 12:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for all this. I've delayed my response hoping some related things would come clearer. Will be back. Eddaido (talk) 03:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Here is another puzzle, Australia is just a handy case:
I'd have thought they would line up with:
and in the end they all do except Category:Automobiles in Australia finds its way into Category:Vehicles in Australia twice. Once labelled Category:Motor vehicles in Australia and again labelled Category:Road vehicles in Australia.
One of them has to be wrong (or am I wrong about this) but which one is it? ————————————————————————————————————————————————
And, on the other hand, I think, these Australian sections I have listed above might be redundant?
might that be so? Or should there be an equivalent for the United States?
I thought a framework had been laid down for Commons categories but I'm told that there is a good deal of flexibility / "discretion". Is that so?
Lastly is there a way to make Commons show me these trees so I can try to understand them without the hours of work it took to do just the above stuff? If it might be better that I just left all these matters to those with the appropriate knowledge and ability (!) just say so, I'm very nearly out of my (not very deep) depth. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 09:55, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message, Eddaido. I don't have time to go into this in detail right now, but I hope to do so this weekend. Sorry for the delay, but I'll get back to you soon! Michael Barera (talk) 00:01, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- No trouble at all. Thanks for the rapid response, Eddaido (talk) 00:06, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your patience, Eddaido.
- First of all, just like Wikipedia, Commons is a work in progress. There is indeed a deal of flexibility and discretion, although the trend over time is definitely toward standardization. In my mind, creation and standardization happen organically; in this case, I think the Australian categories are the most developed, so I think that ultimately the other categories that are lateral to it in the hierarchy will, over time, gravitate that way. In my opinion, all the "essential" categories are already there for the other categories, so to me this isn't a critical matter. If one category hierarchy (like in this case, Australia's) is slightly more complex than other ones parallel to it, I wouldn't worry about it as long as the basics are in place for those parallel categories ("land vehicles by country", "vehicles in the United States", etc., for "land vehicles in the United States"), which in this case I believe are.
- Also, I think that Category:Motor vehicles in Australia and Category:Road vehicles in Australia are perfectly fine to leave as is; while they are both in a common parent category and have a common child category, they are parallel to each other and are in totally separate "motor vehicles by country" and "road vehicles by country" categories. While automobiles go into both, note that some vehicles only go into one: motorboats, for example, only goes into the former, while bicycles only goes into the latter. I'd definitely recommend keeping this one as is.
- Finally, you can see the hierarchy of child categories, but only going down, not up. Therefore, I'd recommend going to a significantly general article, such as Category:Vehicles in Australia, and then clicking all those blue, right-facing arrows before all the subcategories you'd like to explore. You'll see that subcategories with those same blue arrows will then appear, and you can "open up" the following category all the way to the lowest-level categories, those with just files and no subcategories of their own.
- I hope that this all makes sense. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to help. Have a great weekend! Michael Barera (talk) 03:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Michael. I am trying to get my head around at least some of it. One of the (to me quite strange) ideas I am having trouble with is that the US Navy has a heap of vehicles which they persist in calling vessels. Why? To me and I thought all other English speaking people a vessel is no vehicle and the US Navy agrees with me. But . . . other WP people do not. Don't seem to be able to cope with this kind of thing. Will come back and respond to each of your pieces of sound advice in turn. Thanks Michael, Eddaido (talk) 03:45, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: April 2018[edit]
| ||||||
Template:Countries of North America (etc)[edit]
Hi Michael. I have been adding this template where it looked as if it might be useful, maybe I've not been sufficiently discriminating in its application. I've put all continents on this page as a temporary experiment because I hoped you might be able to amend it to show the way it should be used (or point me to where I might find out). I'd be very grateful if you might do that for me and give me some guidelines as when best to use the said template. Best regards, Eddaido (talk) 12:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Eddaido. In general, I'm personally more fond of templates than most users on Commons, so I try to keep this in mind and use them somewhat sparingly. Also, I think our {{By color}} and {{Decade years navbox}} templates work better than our by country templates, and I'm not a huge fan of how they are divided up by continent. I'm not quite sure what the best way forward is, however. Perhaps a collapsible template where the continent the country is in is set to "open" by default, and the other countries on other continents are set to "closed", but still on the same template? I'm really not certain, but I'd recommend playing with the by country templates in a sandbox and seeing what you can come up with. You can always ask for community comment, too, but I'm not sure how receptive they'd be to the idea. Hope this helps. Michael Barera (talk) 03:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: May 2018[edit]
| ||||||
A kitten for you![edit]
hello
Ramiiiiiiiii 08:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramiiiiiiiii (talk • contribs) 08:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2018[edit]
| ||||||
you need to going to Natchitoches, Louisiana to take picture of Natchitoches you do that one day. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 104.243.165.127 (talk) 08:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Definitely a good thought, but that is unfortunately a little out of my driving range. All the best! Michael Barera (talk) 04:06, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: July 2018[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: August 2018[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: September 2018[edit]
| ||||||
|
|
Association football midfielders from Cameroon 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! |
186.112.186.57 00:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: October 2018[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: November 2018[edit]
| ||||||