User talk:Nanahuatl

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

Image of Yalda Abbasi[edit]

The picture of Yalda Abbasi was taken by me at a festival. I don't understand why it was suggested for deletion? Avestaboy (talk) 08:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ancient Roman mosaics in Antakya Archaeological Museum[edit]

L.S. I see you created several categories concerning mosaics. I wonder why you leave it at that. When I create a new category, I try to fill it with relevant items, as many as I can find. Instead you seem to create some categories, and then expect other people to do the re-sorting. I can think up thousands of categories, but if that leaves the hard work of properly using them to others, I rather do not waste their time. And for end-users, I wonder if it makes sense to create a category Ancient Roman mosaics in Turkey, and then present them with just one picture from Antakya. I live in Amsterdam and would be very annoyed if someone created "Sights in Amsterdam by year and month" and then showed one picture of a cheese, taken in march 2019. In a way you made it harder to find the one picture you put in a sub-sub-category of the museum. Whereas formerly all mosaics were easy to view, creating sub-(sub-)galleries forces people to open them one at a time. I can guarantee you, having done so recently on tens of galleries in Berlin, that is very boring and makes little sense unless such sub-galleries have a decent number of relevant pictures. That is valid if it concerns well-known pieces, in particular ones that have a lemma in some Wikipedia. I suggest Amsterdam's Nightwatch. If and when you reorganize categories it would be nice if you'd check some items. I just noticed that some other user put several mosaics I photographed that according to the catalogue I have are 4th century, and thus were mentioned as being from that century, have been put in a 5th century category. I do not doubt that mistake is made repeatedly, another drawback of too fine a categorisation. So in short: when creating categories, uses them yourself and fill them properly. If not, leave other people's categorisations alone. 11:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Why don't you just relax ? :) No one has to do anything here, unless they violate the policies :) And I haven't... So just relax and enjoy dear anonymous user :)--Nanahuatl (talk) 21:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry for not signing, I thought I was logged in. I checked the several other edits you made, and you seem to be categorizing more than I thought, so indeed doing some of the re-sorting that I thought you would not do. Though I keep doubting if too much categorizing does not lead to hiding rather than showing valuable works. I wish there were some system that allowed "mouse overs" to show pictures in sub-categories, so one might see what's in there, without having to open them. That would greatly speed up browsing. Dosseman (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Dosseman: . As I said, you can relax a bit :) I did a lot of categorisation, because it's kinda difficult to track all the categories that we add to the files. Not only by museum and the image, but also the centuries. It'd be also nice to create Wikidata items for them, so more information could be given. By the way, I am about to give up, it's even more difficult to find information about the current files in the category. Nanahuatl (talk) 10:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Nanahuatl: I have visited the museum many times, and contributed many pictures. I have a site of my own, where at you may find some information you may wish to use. I stopped contributing Turkey pictures at some point, focussing on Syria, Jordan and now Berlin, but intend to return, as I still have many pictures I'd like to contribute. I've also started publishing full size pictures, and may put them in place of some smaller sized ones. By that time I may come back to you, as I repeatedly ran in arguments about my naming of categories and you are a frequent contributor. In particular the system where a name can be that of a province, of its capital, or some part of the province has annoyed me often (and I have annoyed people who claim to use that system wisely).
By the way, could you inform me what is the effect of putting a @ in front of a users name? I still do not understand part of the internal messaging system. Dosseman (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dosseman: , yes, I have noticed that you have contributed a lot. Thank you for your efforts. Since I am blocked from the Turkish Wikipedia, I had been contributing to Commons. Have done thousands of edits during the last few monts, and a lot of categorization, especially in the Turkey-related categories.
If you use {{Ping}}, you receive a notification from me and you can see that I had replied to your message :) Nanahuatl (talk) 19:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reşadiye, Sandıklı[edit]

Merhaba. Reşadiye, Sandıklı kategorisine eklediğiniz fotoğrafları yükleyen Oköybenimköyüm adlı kullanıcı Reşadiye kalkım köprüsü fotoğrafını da yüklemiş. O fotoğraf araştırdığım kadarıyla Çanakkale Yenice Reşadiye köyünü Kalkım beldesine bağlayan köprünün. Yani diğer fotoğrafların da Yenice'deki köye ait olması muhtemel. Kategorinin Reşadiye, Yenice olarak taşınması uygun olur diye düşünüyorum nasıl olsa Sandıklı'daki köyün bir fotoğrafı Commons'ta yok. Ne dersiniz?--Güherçile (talk) 21:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Selam @Güherçile: . Evet, tespit doğru gözüküyor. Ben de tespitlerimi buna benzer şekilde yapıyorum böyle ilçesiz köy resimleri için :) Öyle yapıyorum şimdi. Dikkatin için teşekkürler, iyi çalışmalar :) Nanahuatl (talk) 21:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very old images[edit]

Please don't nominate very old images for the sole reason that they are low-resolution without EXIF, as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mersin Kızlardağ 1.jpg. First of all, it was more common back then to resize your own photos before uploading them. Secondly, a lot of these uploaders are no longer active so we can't contact them for further verification, and we don't want to lose perfectly fine images for no good reason. Therefore, we cannot apply modern standards to very old photos. I would say that "low-res without EXIF" is never a valid reason on its own if the upload is more than 10 years old, and if the upload is between 5 and 10 years old, we should still exercise great caution and leniency. Even for modern images, don't go nominating small images for deletion without other reasons for suspicion. -- King of ♥ 09:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @King of Hearts: . There are literally "hundreds of" files that I have nominated for deletion with similiar ration and literally "all" of them are deleted, with various admins. Commons usually follows "better to be cautious" policy in those cases. But it's OK, you are free to close them like that, not really interested a lot, just saying :) Have a great day. Nanahuatl (talk) 21:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It really depends on the situation. See COM:GOF; while not directly applicable to the files you've nominated, it encapsulates our general principle with old uploads that it is "better to be trusting" rather than "better to be cautious". -- King of ♥ 21:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Category discussion warning

İstanbul in the 2010s 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!

R'n'B (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Atatürk fotoğrafı hakkında[edit]

Oynanmış diye kabul etmediğin fotoğraf öncekilerden daha az oynanmış halidir. Sadece arkaplan siyah yapıldı. Örneğin önceki fotolarda mendil değiştirilmiş yamuk duruyor. Zıtlık seviyesi de aşırı yükseltilmiş. İnkanyezi (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@İnkanyezi: , mendille dahi oynanmış, yapma :) Bayağı oynanmış yüzle ve saçla. Ayrı bir dosya olarak yüklenebilir. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Benim mesleğim bu uzmanlığım bu sen kimsin? Orjinal fotoyu atmıştım aç mendili karşılaştır hasta mıdır nerdir. İnkanyezi (talk) 13:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merhaba @İnkanyezi, katkılarınız hasebiyle şükranlarımı sunuyorum! Bu dosyayı müstakil olarak yüklemeniz daha iyi olacaktır. Ayrıyeten, hepimizin ortak amacı insanlığa bilgi vermek buna binaen ikili iletişimde kullandığınız kelimeleri seçerken özenli davranmanızı rica ederim. Bilgilerinize sunuyorum. Kadı Message 13:27, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Selam @Nanahuatl bu adaylık hakkında söyleyebileceğin bir şey varmı? Axis09 (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merhaba @Axis09: . Değişiklik yapmam engelli zaten, maddeyi kullanıcılar değerlendirebilir. Mesnetsiz iddialar ve kişisel yorumları ise ben hizmetlilere bildiriyorum, yapabileceğim bir şey yok. Teşekkürler, iyi günler :) Nanahuatl (talk) 05:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]