User talk:N. Wadid

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, N. Wadid!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 15:38, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary transfer from Flickr[edit]

Hello. There is no reason to transfer my pictures from Flickr like this one. I've provided my picture here already (see: Ko Lanta - Masjid Jannatul Hasanah - 0002.jpg). Please check it before transferring from Flickr. -- DerFussi 06:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi User Der, I don't know how, but from now i will check by the name. --N. Wadid (talk) 07:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Photographs categories[edit]

Hello, N. Wadid. You might notice that I changed the way you had set up some photographs categories and "photographed in <year>" categories, including changing various templates that define them. For example, I changed Template:Uzbekistanmosquephotoyear to assign category "<Year> in Uzbekistan" instead of "<Year> photographs of Uzbekistan". Most categories that have the word "photographs" in their name are used only for very specific kinds of things, not for general photographs or "photographed in" categories. Those specific things include aerial photographs, black and white photographs, and other things that group photographs by that kind of characteristic. That can be a little confusing, but the {{Photos}} template on these categories explains it.

After making the kind of change I just described, that emptied some higher-level categories, which I will be asking to have deleted. That will empty a few more, which I will also ask to have deleted, and so on until I get to categories that aren't empty.

It might help to think of it this way: the vast majority of files here are photographs. Because of that, it's kind of assumed that a file is a photograph unless it's categorized as something else. That means that relatively few things need to be in photographs categories.

I hope I've explained this well enough. If not, or if you have any questions, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Hey Auntof6. Thanks for helping me for templates, but i think it's better we make subcategories of a country by year less crowded by making more categories . I removed "buildings in <Countryname> photographed in <Year>" as unnecessary subcategory, but kept "<Year> photographs of <Countryname>" like this one. But you removed this too, while i think it's not interesting we open "<Year> in Belgium" and see mosques and churches in subcategories (they are under "<Year> in religion in <Countryname>" too). The main category for this template is "<Year> in <Countryname>", must be less crowded. Imagine if i keep categorizing and make more, like "Libraries/Cafes/Restaurants etc in Belgium photographed in 2018". the main cat will became with more 100 subcat. So keep them under <Year> photographs of <Countryname>.
About "photographs", this is based on the category name:Mosques in <Countryname> photographed in <Year>", should be not changed and kept categorized under "<Year> photographs of <Countryname>". but i have another idea, I gonna do something about this and inform you. --N. Wadid (talk) 00:27, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
how about if i make "Template:Mosqueyear" for all kinds of images of mosques, (Photographs, drawings, paintings etc)? this can be used for before 1850s images of mosques and after 1850s as subcategory for "<Mosques photographed in <Year>". --N. Wadid (talk) 00:38, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I look forward to seeing what you do, but I don't think we need "<Year> photographs of <Countryname>". I'm actually planning to ask for those to be deleted, because "<year> in <country>" is all that's needed there. Remember that very little goes in the actual photographs categories. What do you think would belong there? "Mosques in <Countryname> photographed in <Year>" would go under "<year> in <country>", not "<Year> photographs of <Countryname>". The term "photographed in <year>" does not mean the category should go in a "photographs" category. I know this doesn't seem logical, but remember that we assume that files are photographs unless they're categorized otherwise. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
ok, just don't make "<year> in <country>" crowded. every photographed thing can be categorized under a subcategory of "<year> in <country>", like Libraries under education (<year> in education in <country>), mosques under religion, etc. --N. Wadid (talk) 01:24, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. I didn't necessarily mean directly under that category. Things could be in subcategories. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:12, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
We are discussing the issue at Commons:Village pump#Overdiffused categories, the consensus is so far that this categorization is not really the best practice.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello Ymblanter and thanks for informing me, But i have nothing to say there. I don't see anything wrong of making subcats by year for crowded cats. (about Chor Minor Mosque-Madrasa, I guessed i will found more pics if i keep searching more, A historical landmark supposed to be photographed in last decade more than 50 times. Anyway currently cats seems ok.) I do this by-year categorizing only for notable mosques and why it's not helpful? Yea, I agree if you only see by year and decade, They need more cats based on architecture elements, But i am focused on year. This is updating categories, and its helpful for both Commons as "Free media repository" and other projects like Wikipedia, Wikinews, Wikivoyage and even Wikiquote. --N. Wadid (talk) 19:06, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
No, I believe it is absolutely not ok, because now, if I want to choose a photo of Chor Minor to illustrate a Wikipedia or a Wikivoyage article, I need to browse dozens of categories. May I please suggest that we continue at the Village pump.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:10, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: I clearly said about my style of categorizing. Auntof6, What is your view ? Should i have leave making by year categorizing ? Why its not helpful, i just need to check the probabilities, It's helpful or will helpful for :
in Wikipedia, for period time related articles. Like for "<year> in <a country>", or for specific-Islamic related articles in this case.
in Wikinews, for exactly and better picture related to news.
in Wikivoyage, for more updated pictures and make a better view on history of a tourist attraction.
in Wikiquote, for year-related quotes. (You can't put a 80s portrait of Trump for his 2018 sayings).
So, i see its totally helpful and nothing wrong. It's only not helpful if you ONLY see by year or deace cats, you can make more related cats, like exterior, interior, in night, in daylight, etc. User Auntof6, I need your view. --N. Wadid (talk) 19:27, 24 July 2018 (UTC)--N. Wadid (talk) 19:27, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I think I've given my opinion here and at Commons:Village pump#Overdiffused categories, but I'll say it again: I don't think we need year categories for this mosque. There are not enough files here to categorize by year. Categorizing by year is sometimes good, if either there is a large number of files or the subject changes significantly in most years, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Just look at this new topic Commons:Village pump#Is there a way to (easily) search for photos on Wikimedia?, this By-time cats makes people find easier. Flickr and other similar websites have this time-based option. Why not Commons? Time is not recognized here? --N. Wadid (talk) 19:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I am not going to discuss it here any further. Please move to VP.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm fine, and waiting for Auntof6.--N. Wadid (talk) 19:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)-
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It seems that despite what was being said in Commons:Village_pump#Overdiffused_categories, you continue to move images from a main category to a category by year, removing from the main category, contrary to what others are saying, like what your doing in Church of the Holy Sepulchre (Jerusalem). Do you expect people to find images by year, instead of images by location, like inside and outside? Add categories by year, but dont remove images from the main category. Tm (talk) 05:29, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey Tm. after we categorize them by year, we can add more cats. but now, more than 600 pics in that cat. Do you expect me just stop and one by one add cats? Just after making by year, i can add more cats like interiors and exteriors, but now just confuse me. I know what people advised me, but but but just wait and let me done it. --N. Wadid (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
No, read Commons:Village_pump#Overdiffused_categories, and see what should be done. Don´t remove images from the main category and hide them in an category by year, as you never move any image besides to categories by year. Tm (talk) 05:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Tm i don't wanna hide them under year. this is FIRST WAY, this is FIRST STEP. How you clean up a messed house after a big party? See, this is so simple, we put pics under by-year, then we can add more cats by cat-a-lot so better. that's all, but you people are very rushing. --N. Wadid (talk) 05:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Amin_al-Husseini_by_year[edit]

Category discussion warning

Amin al-Husseini by year 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!


Jonund (talk) 16:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (10) (40275049814).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (10) (40275049814).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (11) (40275049514).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (11) (40275049514).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (13) (40275049274).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (13) (40275049274).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (27) (40275044254).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (27) (40275044254).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (3) (40942483372).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (3) (40942483372).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (7) (40275050984).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (7) (40275050984).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (8) (40275050704).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (8) (40275050704).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Grand Mosque Muscat (9) (40275050264).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Grand Mosque Muscat (9) (40275050264).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Yemen IBB (27460466567) (cropped).jpg[edit]

Copyright status: File:Yemen IBB (27460466567) (cropped).jpg

العربيَّة  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  suomi  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  Bahasa Melayu  norsk bokmål  norsk  norsk nynorsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  עברית  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Yemen IBB (27460466567) (cropped).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Nominated for deletion by User:Mdaniels5757. I am a software, please do not ask me any questions but the user who nominated your file for deletion or at the help desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2020 (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:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 10:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)