User talk:NeverDoING/Archive

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Declined {{bad name}}

For Category:Churches in Archdiocese of Köln you stated that it is a {{bad name}}, and I have declined the request as it does not fit the criteria. To undertake that change would require a discussion somewhere, either the talk page or at another talk page with a discussion pointer.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Category:Sankt-Birgitta-Kapelle_(Sikavarp)

Category discussion notification Category:Sankt-Birgitta-Kapelle_(Sikavarp) 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Русский | +/−

LX (talk, contribs) 09:28, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Template:Denkmal

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Template:Denkmal 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 template, 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.
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)‎ | +/−

:| TelCoNaSpVe :| 12:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Church renames

Please note that there is no need whatsoever to rename church categories to the form "Église Saint-Julien d'Ath". We have already sufficient naming variations that are compliant with Commons standards such as "Église Saint-Julien (Ath)" and "Église Saint-Julien, Ath". The "xxx-church de location_y" is the least compliant with Commons standards.

Thank you for the good work. --Foroa (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not notice that there were wrong move requests on the categories you moved. --Foroa (talk) 05:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Category:Churches of the Covering of the Cross

Auffindung means to discover and not to cover. I think this is not the correct category. de:Kreuzauffindung und de:Kreuzerhöhung are also different feasts of the cross.--GFreihalter (talk) 18:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Category:Churches of the Discovering of the Cross or take the right Name.--NeverDoING (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Churches by patron saint

Thanks for recategorising the churches by patron saint! I'd like to make one request — when you create a new "Saint [saintname] churches in [countryname]" category, would you also please add the "Churches in [countryname] by patron saint" category? See here for an example of what I mean. Nyttend (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Kirche von Seuversholz.jpg

Hello!

Why did you remove Seuversholz from this image? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Durch die Category:Churches in Diocese of Eichstätt ist angegeben, dass es sich um eine katholische Kirche handelt, da diese ein Teil der Category:Roman Catholic churches in Bavaria ist. --NeverDoING (talk) 16:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Kategorien von Kirchen

Hallo, du hast Category:Churches in Archdiocese of Freiburg in Category:Roman Catholic churches in Baden-Württemberg einsortiert. Da die Grenzen der Bistümer nicht mit den Ländergrenzen übereinstimmen und viele Diözesen länderübergreifend sind, sollten diese beiden Kategorien getrennt bleiben. Auch in WP-DE ist de:Kategorie:Kirchengebäude im Erzbistum Freiburg nicht in de:Kategorie:Kirchengebäude in Baden-Württemberg enthalten. Gruß --UrLunkwill (talk) 21:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:2011 Wimbledon Championships

Why did you create this category. For all we know people could take pictures and then not release them under the right liesence leaving us with no pictures and a pointless category. Good twins (talk) 10:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

File:St-Markus-Basel.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:St-Markus-Basel.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)‎ | +/−

diba (talk) 11:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:St-Markus-Basel.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:St-Markus-Basel.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:St-Markus-Basel.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

JuTa (talk) 11:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Items missing OTRS ticket ID

Hallo NeverDoING. Du hast unwillentlich ein von dir übertragenes Bild dort einsortiert. Übrigens: Vielleicht magst du dieses Script in deiner monobook.js oder vector.js einbauen mittels

importScript('User:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js');

Es nimmt einem viele mühsame Arbeitsschritte ab, die Änderungen müssen aber vor dem Speichern in der Diffansicht überprüft werden. --Leyo 12:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Nutzt du MonoBook oder Vector? User:NeverDoING/monobook.js/vector.js kann dann entsprechend verschoben werden. --Leyo 09:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Churches in Macedonia

Warum haben Sie vorgeschlagen, die Kategorien von Mazedonischen Kirchen, neue Namen zu bekommen. Das Land ist immer noch unter dem Namen Mazedonien bekannt. --R ašoAero-stub img.svg 08:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Ganz einfach die einzelnen Kategorien gehören zu Category:Churches in the Republic of Macedonia und diese ist in der Category:Republic of Macedonia aufgehängt. --NeverDoING (talk) 08:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Ja, und? Es war nicht einfacher diese beiden Kategorien zu umbenennen, anstatt diese 100? Dann können wir die Category:Churches in Germany zu Category:Churches in the Federal Republic of Germany umleiten.--R ašoAero-stub img.svg 09:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Mir obliegt es nicht an den Hauptkategorien etwas zu ändern. Ich habe nur darum gebeten, dass Unterkategorien richtig im Bezug auf die Hauptkategorie benamt werden. Es wurde auch nur das Durcheinander der verschiedenen Benennungen angeglichen. In der englischen Wikipedia steht Mazedonien auch unter dem Lemma Republic of Macedonia. Und in solchen Fragen ist die englische Wikipedia nun einmal maßgeblich. Wenn D das ganze ändern möchtest, dann musst Du Dich dorthin wenden. --NeverDoING (talk) 09:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Ich bin mit allen diesen griechischen Spielen mit der Ernennung von Mazedonien geführt. Ich versuche so viel ich kann, die Fehler zu korrigieren, aber es gibt einige, die mir nicht helfen. Plus, die englische Wikipedia ist hier nicht die Maßstäbe für die Ernennung.--R ašoAero-stub img.svg 09:55, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Warum denn nicht?--NeverDoING (talk) 09:56, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Die englische Wikipedia ist voll von einseitigen Sicht der Dinge. Bereits das Gefühl der Objektivität ist verloren.--R ašoAero-stub img.svg 10:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah,ja!--NeverDoING (talk) 10:04, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Ist aber so ;)))--R ašoAero-stub img.svg 10:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Deine Passion kann ich zwar verstehen, allerdings sollte man gewisse Dinge manchmal einfach akzeptieren. Die Mehrheit muss nicht immer die eigene Meinung teilen. Beginne Deinen Versuch der Umbennung doch bitte direkt bei Category:Republic of Macedonia. Dort finde ich keinen Diskussionsbeitrag von Dir und auch noch kein Aktivität in der History. Ich habe nur einen Wirrwarr in den Kategorienamen anhand der bestehenden Kategorien aufgelöst. --NeverDoING (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Die Hauptkategorie ist sowieso falsch. Mit solchen Masselöschen von Kategorien ging der Anteil der Kategorien, die ein ausgewogenes Verhältnis hatte. Die Staaten (kategorien) haben hier verfassungsmäßigen Namen. So muss auch bei Mazedonien sein.--R ašoAero-stub img.svg 18:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
EOD--NeverDoING (talk) 18:24, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Sehr nett von Dir. Das war klar. So ist, wenn man keine Argumente hat. EOD --R ašoAero-stub img.svg 18:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Ich weiß nicht, was Du von mir willst. Ich kann keine ganze Kategorie einfach umwerfen und neu benennen. Mein Vorgehen habe ich versucht Dir klar zu machen. Jetzt weiß ich nicht was Du von mir willst. Wie ich auch schon weiter oben geschrieben habe musst Du dich an eine andere Stelle wenden. Vielleicht versuchst Du einfach mal einen {{move}}. Ich komme Dir dabei bestimmt nicht in die Quere da bin ich ganz leidenschaftslos. Oder hinterlasse doch einfach einen Kommentar an der richtigen Stelle und versuche nicht so komische Spielchen, wie den Text zu einer Flagge zu ändern - das hilft sicher nicht. Also noch einmal: Ich bin der falsche Ansprechpartner für Deinen Anliegen, deshalb will ich diese unnötige Diskussion an dieser Stelle beenden.--NeverDoING (talk) 18:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe nur das gelesen. Deswegen habe ich Dir geschrieben. Also "Kolege" du hast angefangen mit diese komische spielschen.--R ašoAero-stub img.svg 19:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC) P.S. End of Discusion

Danke

Danke, für Verschieben meiner Uploads. CT Cooper · talk 10:00, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Bitte gern! --NeverDoING (talk) 11:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Verschieben

Ich hab gesehen, dass du den Inhalt von Braunschweig-Weststadt unter dem Namen Weststadt (Braunschweig) per Copy&Paste eingefügt hast. Galerien kann man verschieben. Den Button findest du unter dem Pfeil neben der Suche.--Jonny84 (talk) 10:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. Da ich so selten Galerien bearbeite hatte ich da gar nicht nach gesucht. --NeverDoING (talk) 12:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Saalfelden Evangelische und orthodoxe Kirche 2.jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:Saalfelden Evangelische und orthodoxe Kirche 2.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Saibo (Δ) 22:28, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

One moment please...

Hi, I hope to write well enough to understand me. The movement of categories of churches in Italy from "Saint Salvator" to "Salvator of Horta" may be a mistake born by a my misunderstanding. In Italy "Salvatore" (Salvator) is a first name (as well Roberto (Robert) ) but is also a title of Jesus Christ (Salvatore da colui che salva, rescuer from the Man (Jesus) who save who believe in God). A church is called simply San Salvatore (Saint Salvator, literally) but this is referred to Jesus, not a Salvator (see en:San Salvatore for more examples). I was able to explain? I'm sorry for starting this problem, my error was an incorrect interpretation of the patron saint. Please stopped moving in the incorrect categories :-(((--Threecharlie (talk) 20:19, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

There is no missunderstandig. Both categories exist Category:Salvator churches in Italy and Category:Salvator of Horta churches in Italy. I correct always the name of Subcategories in the "maincat" Category:Salvator of Horta churches in Italy. You are free to take the churches in the right category. --NeverDoING (talk) 05:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Great cleanup

Thank you for the great clean-up of the backlog. If you agree, can you remove the move requests from the various Budapest Districts. I oppose because only a part of them have an alias, the others should stick to a numebr, which is not very systematic. --Foroa (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Done--NeverDoING (talk) 16:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again for the fantastic job. I intend in one or two weeks time to harmonise the ancient Roman/Greek/Dacia categories, which should get rid of a major batch of old move request. I think that it might be better to move the Czech language things too, we cannot hold them for ever. Some old Italian "by city by ..." remains are tricky as they need to interchange: contents from one cat into the other and vice versa, one needs probably to pass through an intermediate category. Now, my real life is calling ... --Foroa (talk) 06:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Prekmurian

This books is the basis of a standard language(!), see Marko Jesenšek's articles! Doncsecz (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I read in the Slovene articles and books about this works: Knjige in časopisi prekmurskega knjižnega jezika (Books and newspapers of Prekmurian literary language; Prekmurski=Prekmurian knjižni=literary, jezik=language). Doncsecz (talk) 17:29, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


DE WIKISOURCE BOOK

Ich habe deinen Blödsinn hoffentlich gestoppt und erwarte das du den Sc.. rückgängig machst. Siehe hier http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Siebrand&action=submit#De_Wikisource_book.

Aktionen ohne Zustimmung der Community und ohne Ahnung über die Folgen sind zu unterlassen.

Grüße --Joergens.mi (talk) 12:23, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Kategorisieren

Hi NeverDoING,

danke fürs "Hinterherräumen", sortieren und kategorisieren. Mir ist z.B. in dem Bild File:Schwörstadt - Katholische Kirche8.jpg aufgefallen, dass Du scheinbar eine Option "cat-a-lot" verwendest. Das klingt so, als könntest Du damit eine Serie von Bildern auf ein Mal umkategorisieren. Ist es so und wenn ja, wie lässt sich die Funktion nutzen? Die kannte ich bisher nämlich noch nicht. Die Hot-Cat habe ich den Einstellung aktiviert aber in der Doku finde ich zu einer cat-a-lot-Funktion nichts. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot --Leyo 11:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Stereo images of Fonds Trutat - Archives municipales de Toulouse

Hello,

I am not sure I see the point of this category ?

Jean-Fred (talk) 20:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Bitte mit mehr Sorgfalt arbeiten

Steht nicht in der Denkmalliste. --Atamari (talk) 18:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, kann schon mal bei so vielen Edits passieren. Dann gehören die einzelnen Bilder aber auch nicht zu "Wiki Loves Monuments 2011". Die müssen nämlich in eine Denkmalkategorie einsortiert sein. Da liegt wohl der Fehler schon früher. --NeverDoING (talk) 21:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Also einzelne Bilder die im Rahmen von "Wiki Loves Monuments 2011" hochgeladen wurden... Ja, darunter waren fotografierte Objekte dabei, die kein "amtliches" Baudenkmal waren. Ich wusste, nicht ob und wie die zu kontrollieren zu waren. Ich habe lediglich später das Kategorie-System mit der dt. Wikipedia abgeglichen. Was ich damit sagen will: zu jedem "amtlichen" Baudenkmal in Wuppertal, zu dem ein Artikel existiert, habe ich die Kategorie in den Commons nachgepflegt. Es gibt aber noch weitere Bilder von "amtlichen" Baudenkmalen, die noch nicht kategorisiert sind.
Dass einige Bilder im Rahmen von "Wiki Loves Monuments 2011" hochgeladen wurden, die kein Baudenkmal sind - sollte auch in anderen Gemeinden ein Problem sein. --Atamari (talk) 21:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Church in Trzęsacz

Please note we already have the Category:Ruins of the church in Trzęsacz. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 04:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Einelementige Kategorien

Hi NeverDoIng, danke für deine Hilfe bei der Kategorisierung der Denkmäler. Trotzdem eine Bitte: lege bitte einelementige Kategorien nur an, wenn weitere Bilder dringend zu erwarten sind. Es muss nicht für jedes Denkmal eine eigene Kategorie geben. Bsp: Category:Weyerturm. Kategorien dienen der Zusammenfassung von Bildern zu einem Thema, was bei einem einzigen Bild immer wieder mal schwierig ist. Dazu kommt, dass das Anlegen leicht, das Löschen von Kategorien kompliziert ist (braucht admin, links von den anderen WPs sind nicht zu fassen). D.h. Finden sich mehr Bilder, kann die Kategorie immer noch angelegt werden. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Nude_or_partially_nude_females_with_fishnet_stockings

79.221.105.245 11:59, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Trams in Mulhouse

Hello Face-smile.svg

I just wanted to ask you about your edits on this category, because I thought Category:Tram transport in Mulhouse could be useful in the way that any "Tram transport" category depict the tram network in general, whereas "Trams in" depict only vehicles (we can see that explanation on the root categories Category:Tram transport and Category:Trams. Mulhouse was one of the rare french tram transport correcly categorized with this network/vehicles differentiation The harmonization is now ok about french categories (and I'm absolutely not opposed to it, just asking^^) but now not with other countries (like we can see on Category:Tram transport by country. What do you think about it? Face-smile.svg Thanks for your help. Jeriby (talk) 16:34, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Cat-a-lot: Moving from Category:1800s fashion (decade) to Category:1800s

Hi! You've made a mistake doing this: now all the pictures are simply in Category:1800s instead of Category:1800s fashion. Please, correct it.--Shakko (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Aufräumarbeiten

Hi, Bitte bei den Aufräumarbeiten bedenken, dass Commons ein internationales Projekt ist. Ein Großteil der Besucher hier wird nicht wissen, dass 'Ich' (wie hier) kein Autorenname ist, was bei Weiternutzungen schnell mal zu falschen Attributierungen führen kann. --

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Signatur

File:Enzersfeld im Weinviertel im Bezirk KO.png

Meine Bitte für das umbenennen mit der Endung PNG in Großbuchstaben war richtig. Auf der dewiki-Seite de:Bezirk Korneuburg sind die Karten aus der Commons-Kategorie Category:Locator maps of Bezirk Korneuburg über Metadaten verlinkt. Alle Dateien haben die Endung PNG in Großbuchstaben. Als Zwischenlösung habe ich jetzt die Karte für Enzersfeld im Weinviertel auf der Seite manuell verlinkt. Es wäre schön, wenn Du die Umbenennung doch noch durchführen könntest. Danke! --NeverDoING (talk) 18:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hallo NeverDoING !
Ich kann deine Bitte verstehen, leider habe ich kein konsensfähigen Grund gefunden.
Du kannst trotzdem deine Umbenennennug-Bitte wieder formulieren (kehr einfach bei meine Ablehnung zurück), vielleicht findest Du ein anderen Verscheiber, der weniger sorgsam ist.
MFG, Papatt (talk) 18:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Wie sieht es denn mit Punkt 6 als Grund aus "6. Angleichung von Dateinamen einer Bilderreihe, um sie z. B. in Vorlagen einfacher verwenden zu können (...)". Die Datei soll über Vorlagen geladen werden. --NeverDoING (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Der zweite Grund ist dass das Umbenennennug-Verfahren nicht solche Änderungen erlaubt. Dazu muss ich noch beitragen, dass die normale Syntax mit Kleinbuchstaben beschrieben werden sollte. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Aber bitte probier noch mal. Papatt (talk) 19:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Signatur

Verlinkungsaufhebung von Churches in the canton of Thurgau und Churches in the canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden

Könntest du mir bitte erklären, was die Gründe sind, warum die Verlinkung mit Category:Buildings in the canton of Thurgau, Category:Buildings in the canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden und Category:Churches in Switzerland aufgehoben werden sollte? --Pingelig (talk) 13:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Aus meiner Sicht reicht es, wenn die Seite in Ihrer entsprechenden Kategorie aufgehängt ist. Da ist keine weitere Kategorisierung nötig, das wir in der Kategorie erledigt. --NeverDoING (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Signatur

Entfernung einer Kat - warum?

Hallo NeverDoING, es wäre hilfreich, wenn Du das Entfernen von Kategorien mit einer Begründung in der Zusammenfassungszeile versehen würdest. Ich verstehe beispielsweise nicht, warum Du hier eine Kategorie herausgenommen hast. Gruß --Sir James (talk) 10:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Schau Dir mal die neue Oberkategorie an Category:Evangelische Kirche Biedenkopf. Ich habe dort alle Bilder der Kirche zusammengefasst.--NeverDoING (talk) 10:31, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Okay. Das ist sicher gut gemeint. Ich gehe aber davon aus, dass das fehlerhafte Lemma bald korrigiert wird. Dann darfst Du die Kat umbenennen. Gruß --Sir James (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Du kannst das Lemma gerne auch selber ändern. An dem konkreten Namen hab ich kein gesteigertes Interesse. Mir geht es nur darum, dass Bilder die zu einem Bauwerk gehören auch in einer Kategorie zusammengefasst werden. So sind die Bilder leichter auffindbar und können im dewiki zentral angelinkt werden.--NeverDoING (talk) 10:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh, das Lemma werde ich durch Verschiebung schon selbst ändern. Mein Verständnis von Höflichkeit ggü. dem Ersteller/Autor des Artikels gebietet mir, ihm (oder anderen) eine Zeitspanne zur Nennung von Gegenargumenten einzuräumen. Kategorien, die jemand anderes angelegt hat, ändere ich jedoch nicht. Gruß --Sir James (talk) 10:58, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Waldenserkirchen Gottstreu und Gewissenruh

Hallo NeverDoING, die Kategorisierung hier verstehe ich noch nicht - vielleicht wegen der Uhrzeit, aber bitte erkläre es mir doch mal für Dumme: Kategorie der Kirchen in Waldensern? Die Waldenser (engl. Waldensians) waren Personen einer Glaubensgemeinschaft bzw. Kirche, keine Gegend oder Gemeinde. Die Orte Gottstreu und Gewissenruh gehören zur Gemeinde Oberweser, ich hätte also gedacht, die Kirchenbilder gehörten hierhin und hierhin, die andere Kategorie verstehe ich noch nicht ... --Dehio (talk) 23:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis, da habe ich mich von der vorherigen Kategorisierung ablenken lassen. Dort fehlte nämlich zumindest bei einer Kirche die Gemeindeangabe. Ich habe den Fehler jetzt behoben.--NeverDoING (talk) 06:35, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Kleiner Hinweis …

… auf einen offensichtlichen Fehler von dir: User talk:Dealerofsalvation#File:Windhoek New Apostolic Church, 1990.jpg. Gruß & nichts für ungut --dealerofsalvation 12:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Churches_in_Diocese_of_Columbus

Nyttend (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Churches_in_Diocese_of_Nice

Nyttend (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Churches_in_Diocese_of_Copenhagen

Nyttend (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

A small cup of coffee.JPG 4 your extensive work... Nevit Dilmen (talk) 11:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Verschiebungen nach Village Church (Ort)

  1. Wurde dazu gerade eine Anfrage auf Commons:Forum gestellt.
  2. Mache es zumindest bei von mir angelegten Kategorien nicht. "Church in Ort" ist völlig OK.

Danke und Gruß -- Niteshift (talk) 11:23, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Auch noch eine Frage dazu: Wieso hast du bei der Kategorie "Village Church" das church großgeschrieben und nicht klein? --Pilettes (talk) 12:41, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Warum nicht? Schau Dich mal bei den Amerikanischen Kirchen um, da wird Kirche fast immer groß geschrieben. Wenn das falsch ist, dann zeig mir bitte eine eindeutige Erklärung. Einen guten Rutsch! --NeverDoING (talk) 12:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Weil es meinem Empfinden von korrekter Schreibweise nach eben falsch ist. Aber ich kann damit auch falsch liegen. Soweit mir bekannt, schreibt man church groß, wenn es entweder am Satzanfang steht oder halt Teil eines Eigennamens ist (so wie z.B. hier). Ist es aber kein Eigenname und steht das church auch nicht am Anfang, dann schreibt man es mMn klein (so wie hier (zumindest die meißten)). Oder was meinst du?
Und noch etwas, meinst du nicht, es könnten evtl. Schwierigkeiten auftreten beim Zuordnen, ob eine Kirche eine Dorfkirche ist oder eine "normale" Kirche (sprich, der Begriff de:Dorfkirche ist ja doch eher ein schwammiger)?
Ein gutes Jahr 2012 :) --Pilettes (talk) 08:57, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Pargas

Hi! The old category Category:Pargas should have been moved to Category:Pargas (municipality 1948–2008) (or actually more preferably just Category:Pargas (former municipality) or Category:Pargas (island)) before moving Category:Väståboland to Category:Pargas. Now the files belonging to Category:Pargas (former municipality) must be selected manually, and that requires a lot of work. Please notice also, that the original authors should always be mentioned when moving categories to fulfill Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. ––Apalsola tc 11:22, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I came here for the same reason. But please don't use Category:Pargas (island) as there is no such island (the municipality consisted of several islands, none of which is called Pargas). --LPfi (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Clean up

Best wishes for 2012 and thanks again for your great work.

Would you have some time to clean up a bit in the "buildings and structures" cats (from en:wiki) as here. The mix creates conflicts with the Commons structures/buildings hierarchy. Thank you. --Foroa (talk) 07:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Eartags categories

Hoi NeverDoING, could you please have a look at Category talk:Cattle eartags? --:bdk: 16:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

sehr schön

Hei NeverDoING, sehr schön umstrukturiert, so sieht es viel besser aus. :-) Da war wohl vor 2 Jahren etwas Chaos entstanden und dann immer dieses Switchen zwischen Kirchen und Kirchengebäuden. Danke. Viele Grüße --Geitost diskusjon 16:08, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Reading in the 21st century

Some ambiguity created. When we have a place name added such that Category:21st century in Reading which is not ambiguous, is converted to what is in the subject line, there are now issues.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:26, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Been managed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

South Tyrol

Don't change the city category names in (German speaking) South Tyrol. There has been very long fights from Italian, German, English (only partially existing) and bilingual doublename versions. Lets keep the peace. --Foroa (talk) 11:09, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

And please, don't rename galleries: they often reflect the compromise for local language naming (a gallery name should maintain de name given by the creator in any language, unless completely wrong). --Foroa (talk) 11:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok! Its your turn category:Percha, South Tyrol, category:Gais, South Tyrol, Category:St. Lorenzen, South Tyrol--NeverDoING (talk) 11:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
As you can see in En:Municipalities of South Tyrol, they follow the name of the language majority, we too I guess for the first part, not for the disambiguation. --Foroa (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

SVG Flag map categories

Can you please explain why you and Forea are undoing all the work I've spent days doing? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 17:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Kirche Bärenstein

Hallo,

was ist denn der tiefere Sinn für diese Umbenennung:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ARedeemer_Church%2C_Bärenstein.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=64775169&oldid=25173140

Hab' ich da irgendwas verpaßt?

Schöne Grüße,

Oxensepp (talk) 00:19, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Saints

Hi NeverDoING, for people, we try to maintain their original birth name. For saints, the latin name is preferred if it exist (or popular nick names such as Category:Don Bosco), otherwise, I think that generally their birth name should be maintained, at least for Romanesque and Germanic languages. No clear idea about other languages.

We better keep the removal of saints in church and chapel names on hold till there have been some discussion somewhere. --Foroa (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Military history by century

Category:Military history by century needs some cleanup; I think that it is either "xth century in military history" without hyphen or 'miltary history in the xth century". --Foroa (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Rename Category:1st century in military history to Category:Military history in the 1st century (1 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:20th century in military history to Category:Military history in the 20th century (66 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:21st-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 21st century (8 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:10th-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 10th century (3 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:11th-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 11th century (10 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:13th century in military history to Category:Military history in the 13th century (15 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:16th century in military history to Category:Military history in the 16th century (16 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:19th century in military history to Category:Military history in the 19th century (18 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:2nd-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 2nd century (2 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:3rd-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 3rd century (4 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:4th-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 4th century (5 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:5th-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 5th century (6 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Rename Category:7th-century in military history to Category:Military history in the 7th century (13 entries moved, 0 to go) --NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
I prefer this Version--NeverDoING (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deleting categories

What is the reason for clearing and speedy deleting categories like "Category:Roman Catholic churches in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana"? Thanks for adding information on archdiocese organization. I don't understand why we can't also identify Roman Catholic churches by their geographic/political entity locations? -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:49, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I am restoring the categories. Categories by archdiocese is good information, but categories according to what political boundaries they are located in is also useful. Churches for other faiths are so categorized (eg, Baptist Churches in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana). -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleting categories

for "incorr. name". В Калифорнии, конечно, гораздо за 12000 километров виднее, как называется по-английски в официальных документах Городского совета мой родной город Харьков. Где русский язык является официальным, кстати. А называется он Kharkov. Кроме того, зачем вандализировать ссылки со страниц Википедии, удаляя изначальные категории? Ссылки на Коммонз при удалении базовой категории ведут в никуда. --Vizu (talk) 09:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Bitte

zukünftig besser aufpassen, was Du alles so verschiebst (revert), ist schon das zweitemal. gruss Rauenstein 16:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry! Bitte achte selber bei den Soertierkriterien darauf, dass nach Städten/Gemeinden sortiert wird.--NeverDoING (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Sollte das ein Witz sein? Wonach wird denn sonst kategorisiert? An einer Atomisierung von Kategorien, die letztlich nur bezwecken, dass niemand mehr Bilder findet - falls Du das meinst -, werde ich mich definitiv nicht beteiligen, im Gegenteil. gruss Rauenstein 22:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Frage und Bitte

Hallo NeverDoING, ich verstehe nicht, was an beispielsweise Category:Pfarrkirche hl. Rupert, Uttendorf jetzt (incorrectly named) sein sollte und warum Category:Saint Rupert Church (Uttendorf, Salzburg) besser ist. Klar es Rupert Church Englisch, aber Pfarrkiche hl. Rubert ist ein Eigenname, insoferne bedarf er keiner Übersetzung. Dass die Kategorien drüber dann Category:Churches in ... und Category:Saint Rupert churches in ... heißen, ist ja in Ordnung. V.a. wenn ich hl. Jakob unter Saint James suchen muss, sehe ich Probleme für die OMA. Mir ist bei weitem nicht klar, wie die ganzen (und halben) Heiligen jetzt auf Englisch heißen. Nebstbei pass bitte auf, wenn du Kategorien änderst, die könnten in den Denkmallisten vorkommen. Dann solltest du sie mitändern, da sie sonst dangling werden. Wenn du neue Kategorien zu Denkmälern anlegst, wäre es nett, wenn du sie auch in den passenden Denkmallisten unter commonscat eintragen könntest.

Zu den Namen, ich bin mir da nicht sicher, vielleicht kannst du mir eine diesbezügliche Regel verlinken, ob die Klammerschreibweise oder die Kommaschreibweise hier auf commons vorzuziehen ist, ich dachte immer hier ist es die Kommaschreibweise. Die Klammerschreibweise wäre die der deutschsprachigen WP.

Jedenfalls bin ich gerade dabei noch weitere 3000 Denkmalbilder aus AT zu kategorisieren, da fallen jede Menge neue Kategorien an und es wäre doch schade, wenn ich Namen wählen würde, und du würdest sie anschließend umbenennen. Bevor Kategorien umbenannt werden, muss es sie erst einmal geben, hier gibt es jede Menge noch nicht als Denkmal in der passenden Gemeinde kategorisierte Bilder (auch Kirchen). Magst du dich an der Abarbeitung dieser Liste beteiligen? lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 17:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

In dem von Dir genannten Fall habe ich nur die Bilder aus zwei verschiedenen Kategorien zu der gleichen Kirche unter einem neuen Namen zusammengefasst. Außerdem hatte ich ausnahmsweise versucht die Namen der Kirchenkategorien zu vereinheitlichen. OMA-Tauglichkeit ist natürlich so ein Problem, nur ist commons anders als dewiki ein internationales Projekt. Da sind natürlich englische Kat.namen sinnvoller. Commonslinsk in dewiki versuche ich zu korrigieren und auch ergänzen. Ich werde mich zurückhalten mit der Umbenennung von Kats und habe auch kein Problem damit, wenn ich da korrigiert werde.--NeverDoING (talk) 10:33, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Weiter so

Hallo ich denke deine Arbeit hier ist unbezahlbar. Legst du doch so schön benamste Kategorien wie Category:Kath. Pfarrkirche Gainfarn (Bad Vöslau) an, um sie dann mit sagenhaften 2 Bildern zu füllen, weil man bei der Category:Gainfarn vor lauter Bildern keinen Überblick mehr hat. Bwag (talk) 18:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

aber so wie ich Bwag kenne, meint der das sarkastisch. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Frage

Hallo NeverDoING, gedenkst du weiter so schöne 2-Bild-Kategorien anzulegen wie hier, so dass die vielen informativen und schönen Autobahnbilder in der "eigentlichen Ortskategorie" schöner zur Geltung kommen? Wenn ja, dann sage es mir bitte, denn ich werde dann zukünftig darauf Bedacht nehmen und nur mehr ein Foto pro Objekt hochladen. Bwag (talk) 15:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Der Sinn von Kategorie liegt doch darin zwei oder mehr Fotos von einem "Objekt" zusammenzufassen, damit mman sie zentral aus anderen Wikis anlinken kann. Ansonsten gehen doch diese Fotos in oft sehr umfangreichen Kategorien verloren. Wenn Du mit Fotos einen Überblick über z.B. ein Dorf erstellen willst, dann nutze doch einfach Galerien. Die sind für so etwas vorgesehen.--NeverDoING (talk) 17:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
OK, danke für die Info. Bevor ich mir aber die Arbeit antue bezüglich den Galerien, da lade ich zukünftig eher nur mehr 1 Bild hoch, so dass die Kategoriefreaks keine Möglichkeit mehr haben 2-Bilder-Kategorien in Masse anzulegen. Bwag (talk) 11:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hallo NeverDoING, ich würde es schade finden, wenn deine Kleinkategorien dazu führen, dass keine oder weniger Bilder hochgeladen werden. Bwag ist ein guter und fleißiger Fotograf, um seine Bilder wäre es schade. Ich sehe das ähnlich wie Bwag, ich überlege mir auch genau, welche Bilder ich in einer Kategorie zusammenfasse. Kaum fasse ich sie zusammen, verschwinden sie am nächsten Tag wieder in Unterkategorien. Komischerweise macht sich kaum jemand die Mühe, Bilder zusammenzufassen, die nicht ohnehin schon zusammengefasst sind: Quellen dazu wären etwa andere WPs (Move to commons), Artikel in denen ein Bild vorkommt und die eventuell weitere enthalten, schlecht benamste Bilder hier auf commons. Wenn du sinnvollere Betätigungsfelder suchst, kann ich dir Category:Media needing categories wärmstens ans Herz legen. Dort ist dann kluge Recherche, Kombinationsgabe, Intuition usw. gefragt. Zu den Kirchen solltest du dich vielleicht mit W!B: kurzschließen, der schmeißt die Kirchen aus dem Bezirken raus und kategorisiert sie unter Patrozinium. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
BTW: Commons ist ein Medienarchiv, keine Kategorisierungsplattform. Bei 12 eigenen Bildern und 6 verbesserten solltest du vielleicht auch deine Prioritäten überdenken. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

No source

Hi, du hast einige meiner hochgeladenen Bilder mit no source markiert. Ich verstehe die Problematik, dass Dritte schwer prüfen können, welche Copyright-Status das Bild hat. Ich habe die Bilder für jmd. anderes hochgeladen und mir per Mail seine Zustimmung dafür eingeholt. Wie kann ich das in WikiCommons kenntlich machen. Oder müsste ich die Bilder dann als eigenes Werk hochladen? Bzw. was ändert der Fakt, dass der Dritte das Bild schon auf Panoramio veröffentlicht hat? --Aschroet (talk) 07:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Ich habe alle von mir hochgeladenen Bilder mit subst:OP markiert und die Lizensierung über OTRS mit dem Urheber angestoßen. Mir war das Verfahren vorher nicht klar. Ich hoffe, dass damit das Löschen der Bilder erstmal aufgeschoben ist. --Aschroet (talk) 11:25, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

St. Magdalena

Hallo NeverDoING! Ich weiß leider gar nicht, was Du hier mit wenn es unbedingt sein muss, dann auch mit dem richtigen Kat-Namen meinst, da eigentlich nichts unbedingt sein muß. Ich war gestern nur etwas in Panik, als ich in der Benachrichtigungsmail etwas von Schnelllöschantrag las und erst dachte, es würde eins meiner Bilder betreffen. Als ich dann sah, daß es die Kategorie betraf, meinte ich, ich hätte da was falsch verknüpft und wollte es korrigieren. Kann sein, daß ich nach dem Schock in der E-Mail nicht mehr richtig denken konnte. Also wenn Du meinst, es gehört nicht so, dann mach es ruhig anders. ;-) Liebe Grüße, --Haeferl (talk) 11:43, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Ich finde es unnötig für eine Maria-Magdalena-Kirche im Oberösterreich eine extra Kategorie zu schaffen. Und diese Kategorie war auch noch falsch benannt. Ich lass jetzt die neue Kat auch wieder löschen und habe die Kirche in die Oberkategorie Mary Magdalene churches in Austria verschoben. (Die Benamung von Unterkategorien erfolgt immer analog zu den Oberkategorien]] --NeverDoING (talk) 11:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Ist gut so und entschuldige bitte das Durcheinander. ;-) Liebe Grüße, --Haeferl (talk) 12:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. NeverDoING (talk) 17:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Umbenennung von Kategorien

Hallo NeverDoING, Du hast die Cultural-heritage-monuments-Kategorien der Linzer Stadtteile umbenannt. Warum hältst Du beispielsweise die Bezeichnung von Linz-Waldegg für falsch und Waldegg (Linz) für richtig? Grüße, -- Hans Koberger (talk) 11:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Ganz einfach. Die Kategorie für den Stadtteil Waldegg (Linz) heißt Category:Waldegg (Linz). Entsprechend dieses Namens werden auch entsprechende Unterkategorien (Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Waldegg (Linz)‎) gebildet. --NeverDoING (talk) 11:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Alles klar, danke. -- Hans Koberger (talk) 11:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Die Umbenennung der Kategorie Pfarrkirche hl. Leopold in Saint Leopold III Church (Urfahr) gefällt mit gar nicht. Ist quasi eine Begriffsfindung ;-) siehe [1]. -- Hans Koberger (talk) 13:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Dürfte zudem ein unangezeigter Bearbeitungskonflikt gewesen sein?! Ich hab die beiden Bilder jetzt in die Category:Pfarrkirche Sankt Leopold (Urfahr) gestellt. -- Hans Koberger (talk) 14:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Das verstehen aber nur die Deutschsprachigen Commonsnutzer. Alle anderen bleiben außen vor. Ich bin immer froh, wenn ich keine osteuropäischen Kategorienamen entziffern muss. Aber mir soll es hier egal sein.--NeverDoING (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

St. Radegund

Hallo NeverDoING, ist dir aufgefallen, dass Sankt Radegund vor ein paar Tage gerade nach St. Radegund verschoben wurde? Und du hier genau in die andere Richtung schiebst? BTW. Momentan sind da einige Sankt und St. verschoben worden. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 14:31, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Ich habe nur die Konsistenz der Schreibweise auf commons korrigiert. Du kannst gerne eine Angleichung an dewiki vornehmen.--NeverDoING (talk) 16:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
damit habe ich ja begonnen, mit der Wahl des Categorynames, aber du hast das wieder rückgängig gemacht. Es gibt immer zwei Varianten, die Konsistenz herzustellen, du hättest auch Category:Sankt Radegund auf Category:St. Radegund umbenennen können. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
So, die Sache ist mit einer großen Lösung (Category:St. Radegund, Upper Austria) erledigt.--NeverDoING (talk) 06:29, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 06:29, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Clarification needed

Can you explain me (and to the italian wikisource community) why the Category:It Wikisource books has been deleted (moved to Category:Italian Wikisource books), and did not the same for Category:De Wikisource book (to be moved to Category:German Wikisource books)? Different behaviours for the same kind of category. It seems to me a sort of discrimination. Can you please proceed in the same way for the german category? --Accurimbono (talk) 07:53, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

My inexperience

Sorry, if your not mistaken belief that this operation is due to the only church in (my) region of Italy? Unfortunately I have not photographed the numerous churches, chapels and oratories in my area dedicated to that saint, I hope you'll understand when you will insert an action that does not want to be vandalism. Hello, good work and sorry for the dirty work that I leave involuntarily.--Threecharlie (talk) 17:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Saint Peter Church heißt eigentlich gar nicht so...

Hallo NeverDoING, Du kategorisierst grade viele meiner Gebäudefotos in eigene, neue Kategorien (soll man das machen, auch wenn es nur zwei Bilder für eine Kat gibt?). Die Kategorien haben englische Namen, Beispiel Category:Saint Peter Church (Bempflingen). Da fände ich es gut, wenn Du eine Kategoriebeschreibung hinzufügst und den richtigen (deutschen) Namen der Kirche angibst. --Schwäbin (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo NeverDoING, dem Wunsch von Schwäbin möchte ich mich voll und ganz anschließen. Wäre schön, wenn Du das beim Umbenennen deutschsprachiger Kategorien so machen könntest. Liebe Grüße, --Haeferl (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

In etwa [2]?--NeverDoING (talk) 18:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
So ist das ein guter Kompromiß. :-) Besonders schön wäre es, wenn das nicht nur bei geographisch dem deutschsprachigen Raum zuzuordnenden Kategorien so gemacht werden würde, sondern auch bei z.B. Sachkategorien. Wenn man nicht so einen ausgeprägten englischen Wortschatz hat, ist es immer schwierig, die passenden Kategorien zu finden - anders ausgedrückt: Mit deutscher Kategoriebeschreibung würden die Fotos besser kategorisiert werden. Liebe Grüße, --Haeferl (talk) 10:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat

Good morning, NeverDoING. I have difficulties to understand and write in english. Why have you created Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux and suppressed Category:Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat ? Officially, since 1854, « Diocese of Sarlat » and « Diocese of Périgueux » are united. This is the official web site of Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat (in french : « Diocèse de Périgueux et Sarlat ») and I wish that Category:Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat (or Category: Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat if you prefer) take the place of Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux which no more exists. Père Igor (talk) 10:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I follow the Site of enwiki en:Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux. Feel free to correct it. --NeverDoING (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
On frwiki, it's Diocèse de Périgueux et Sarlat since 2007 but the interlanguage link is false on enwiki. I correct it. Père Igor (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Evangelische_Stadtkirche_Giengen_an_der_Brenz

88.64.117.189 20:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --NeverDoING (talk) 13:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Engel am Orgel.JPG

Hi NeverDoING. Magst du die Beschreibungsseite von transferierten Dateien jeweils nicht etwas (mehr) aufräumen? In diesem Fall ist da sogar ein Einzelnachweisfehler. --Leyo 12:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry but...

a it:Cantoria isn't a en:Matroneum...--Threecharlie (talk) 19:26, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Se vuoi te lo rispiego in italiano (così mi trovo più a mio agio): come puoi leggere nella voce in it.wiki una cantoria era quella parte della chiesa atta a ricevere i cantori, ovvero gli elementi del coro, normalmente in epoche più recenti vicino all'organo. Evidentemente è un elemento più tipico delle architetture ecclesiastiche italiane e fare di ogni erba un fascio è quantomeno errato. Se tu hai una fonte, o in italiano o in inglese che accomuna le due categorie da te unite mi adeguerò altrimenti è una ricerca originale, sia tu un amministratore o meno, e questo è distante dai pilastri. Gradirei una risposta, grazie.--Threecharlie (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js

Das Script ist für deine Transfers sicherlich auch ganz nützlich... Grüße --Brackenheim (talk) 11:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Category renames

Please do move categories without using {{Move}} (for at least two weeks) and thus giving other users chance to comment on the move request. (Trivial, uncontroversial renames are an exception; for them you can use User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands.) Now we probably have to rename Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix A100, Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix A170 and Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix A850 back to their previous names.

And if you copy the content (e.g. category description) from the old category to the new one, you should attribute the original authors like SieBot has done in this example. If you don't attribute the authors, you may vialote the COM:CC-BY-SA and the COM:GFDL.

Generally it is often the best option to just use {{Move}} or User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands, and let a bot do the job. ––Apalsola tc 10:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Cantorie sind nicht Matroneums !

Hallo Neverdoing. Hab gesehen, du hast Cantorien und Matroneums zusammengefügt. Das ist falsch. In Kirchen ist eine Cantoria eine Sängerkanzel (siehe da), während ein Matroneum eine Empore ist, eine Tribüne oder Galerie die in den alten Kirchen für die Frauen bestimmt war, als die Geschlechter noch getrennt waren (siehe da). Deswegen werden sie "Matroneum" genannt, das von "Matrone" herkommt. Also die zwei Kategorien sind nicht das gleiche, gehören also nicht zusammen, da sie eine total andere Funktion haben. Ich wäre dir sehr dankbar wenn du dies wieder sanieren und rückgängig machen könntest. Herzlichen Dank. Alles Gute, --DenghiùComm (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Moving from Category:Celtic spirals to Category:Triple spiral

Why did you do that? I had a reason for wanting category:Celtic knots, and intend to add more images. Moreover not all the images I uploaded are triple spirals. Could you please move the images back to 'Celtic spirals' and just add category:triple spirals to the images where that actually applies? Thank you. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Der Vorredner bat mich, diese Anfrage ins Deutsche zu übersetzen. Er meint, dass Ihre Verschiebung nicht richtig sei, da nicht alle der dortigen Bilder triple spirals darstellten, und bittet, diejenigen die es nicht sind wieder zurück zu verschieben. - A.Savin 21:55, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Ich hab nach Celtic spiral gegoogelt, die Kategorie nicht korrekt angelegt war und bei enwiki folgendes gefunden The triple spiral or triskele is a Celtic and pre-Celtic symbol. Wenn Celtic spiral eine spezielle Kategorie sein sollte, dann kann sie jeder korrekt anlegen und richtig kategorisieren.--NeverDoING (talk) 04:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

NB: I have initiated a thread on your unwarranted category moves here [3]. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 13:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Hoppenlaufriedhof

Hallo NeverDoING, danke für "Moving from Category:Hoppenlau Cemetery to Category:Hoppenlaufriedhof)"! --Gerd Leibrock (talk) 09:05, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Trotz allem verstehe ich nicht die Logik dahinter. Einmal in Deutsch wie beim Friedhof und einmal in Englisch bei einer Kirche [4]. Bwag (talk) 11:41, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Bescheidene Frage

Tust du zuhause auch für zwei Bilder sozusagen ein eigenes Bilderalbum anlegen, wie indirekt beispielsweise hier? Bwag (talk) 21:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Du stellst den falschen Vergleich an. Commons-Kategorien sind nicht mit einem privaten Fotoalbum zu vergleichen. Dafür sind die Gallerie-Seiten gedacht. Kategorien dienen der Übersichtlichkeit und laden zum Ergänzen ein. --NeverDoING (talk) 05:22, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Ich weiß nicht was da übersichtlich sein soll, wenn man zwei Bilder tief in einer eigenen untersten Schublade versteckt. Bei Artikel ist in der DE-Wikipedia an sich erst eine eigene Kat ab 10 Artikel erwünscht, aber egal ich habe daraus gelernt und werde halt das neue Prinzip beibehalten, das ich in letzter Zeit praktiziere, indem ich nur 1 Bild pro Objekt hochlade. Bwag (talk) 05:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:HMS Daphne

What are you doing? Why do you keep moving images from Category:HMS Daphne to Category:HMS Danae (D44). The Daphne was an early 19th century wooden sailing vessel; the Danae was an iron clad vessel. They are totally different ships from two different eras.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry--NeverDoING (talk) 04:28, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Elvekum.jpg

Hallo, NeverDoING, du hattest die Datei exportiert. Hattest du das fette Copyright-Zeichen darin übersehen? Diese Markierung kann nicht mit CC-BY-SA-2.0-DE kompatibel sein. Gruß --Kai von der Hude (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Photographs by Charles L. Weed

Hi, I was wondering why you moved a lot of images from Category:Photographs by Charles L. Weed to category Category:Charles L. Weed. I would expect the first category is for photographs taken by the photographer and the second is for photographs (or portraits etc) of the photographer. --Tony Wills (talk) 12:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Take a look User:CommonsDelinker/commands There are similar moves like: Category:Photographs by John Mueller to Category:John Mueller --NeverDoING (talk) 12:28, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
See Commons:Village_pump#.22Photographs_by.22_category_moves, it is not the right thing to do. --Tony Wills (talk) 13:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Karten von Engelskirchen

Hallo, es wäre wohl eine gute Idee, die Karten von Engelskirchen auch gleich in Category:Maps of Engelskirchen zu übertragen. Gruß, -- Ies (talk) 04:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Saint Procopius churches (Trebic)

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Saint Procopius churches (Trebic) 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 category, 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.
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)‎ | +/−

JuTa 12:42, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Motorway_Interstate_Highway_shields

Imzadi 1979  03:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Geismar

GFreihalter (talk) 18:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion ?

On Commons:Village_pump#Our_Lady_categories. Best. --Foroa (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

category

Hi. rather not in Warsaw ;) Przykuta[edit] 09:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Artificial topic name: re Lancaster

Just a POI- Lancaster is the county town of Lancashire. By postal convention- followed everywhere- you never place the county name after a county town. So Morecambe, Lancashire is right-- Preston, Lancashire is right but Lancaster is just Lancaster. In the same way one cannot say Bedford, Bedfordshire. I don't lose any sleep over it- but it would be better reverted.--ClemRutter (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. NeverDoING (talk) 18:28, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Category Churches of Evangelische Kirche in Mitteldeutschland

Hallo Never doing - diese Kategorie wird nach dem Ort, wo die Kirche steht sortiert, und nicht der Bezug der politischen Gemeinde ist da relevant. Wie soll bspsw. Jemand Bilder von 'ner Kirche in Vieselbach finden, wenn er kein Hintergrundwissen hat, wo dieses Vieselbach liegt, also denk mal drüber nach, das ist total praxisfern.M.f.G --Metilsteiner (talk) 16:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Das ist Deine Meinung, die Realitität sieht aber anders aus. Nach Vieselbach kann gesucht werden, in Kategorien sollen aber die Kirchen von einer Stadt (z.B. Erfurt) alle zusammen stehen.--NeverDoING (talk) 16:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Scheinst es nicht begriffen zu haben, in dieser Kategorie werden die Kirchen und nicht die Hauptorte verwaltet, dafür gibt es z.B. zusätzlich Churches in Erfurt.--Metilsteiner (talk) 16:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. NeverDoING (talk) 16:46, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

File tagging File:Klosterkirche Zwiefalten.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Klosterkirche Zwiefalten.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Klosterkirche Zwiefalten.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Yellowcard (talk) 13:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Verschiebung

Hallo NeverDoING. Mir ist diese Deine Verschiebung momemntan nicht ganz nachvollziehbar. Das Lemma "Naturschutzgebiet Löcknitztal" verlinkte auf das NSG in Brandenburg de:Naturschutzgebiet Löcknitztal und schien mir korrekt. Nach Deiner Verschiebung geht der commoncat-Link im de-Artikel auf das NSG in MeckPomm - das ist aber nicht gemeint ... es gibt mehrere "Löcknitze" :-). Gruß --Lienhard Schulz (talk) 14:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Saint Boniface Church (Lingen)

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Saint Boniface Church (Lingen) 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 category, 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.
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)‎ | +/−

The church's common name is in German, not in English, therefore it's sensible to call the category "St.-Bonifatius-Kirche (Lingen)", not "Saint Boniface Church (Lingen)" as done till now. In fact, all other subcategories of churches in Category:Saint Boniface churches in Lower Saxony are labelled in German, just this one till now was an exemption. As three of the four images in the category are even my own uploads, I moved them to a german-labelled category myself.

Einverstanden? -- ThomasPusch (talk) 10:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

File:KircheAkureyri.jpg

Hallo, du hast das Bild unberechtigt nach Commons verschoben. Es darf dort nicht sein. Dort ist ein Löschantrag gestellt. Verschiebe es bitte zurück nach WP [[Kategorie:Datei:Kirchengebäude in Island]]. Fingalo (talk) 10:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hä?

[5]

Was soll das? Ich wundere mich, dass das Bild aus der Wartungs-Kategorie verschwunden ist... es sind noch nicht alle Kategorien gesetzt. Wenn du so etwas machst - ist der Arbeitsaufwand dir hinterher zu räumen enorm. Hast du die nicht gefragt weshalb es überhaupt eine "Wartungskategorie" gibt? Hattest du doch mehr Dateien aus dem Wuppertaler Raum bearbeitet? --Atamari (talk) 08:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Kategorie Dassel

Hi NeverDoING, dankenswerterweise hast du die Unterkategorien für die Stadtteile in der Kategorie Dassel erzeugt. Leider fehlen noch 5 Unterkategorien, und ich weiss nicht wie das geht. Daher die Bitte an dich, ob du diese Kategorien dort noch erzeugen könntest: Deitersen, Erichsburg, Hunnesrück, Krimmensen, Portenhagen. --Ü lenes (talk) 08:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:Triad_chess

Ihardlythinkso (talk) 09:22, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

File tagging File:Rostock Jacobikirche Ruine.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Rostock Jacobikirche Ruine.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Wdwd (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

File:PapstBenediktDeutschland.JPG

Pay attention to copyright
File:PapstBenediktDeutschland.JPG has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Wdwd (talk) 16:45, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

File:PapstBenediktDeutschland.JPG

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:PapstBenediktDeutschland.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)‎ | +/−

Yann (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

File:San Bartolomeo all’Isola.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:San Bartolomeo all’Isola.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)‎ | +/−

Heubergen (talk) 20:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Seligenstadt-orgel-einhardsbasilika.JPG

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Seligenstadt-orgel-einhardsbasilika.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)‎ | +/−

Heubergen (talk) 18:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Semur-en-Auxois - Fassade.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Semur-en-Auxois - Fassade.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)‎ | +/−

Heubergen (talk) 18:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Players_of_Wolverhampton_Wanderers

Froztbyte (talk) 17:18, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with categorizing media files

Hallo NeverDoING,

danke für deine Hilfe beim Kategorisieren von Dateien in Category:Uploaded with Open Access Media Importer and needing category review. Frohes Fest! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 00:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

small mistake

Hello NeverDoING,

this, this and this ones were wrong. The files state the province they are made in (and 99.9% of the images is from the Netherlands). Basvb (talk) 21:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Aboriginal People and Culture of Australia

Hello. One of our commons uploaders has uploaded files by the category: Aboriginal. I've requested the moving this category to Category:Aboriginal People and Culture of Australia. I request your cooperation, otherwise we're only acknowledging Aboriginal People of Canada in a few of our categories and clubbing the other Aboriginal People in unclear categories. Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 16:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC).

Category "Syrakus"

Hallo, vielen Dank für die Korrekturen! --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Our_Lady_Church_(Oud-Zuid)

Paulbe (talk) 16:59, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

File:European Court of Human Rights.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:European Court of Human Rights.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)‎ | +/−

84.61.182.144 09:49, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Rijswijk

Hello, I see you've moved a bunch of images from Category:Rijswijk to Category:Rijswijk, South Holland. A lot are eronous though. There are no less than 3 places in the Netherlands called Rijswijk. The largest one is in South Holland, but there is also one in North Brabant and another in Gelderland. I'm looking into fixing it by doing some cat-a-lot voodoo, since it's a bit of a mess now. --Vera (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:St Michaelskloster Kiew.JPG

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:St Michaelskloster Kiew.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)‎ | +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Wecholdjesu.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Wecholdjesu.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)‎ | +/−

Heubergen (talk) 20:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Türmer1.JPG

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Türmer1.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)‎ | +/−

Heubergen (talk) 11:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Rathaus st johannes nm.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Rathaus st johannes nm.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Rathaus st johannes nm.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Wdwd (talk) 20:34, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Saint_Matthew_Church_(Boevange-sur-Attert)

Jwh (talk) 00:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Oberwiehler Gewerbepark.JPG

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Oberwiehler Gewerbepark.JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Oberwiehler Gewerbepark.JPG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Wdwd (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Vielen Dank...

... für das Anlegen der irischen Kategorien, die es erlauben, die Kirchen nach Diözesen einzusortieren. Das wollte ich schon immer mal haben und Du hast das jetzt einfach mal gemacht! Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 23:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Kit body fcaugsburg away0809.png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kit body fcaugsburg away0809.png 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)‎ | +/−

Cloudz679 (talk) 11:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Nach Commons verschieben, 'Files requiring review' belassen

Hallo NeverDoING, mir ist an mehreren Fällen aufgefallen, dass Du Dateien von de-WP nach Commons transferierst und ihnen hier Kategorien vergibst. Du lässt dabei jedoch den Baustein {{BotMoveToCommons}} drin, so dass die Dateien trotz Deiner "Sichtung" in der jeweiligen Unter-Kategorie von Category:Files moved from de.wikipedia to Commons requiring review verbleiben. Aktuelle Beispiele: alle Dateien in Category:Capernaum Church (München) bzw. Einzelbeispiel [6]. Ist das Absicht, damit noch eine zweite Person drauf schaut wie ich hier? Wenn ich nach Commons übertrage, entferne ich den Baustein immer mittels User:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js, da ich ja weiß, dass ein de-WP Admin vor der Löschung dort ohnehin noch einen Blick auf beide Dateien wirft. --Emha (talk) 16:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Rory_Uphold

Lukecford (talk) 16:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Leenock.jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:Leenock.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Alan Lorenzo (talk) 15:24, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Only a word...

Thanks :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Natural heritage sites in Ukraine

Hi! Could you explaine what is "Natural heritage sites in Ukraine"? What is the difference btw "Natural heritage site" and protected area? And why do you create such category only for Ukraine? --A1 (talk) 20:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Natural heritage sites in Ukraine

Hi! Could you explaine what is "Natural heritage sites in Ukraine"? What is the difference btw "Natural heritage site" and protected area? And why do you create such category only for Ukraine? --A1 (talk) 20:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Santo Niño

What management would call: a challenge: Category:Santo Niño. Enjoy. --Foroa (talk) 15:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Agárdy_Gábor

Louperivois Ψ @ 14:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Category bishops from France

Ich verstehe nicht warum Sie wollen nicht dass ich diese "categoy" korrigiere. The extra space I want to remove prevent the category you are creating to be sorted in the alphabetial order. You shoult have a look on the page "Category:Roman Catholic bishops by dioceses" and on the existing categories on this page and try to understand what I'm doing before undoing my contributions. Danke schön.

Schau Dir bitte mal vergleichbare Kategorien an: Category:Bishops from England, Category:Bishops from Austria, Category:Bishops from Australia, Category:Roman Catholics bishops of Argentina, etc. Wenn eine Kategorie im Namen by diocese, dann sollten die Kategorien auch direkt nach Alphabet einsortiert werden. Hier ist das nicht der Fall. Vielen Dank.--NeverDoING (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
OK, so, bitte schön, modifizieren Sie alle die anderen Kategorien auf der Seite Category:Bishops from France. Es tut mir leid dass ich es nicht verstanden habe.--Barsupilami1512 (talk) 16:11, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Schmiedeberg (Erzgebirge)

Gegen eine "zusätzliche" Einordnung in Holy Trinity Church (Schmiedeberg, Erzgebirge) oder eine andere Kategorie habe ich nichts einzuwenden, aber es sollte in der "Hauptkategorie" (Schmiedeberg, Erzgebirge) verbleiben, da WIKI Schmiedeberg, Erzgebirge auf diese Seite verweist. Man könnte vielleicht vorher fragen, wenn man etwas vom Autor erstelltes löschen möchte. --Geri-oc (talk) 13:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Ich habe gar nichts löschen wollen, sondern nur alle Bilder der Kirche in einer Kategorie zusammengefasst. So wird es tausendfach bei wikicommons gemacht. Da die Kirchenkategorie eine Unterkategorie der Gemeindekategorie ist müssen de Bilder nicht auch noch in diese einsortiert werden.--NeverDoING (talk) 17:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Es kann sein, das "So wird es tausendfach bei wikicommons gemacht" - doch zerstört das Einbindungen zur Geschichte in Schmiedeberg. Da ich die Kirche nicht als Kirche sondern als Kulturgut betrachte. Zur Kultur gehören neben Kirchen auch historische Gebäude - und die stehen auch unter Schmiedeberg - oder soll ich für Herrenhäuser, Eisenwerke, Verkehrsmittel, ... Unterkategorie anlegen. Was ist falsch, ein Bild mehreren Kategorie zu zu ordnen. Ich verstehe nicht, warum in Commons manche User das einzig Wahre in ihren Vorstellungen suchen. Ich hätte doch bei einem freien Projekt bleiben sollen. --Geri-oc (talk) 17:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Es geht bei so einem großen Projekt immer darum eine einheitliches Linie zu etablieren. Du kannst natürlich ein Bild in mehrere Kategorien einbinden. Aber wenn doch alle Bilder der Kirche in einer Kategorie zusammengefasst sind, dann brauchen nicht einzelne Bilder wieder in der Oberkategorie zu stehen. Dann müssten auch alle anderen Bilder der Unterkategorien mit in der Hauptkategorie stehen. Nur werden dann die Hauptkategorien total unübersichtlich.--NeverDoING (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry- Ich verstehe dann aber deine "Holy Trinity Church (Schmiedeberg, Erzgebirge)‎" nicht - dann sollte - wie die einheitliche Linie "Churches in Schmiedeberg (Erzgebirge) als Kategorie stehen und dann gehören auch katholische, freikirchliche und andere dort rein. Ihr könnte es machen - wie es beliebt. Die bisherigen Verlinkungen auf COMMONS werde ich bei Projekten wieder auf freie Server umstellen. Dann entfällt auch das kategorisieren und die Bilder werden über taggs und Beschreibung gefunden. --Geri-oc (talk) 17:36, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Die Kategorie Category:Churches in Schmiedeberg (Erzgebirge) gibt es nicht und ist aus meiner Sicht auch nicht unbedingt notwendig bei insgesamt zwei kirchlichen Bauten in Schmiedeberg, die zur zeit mit Bildern vertreten sind. Man muss ja nicht immer einen ganzen Kategoriezweig für eine Unterkategorie anlegen. Deshalb hängt ja auch Category:Holy Trinity Church (Schmiedeberg, Erzgebirge) in der nächst höheren Kategorie Category:Churches in Landkreis Sächsische Schweiz-Osterzgebirge. Ich verstehe leider nicht was Du genau möchtest. Von welchen Verlinkungen sprichst Du? Ich würde das gerne verstehen.--NeverDoING (talk) 17:49, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Patron vs. Ort, Patron

Hallo NeverDoING, ich hatte vorgestern alle (fast) in Category:Churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Aachen eingeordneten cats aufgrund der völlig inkonsistenten Anordnung (siehe hierzu meine Ankündigung in Category talk:Churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Aachen) in der o.g. cat nach dem jeweiligen Patron sortiert, d.h. den ggf. vorhandenen Ort aus der pipe (nur für die o.g. cat) entfernt. Du hast das für cat:Saint Joseph Chapel (Matzerath)‎ nun wieder rückgängig gemacht[7], mit dem Ergebnis, dass diese Kirche, die eine Josefskirche ist und sich in Matzerath befindet, in der o.g. cat nun im Abschnitt E steht, wo sie natürlich niemand sucht. Wer Kirchen in Erkelenz sucht, geht nach Category:Churches in Erkelenz. Ich kümmere mich zwar nicht systematisch um die Kategorisierung, meine aber dass meine Überlegung hier nachvollziehbar ist und würde mich freuen wenn wir uns da einigen könnten. --Túrelio (talk) 18:43, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Cute grey kitten.jpg

Because this kitten crap is totally useless.

Schmelzle (talk) 23:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Blockland

Hallo, Deine Umbenennung ist m.E. unglücklich. Blockland ist nun der einzigen Bremer Stadt- bzw. Ortsteil, der in dieser Kategoriegruppe nicht mit "Bremen-" beginnt. Außerdem wird so die automatische Kategorisierung der Uploads mit dem Bremer Express-Upload und dem Wizard für WLM zum Scheitern gebracht. Ich denke, dass Du diese Seiteneffekte nicht bedacht hast und bitte Dich, Deine Änderung selbst rückgängig zu machen. Gruß --Quarz (talk) 21:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Meine Umbenennung ist richtig. Die Benamung richtet sich nach der Oberkategorie. Diese heißt Category:Blockland und richtet sich nach dem Artikelnamen auf dewiki. --NeverDoING (talk) 04:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Hallo, das ist wirklich nicht glücklich. Dir ist hoffentlich klar, welche Arbeit nicht nur auf Dich zukommt, wenn Du weitere Bremer Kategorien nach diesem Denkmuster umbenennst. Also bitte noch mal in Ruhe drüber nachdenken, rein formale Gründe sind da nicht angebracht. --Godewind (talk) 11:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Manessier-Fenster.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Manessier-Fenster.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)‎ | +/−

87.184.96.51 14:30, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Dorfkirche Lichtenrade 2.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Dorfkirche Lichtenrade 2.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)‎ | +/−

80.187.110.166 10:14, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Bishops_of_the_Roman_Catholic_Archdiocese_of_Bamberg&action=history

Sorry, this categorization is total crap. "Bishops of Bamberg" was perfectly o.k, and now the name is plainly wrong. All those that are in this category, have never been "Bishops of an archdioeces", but simply bishopf of the diocese of Bamberg, which has only become an archdiocese in 1818 (those are in the correct subcategory "archibishops of Bamberg"). Anyway "Bisohps of the ... archidocese" is pretty silly, since "bishops of an archidocese" are "archbishops". Please revert these wrong, useless and time-consuming recategorizations, and please re-categorize only when you really know what you're doing. --Tiergärtner (talk) 14:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

File:T. F. Lansing.jpg

Could you help me restore File:T. F. Lansing.jpg and delete File:T. F. Lansing (1).jpg instead? File:T. F. Lansing.jpg had a better upload history and no point in keeping two images.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Icelandic_turf_houses

Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:55, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Category:4711

André Kritzinger (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Leonardo da Vinci

Bist du sicher, dass diese Statue von da Vinci ist? --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 20:26, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Category:Hunting,_Moselle

Sjoerddebruin (talk) 08:16, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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.
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)‎ | +/−

Affected:

Eleassar (t/p) 15:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Calavera

Thelmadatter (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Paintings_in_the_Alte_Pinakothek_(flat_list)

ghouston (talk) 11:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For category work. ;) Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:12, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Kraków-Nowa Huta

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Kraków-Nowa Huta 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 category, 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.
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)‎ | +/−

JuTa 11:48, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Recent zebra catting

You just removed a bunch of zebra photos from the more specific Category:Unidentified zebras (reserved for zebras of unidentified species/subspecies) to the less specific Category:Zebras. This should NOT be done. Images in Unidentified cats should be left there until identified or, in rare few cases, deemed unidentifiable. --Pitke (talk) 10:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

It seems I had forgotten to originally create Unidentified zebras after moving files there. In any case, for your future reference, please include any new "Unidentified X" category in both its topical (X) and an upper level "Unidentified things" category. --Pitke (talk) 13:37, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

TUSC token 4712787e84368f87374c2af80d7582d8

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!


Images of Tour de France 1936 Hi! These Images of Tour de France 1936 have been cropped.--Cerovic Dragana (talk) 02:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Verschiebung in andere Kategorie

Hallo, hab mal ´ne Frage: du hast gestern einige meiner Bilder verschoben von der Kategorie "Mosel-Camino" in die Kategorie "Way of Saint James in Rhineland-Palatinate". Könntest du mir kurz erläutern warum? Ich finde, dass "Mosel-Camino" eigentlich ok war. Allerdings hatte ich diese nicht als Unterkategorie von "Way of Saint James in Rhineland-Palatinate" eingestuft. Das wäre doch sicher die bessere Lösung, oder. Herzliche Grüße Woscho (talk) 11:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Kirche in Kückhoven

Hallo NeverDoING, heißt die Kirche in Kückhoven nicht Kirche St. Servatius. Gruß Huckety (talk) 11:56, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Jetzt stimmts Category:Saint Servatius Church (Kückhoven)--NeverDoING (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Frage

Zu Deinen Massenedits wie [8]. Gibt es eine andere "Diocese of Linz" auch noch, weil du in "Roman Catholic Diocese of Linz" ändertest? Bwag (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Frage

Zu Deinen Massenedits wie [9]. Gibt es eine andere "Diocese of Linz" auch noch, weil du in "Roman Catholic Diocese of Linz" ändertest? Bwag (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh Gott ...

hab ich doch in letzter Zeit den Fehler gemacht, dass ich von einem Objekt 2 Bilder hochgeladen haben und gleich ist jemand zur Stelle, aus einem "Fotoalbum" ein Inhaltsverzeichnis für Englischsprachige zu basteln: [10]. Bwag (talk) 18:28, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

What happened here?

I was notified that this edit reverted my edit. However I removed that category including itself, and you added a new category. Odd. --Dschwen (talk) 14:57, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Maps_of_the_Germans

Rudolph Buch (talk) 23:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Burian2.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Burian2.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)‎ | +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 01:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Bolts and hardware

Please don't bulk re-categorize these like this - almost all of your new categories are quite wrong. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Arandelas

Andy Dingley (talk) 13:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Thames Quay

Perhaps you could in future look at the images you are recategorising before you move them. Thames Quay is in the Docklands, not Chelsea! Even a cursory glance would have told you they are not the same place. I have reverted your changes. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Imagem

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Maps of the Germans

--rimshottalk 19:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Categories for dioceses

Hi NeverDoING!

I see that you are creating a lot of categories for the Roman Catholic dioceses. Thanks a lot for doing so! When you create a category, can you please add it to the corresponding Wikidata item? Please add it to both the properties: example and the commons interwiki link: example.

I have created a bot that fetches those categories from Wikidata and renders a table of all (I hope) the Roman Catholic dioceses, so that we can see the progress of the work: http://pylan.free.fr/dioceses/

Thanks again! Best regards! Peter17 (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Pedestrian_crossings_by_city

ŠJů (talk) 05:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Gillbachbahn

Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello @NeverDoING:, there's no need to create redirects for unproper names. They just are useful when there are several names, all legitimate, to redirect to one surely written according to our standards. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:17, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

@NeverDoING:, take one minute for chatting with me. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

NeverDoING, stop your write-only mode or I'm going to block you. You're doing a mess with redirects. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:40, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
NeverDoING, please stop messing with categories. No need to create disambiguation pages when there's no media related to homonyms. This is not en.wikipedia, it's Commons. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 19:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
You are not commens--NeverDoING (talk) 19:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
That's not a reason. You're messing up. Stop or I'll block you soon. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 19:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I do this since many many Months and no other is so talking about this. --NeverDoING (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Not a valid reason. The fact that nobody noticed before is not a good reason for doing wrong once you've been warned not too. I reported your case to the Administrators' Noticeboard, I asked for a German-speaking Administrator to follow you, I want to be sure that rules are being explained clearly to you. Meanwhile I ask you not to do anything with categories please. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 19:13, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Have a look at my Timeline and my many category-correction espacially at the church categories. --NeverDoING (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

??

Bei Personen-Kategorien muss man defaultsort hinzufügen, sonst findet die keiner in Personenverzeichnis. Sie haben massenhaft solche ohne Sortierschlüssel angelegt, ich erwarte Korrektur. Danke --A.Savin 13:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Keine Reaktion und auch keine Korrektur bisher. Zwei wahrscheinlichste Ursachen: entweder stimmt de-Babel nicht und Sie können kein Deutsch, oder man kann mit Ihnen nur durch Sperren kommunizieren. --A.Savin 14:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Wenn Du alle sperren möchtest, die Fehler machen, dann wäre die Wikipedia sehr leer. Schau Dir bitte einfach mal genau meine Bearbeitungen an, insbesondere nach Deiner Ansprache. --NeverDoING (talk) 05:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Lösch vs Loesch

Hallo NeverDoING,
gibt es einen speziellen Grund, weshalb Du ausgerechnet Claudia Lösch hier zu Claudia Loesch machen möchtest? Entsprechende Richtlinien zur Transkription von Namen sind mir nicht bekannt. --Tsui (talk) 17:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Ich habe nur die schon existierende Kategorie "verlinkt"--NeverDoING (talk) 17:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Ah, verstehe. Ich habe jetzt alle Bilder mit ihr (die ich finden konnte) der Category:Claudia Lösch zugeordnet und den Kategorie-Redirect umgedreht. Soviel ich weiß werden ja nicht-englische Buchstaben hier nicht automatisch ins Englische transkribiert. Falls das dann und wann jemand macht, weil er meint Alles solle Englisch benannt sein, verweise ich gerne auf die Category:Motörhead, die er dann zuerst so verschieben sollte (wegen des erwartbaren Feedbacks darauf) ;)
lg, Tsui (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Von de-wp transferierte Datei musste leider schnellgelöscht werden

Hallo NeverDoING, Du hast auf die korrekte Lizenzierung vertrauend File:Agfa Varioscop.jpg von de-wp hierher transferiert. Diese Datei habe ich leider schnelllöschen müssen. Dies steht in Beziehung zu Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nikon rangefinder d.jpg (wird da aber nicht explizit erwähnt) und ticket:2014020910008697 (wo es explizit genannt wird). Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 23:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Coat of arms

Hola NeverDoING!

Lo felicito por organizando y categorizar los archivos, en especial los escudos de armas. Acabas de retirar la categoría a los escudos que tienen las armas de los Redentoristas, hace días quería tocar ese tema con usted, y ver si es posible crear una categoría que reúna los escudos que tengan las armas de los Redentoristas, algo así como "Redemptorists in heraldry". Saludos

(Translation Online: I congratulate you for organizing and categorizing files, especially the coats of arms. You just remove the category to the shields that have the arms of the Redemptorists, days ago I wanted to touch that topic with you, and see if you can create a category to collect the shields having weapons of the Redemptorists, something like "Redemptorists in heraldry". Best regards) --SajoR (talk) 06:59, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

About Category:Matteo Renzi

Hello NeverDoING. Actually, it's pretty weird you require me to know why you removed a widely used (and accepted) template. Can you please link me a discussion where consensus claimed to abolish it (or modify its use, at least)? Otherwise, please refrain from removing {{On Wikidata}}. Thank you. Regards, — TintoMeches, 19:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Santa Maria de Cambre

Please what means "Igrexa"? Du you mean "Iglesia"? Greetings --Ziegler175 (talk) 07:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Its not "my" Category. History--NeverDoING (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Kirchennamen

Hallo NeverDoING, es ist schon eine ziemlich schlechte Idee, einer deutschen Dorfkirche mit deutschem Namen, hier der Borbyer Kirche, einen englischen Namen zu verpassen. Ich halte es aber für eine noch schlechtere Idee, bei der Korrektur des Namens einen Editwar auszufechten. Lasse das doch bitte! Wenn Du wissen willst, wie eine Kirche heißt, mache doch einfach mal eine Suche z.B. mit Google. Wie Du sehen wirst, heißt die Borbyer Kirche nur im Artikel der deutschen Wikipedia (und auf wenigen Seiten, die dort abgeschrieben haben) "Feldsteinkirche (Borby)". Sonst (z.B. auch in der de:Liste der Kulturdenkmale in Eckernförde) und insbesondere in der Kirchengemeinde, die es wohl wissen sollte, heißt sie "Borbyer Kirche". Siehe Seite der Kirchengemeinde. Das war der Grund, warum ich die Kirche mit eben diesem Namen kategorisiert hatte. Wenn Du aber besser als die Gemeinde weißt, wie deren Kirche heißt... -- Ies (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Category:Sapienza University of Rome alumni

What is this? The appropriate category already existed. The correct synthiax is "Alumni of...". This is not en.wikipedia, this is Wikimedia Commons, there are different naming standards. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Heilig-Geist-Kirche (Braunschweig)Toni Zenz Agape.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Heilig-Geist-Kirche (Braunschweig)Toni Zenz Agape.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)‎ | +/−

Raymond 16:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Heilig-Geist-Kirche (Braunschweig)Toni Zenz- Der Beter St Antonius.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Heilig-Geist-Kirche (Braunschweig)Toni Zenz- Der Beter St Antonius.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)‎ | +/−

Raymond 16:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Heilig-Geist-Kirche (Braunschweig) Adler.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Heilig-Geist-Kirche (Braunschweig) Adler.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)‎ | +/−

Raymond 16:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Vincentmalone.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Vincentmalone.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)‎ | +/−

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Joelle King 2013.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Joelle King 2013.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)‎ | +/−

Peripitus (talk) 07:37, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Category:Places_in_Polomolok

P 1 9 9   13:07, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Category:Catholic_spirituality

Fayenatic london (talk) 09:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Dein Revert in Category:Churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Kildare and Leighlin

Hallo NeverDoING, Du hast meine Anpassung ohne Angabe von Gründen revertiert. Das Resultat ist nun, dass die Aufstellung in Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Kildare and Leighlin unsortiert erfolgt. Das Leerzeichen zu Beginn einer Sortierangabe ist angemessen, wenn zwischen zwei Arten von Kategorien unterschieden werden soll, wo die eine Variante sich nicht unter die anderen mischen soll. Das ist hier aber nicht der Fall. Könntest Du bitte den Revert zurücknehmen oder eine überzeugende Begründung geben? Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 17:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Schau Dir bitte einfach die anderen tausenden Kategorien der Art "Churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese …" an. Dort wird es immer so gamcht, so dass in der Bistumskategorie die Kirchenkategorie ganz oben steht.--NeverDoING (talk) 03:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Motivational Speaker

--TJRC (talk) 00:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hello!

Thank you for adding categories to my uploads!

Online translation (Online Übersetzung): Hallo! Vielen Dank für das Hinzufügen von Kategorien, um meine Uploads! John Ronn talk 06:38, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Gabriel Montalvo.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Gabriel Montalvo.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Gabriel Montalvo.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

TLSuda (talk) 15:09, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand...

Reliefs of coats of arms in the province of Rovigo‎ (and others) is very different from Reliefs of coats of arms of the province of Rovigo‎, and the removing of Category:Coats of arms in the province of Rovigo for added Category:Coats of arms of the province of Rovigo does not make sense. These are not Coats of arms of the province of Rovigo, this it:File:Provincia di Rovigo-Stemma.png, but various coats of arms related at families or institutions identified (or not yet identified) in the area of the province of Rovigo. Now, I await you restore the old categories.--Threecharlie (talk) 10:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

...write only, reprise...--Threecharlie (talk) 00:00, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Arcmarra.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Arcmarra.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Arcmarra.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Category ambassadors

Hi, I reverted your edit at Category:Apostolic Nuncios to the United States and Category:Apostolic Nuncios to Russia. The reason is that all other ambassadors to the United States and to Russia are not alphabetically ordered, but are listed at the beginning of the category. Gugganij (talk) 10:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:Saint Michael Church (Inveresk)

Why have you reverted my move, and without any explanation? It is customary for brackets to be used to disambiguate category names rather than add their location. And you haven't moved any of the images back. Rodhullandemu (talk) 10:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

SS 100

Please would you leave the collection of pictures so that they just appear individually in the SS 100 page. You lose nothing by doing that, the pictures are still grouped as you intended. You've mistakenly added them back as a group as well so they are duplicated in SS100, I've removed the duplication. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 11:43, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:SS 100

If you look quickly before it is reverted you will find all Wikimedia's images of this car on one page. If you revert (again) any readers will have to hunt to find them. It is so much simpler for everyone to have them on the one page. What is your reason for preferring them on that page only as a note? Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 08:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Kategorien für Erzbischöfliche Wappen

Guten Morgen - ich stoße immer häufiger auf von dir neu angelegte Kategorien, die nur eine Datei beinhalten. Welchen Vorteil hat der Nutzer von dieser Vereinzelung? Welcher Vorschrift oder Richtlinie entspricht dies? -- Maxxl² - talk 08:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Berwick upon Tweed

Thanks for categorising those, I was just about to get to them myself. I have a user template which adds everything when I go through them all. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Catholic Cathedrals in the United States

Why did you set up a new category for "Roman Catholic" Cathedrals? The former category included all Catholic Cathedrals from the Roman Rite to the Eastern Rites and was inclusive of the entire church. The entity known as the Roman Catholic Church is fictional. It is a title used by Protestants and Catholics who do not know better. The Catholic Church is a single entity that is made up of multiple rites with none having primacy over the others. The Roman Rite is much larger than the others, but it is not inclusive of the others. You have even included Eastern Rite cathedrals in this category, which in incorrect. Dividing the church this way does damage to the larger communion for no good reason. I would suggest getting rid of this fictional category. The Roman Rite and the various Eastern Rites are different rites of the same church. They are not different churches. Do you not understand this? If you do not you should not involve yourself in editing topics you do not fully understand. Farragutful (talk) 17:22, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry to involve in a conversation in which I was not invited Face-smile.svg. I am sure NeverDoING perfectly understands that there is only one Catholic Church (so do I; however, I am not sure that he speaks English!). Creating Category:Roman Catholic cathedrals in the United States makes perfect sense to me since this category exists for all other countries: Category:Roman Catholic cathedrals by country. Creating a category for the Roman rite and another one for the Eastern rites does not "damage to the larger communion" as you say, but only adds a precision about the item that is categorized. Different rites is a fact, not a fiction, and recognizing them does not divide the Church... Best regards. Peter17 (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Deletion

Sorry, Ulrike von der Groeben is not empty. It contains two photos. One of them is used in several wikis. "Empty or single-photo gallery" is a standard reason for deleting a gallery, but here are two photos, both properly licensed. I revert you again, please do not nominate the gallery for deletion again. Taivo (talk) 17:52, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

This Gallery is not necessary with only two Photos. The Category is enogh.--NeverDoING (talk) 17:56, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
If you think so, then please create a regular deletion request, but galleries with two photos do not qualify for speedy deletion. Taivo (talk) 18:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Wenn Du einen Mehrwert gegenüber der Kategorie siehst, dann kann die Kategorie von mir aus bestehen bleiben. Aber viel Sinn macht es nicht zwei von drei Bildern die in der Kategorie stehen in eine extra Gallery auszulagern. --NeverDoING (talk) 18:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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.
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)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 21:46, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Political_catch_phrases

Beland (talk) 20:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Political_slogans

Beland (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Terminology_by_ideology

Beland (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Postmodern_terminology

Beland (talk) 20:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Works_based_on_actual_events

Beland (talk) 20:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Printers_Sun_Innoavtions

Alan Liefting (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

File:University Church Oxford.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:University Church Oxford.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)‎ | +/−

Emha (talk) 08:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Reichshof-lage-blockhaus.png

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Reichshof-lage-blockhaus.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Reichshof-lage-blockhaus.png]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Reichshof-lage-borner.png

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Reichshof-lage-borner.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Reichshof-lage-borner.png]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

COM:OVERCAT

Bei Verfeinerung der Kategorien sind redundante Kategorien gleichzeitig zu entfernen. Warum machen Sie das nicht? (z.B. "Churches in Leverkusen" hier, da? --A.Savin 18:24, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Category talk:Churches in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cologne

Hallo NeverDoING, schaust du mal auf obiger Diskussionsseite nach? Die Ergänzung der Bistums-Kat ist natürlich richtig, sie ersetzt oder sollte aber nicht die Kategorisierung nach (Bundes)Land ersetzen. Gruß--Leit (talk) 19:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Das sollte aus meiner Sicht aber über Dekanatskategorien oder ähnlichem gelöst werden. Eine Doppelkategorisierung ist in der Fläche leider zu fehleranfällig.--NeverDoING (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Ich sehe es nicht als Doppelkategorisierung, sondern als zwei gänzlich unterschiedliche Ebenen. Die Bistums- und auch die Dekanatsgrenzen orientieren sich zwar an den Grenzen staatlicher Verwaltungseinheiten, aber sind grundsätzlich von diesen unabhängig. Selbst innerhalb mancher Landkreise kann ein Teil des Gebiets zu einem anderen Kreisdekanat gehören. Beispielsweise umfasst das Stadtdekanat Bonn des Erzbistums Köln auch die de:Katholische Kapelle (Rolandswerth) in Rheinland-Pfalz. Wie wollen wir hier hinsichtlich der Kategorierung vorgehen?--Leit (talk) 11:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Mit Kategorien wie Category:Churches in Stadtdekanat Bonn in Rhineland-Palatinate haben wir jetzt genau die Vermischung unterschiedlicher Gliederungsebenen (staatlich/kirchlich), die es m.E. zu vermeiden gilt. Sofern man bei diesem Ansatz bleibt, hätten wir sinnvollerweise die Category:Churches in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cologne in eine Category:Churches in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cologne in North Rhine-Westphalia und eine Category:Churches in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cologne in Rhineland-Palatinate erteilen können. Falls man das doppelte in vermeiden möchte, wären auch Klammern möglich. Es wird nun natürlich schwierig sein, die Aufteilung in Dekanate wieder rückgängig zu machen. Möglicherweise wäre es stattdessen angebracht, z.B. die Category:Churches in Stadtdekanat Bonn nicht weiter zu unterteilen, sondern stattdessen die wenigen Einzelfälle von nicht in Nordrhein-Westfalen liegenden Kirchen des Erzbistums direkt in die Category:Roman Catholic churches in Rhineland-Palatinate einzuordnen. Oberstes Ziel sollte es m.E. nun sein, doppelte Zuordnungen innerhalb einer Kategorie nach kirchlicher und staatlicher Zugehörigkeit zu vermeiden.--Leit (talk) 18:37, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Category changes

Can you explain what's up with this and about 7 similar edits you made to other pages? Perhaps you meant to do something else? --R'n'B (talk) 17:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Tropojë

Albinfo (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Fossil categories

Hi, please do not move fossil categories back, we're currently doing a mass move, per: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:WikiProject_Paleontology The former names were not correct English, so they should not be used. FunkMonk (talk) 18:37, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

then it makes Please also accurate and not let behind tons of categories without Alignment!NeverDoING (talk) 18:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, that's what we're in the process of doing. You're free to help out, it's a massive task. But please don't revert back, it will only make the task greater for the rest of us. FunkMonk (talk) 18:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

No new files to category: Items from the Catharinazaal

Hi NeverDoING, I see you've added files to the category: Items from the Catharinzaal. This hiddencat was created solely for the purpose of bringing the best pieces of this museum (which are located in their hall the Catharinazaal) under the attention of the editors of an editathon. Please do not use this category as a normal category. Thanks, 85jesse (talk) 10:26, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Also, adding category:Museum Catharijneconvent as a category to pictures donated by that museum really doesn't help. I appreciate you taking the time to categorize, but please find categories that are added value, in other words, that pertain to the content, such as: "painting from painter x" or something like that. We have worked with the museum to categorize their collections. The media they have donated is in a separate category to differentiate between files donated by the museum and pictures taken by visitors of the museum. Thanks for leaving these categories as is. 85jesse (talk) 10:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Churches in Propstei Pasewalk

Hallo, du hast diese Kategorie bei Category:Lutheran churches in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern eingeordnet. Die Propstei Pasewalk erstreckt sich allerdings bis nach Brandenburg. Also sind dadurch Kirchen wie die in Gartz an der Oder, Wolfshagen oder Blumberg in der Uckermark dem falschen Bundesland zugeordnet. --Erell (talk) 22:47, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
PS: Ähnlich ist es übrigens mit der Category:Churches in Propstei Neustrelitz, die sich ebenfalls bis nach Brandenburg zieht: So ist auch die Stadtkirche (Fürstenberg/Havel) nicht in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern gelegen. --Erell (talk) 23:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Kategorie Diskussion: Our Lady Church (Buchfart)

Ich habe einen Beitrag auf der Diskussionsseite hinterlassen, vielleicht siehst Du Dir's mal an. --Silvio Ludwig (talk) 08:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Populated places in England

"Populated places in England" is not the same as "Popular places in England". "Populated" means "places, where people live". There are thousands categories on Commons with such a name. Wieralee (talk) 18:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Some time ago there was a massive movement from the categories "Cities and villages in..." into "Populated places in...", but French users didn't want it for their categories. I don't know how it is with English people. Wieralee (talk) 19:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Bundesstraße_314_Stühlingen_Wutachtal_Wutach

Schofför (talk) 11:29, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Question about categorization

Greetings, I noticed that you removed the category Men by name and replaced it with People by name. I am confused because Men by name is a more specific subcat of People by name so I was wondering why you would replace the more specific category with a more ambiguous one. Reguyla (talk) 14:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:State_schools

This, that and the other (talk) 11:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Jingmen not Jiangmen!

Jingmen not Jiangmen! If you do not understand Chinese Please do not modify--Qa003qa003 (talk) 12:58, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

?--NeverDoING (talk) 13:01, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Nachvollziehbarkeit deiner Ordnungskriterien

Hallo NeverDoING, du bist mir jetzt schon mehrfach unangenehm durch absurde Edits aufgefallen. Zum einen glaubst du dich aus irgendeinem Grund verpflichtet, ein obskures Prinzip "sortierung nach stadt und NICHT stadtteil" durchsetzen zu müssen. Ich weiß ja nicht, woher du das nimmst, aber hast du dir schon mal angesehen, was für Folgen dieses Prinzip hat? Kirchen z.B. tragen meist (und vernünftigerweise) den Namen des Ortes in ihrem (auch Kategorie-)Namen und nicht den Namen der Gemeinde, so daß dieser in einer alphabetischen Anordnung gar nicht aufscheint. Ein besonders schön abschreckendes Beispiel, wohin dein Prinzip führt, ist der aktuelle Zustand dieser Kategorie. Da "finde" ich schon unter A: U wie Utenbach, R wie Rödigsdorf, N wie Niederaudenhain (in dieser Reihenfolge !) ... und so geht das weiter. Bei aktuell 657 Unterkategorien in dieser Kategorie bedeutet das, daß man entweder alles von A bis Z durchforsten muß, wenn man etwas sucht, oder aber eben nichts findet. Ein weiterer Nachteil deines Prinzips "Gemeinde" ist, daß du nach jeder Gemeindereform (und gerade in Thüringen dürfte da noch Einiges auf uns zu kommen) gezwungen bist, den Key zu ändern - bei den Orten (von dir bezeichnenderweise zu"Stadtteilen" degradiert) als Ordnungsprinzip fällt dieser Mehraufwand weg. Und im gleichen (Un-)Geist glaubst du jetzt, die von mir gerade erst neueingerichtete Category:Churches in Schleusegrund durch ebenso fragwürdige Kriterien wieder durcheinanderbringen zu müssen. So finde ich die Dorfkirche Biberschlag unter .. P! Nur ist im Namen dummerweise kein einziges P vorhanden. Welcher Benutzer soll bitteschön einen derartigen Unfug nachvollziehen können? Ich würde dich also bitten, deine Edits nochmals zu überdenken und den ursprünglichen Zustand wiederherzustellen. Ich habe nämlich keine Lust, ständig Zeit durch deine kontraproduktiven Aktivitäten zu verlieren. --Jwaller (talk) 13:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Preston Brooks

How can a person belong in Category:Black and white photographic portraits of men of the United States? Am I missing something? - Jmabel ! talk 03:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Unexplained revert

Why have you reverted my edit? All these files were indeed "BadJPEG"s. And why have you moved some of them to other categories without tagging with this template? — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 21:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:University of Siena alumni

Please respect the synthiax. It is "Alumni of the University of Siena" -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:ES0000003

Hi NDING, thank you for creating the category, but they're not actually needed. Such category (and other similar ones, as all the listed in here) has been added with the only purpose of easing the classification and revision of images in WLE Spain. Once reviewed (and moved to the appropriate category), the images are stripped of this code-based category. That is, once all the images are reviewed, no code-based category will remain. Therefore, such categories are not needed. Thank you for your understanding. Best regards --Discasto talk 16:08, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Bots


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)

Category:Cariboo

Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Category:Intelligence_(information_gathering)

Sanandros (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Categories

Hello, this is NOT the correct synthiax. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Susan_Allen_(musician)

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Kategorien

Hallo NeverDoING, ich habe deine Bearbeitung an der Category:Stadttheater und Friedrich-Ebert-Grundschule wieder rückgängig gemacht, weil diese Kat eine Unterkategorie von Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Luckenwalde, welche wiederum bereits in Category:Luckenwalde liegt. So würden die Kategorien unnötig verschachtelt und bei den anderen Kategorien, die Bilder von Baudenkmalen in Luckenwalde zusammenfassen, haben wir es auch nicht so gemacht. Grüße --Plasmarelais (talk) 12:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Aber die Kulturdenkmalkategorien sind doch nur eine Art "Meta"-Kategorie. Da wird alles reingeworfen, wie Kirchen, Denkmäler etc. Wenn ich etwas suche weiß ich doch nicht zwingend, dass es ein Kulturdenkmal ist. Deshalb muss die Kategorie auch in der Haupt- oder entsprechenden Unterkategorie liegen.--NeverDoING (talk) 15:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, setzt du dann bitte auch noch die anderen 16 Unterkategorien der Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Luckenwalde, damit das wenigstens einheitlich ist? Danke und Gruß --Plasmarelais (talk) 06:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Gemeint war eigentlich das umkategorisieren der Unterkategorien, nicht der Bilder selbst. So ist die Category:Luckenwalde nun deutlich weniger übersichtlich geworden. Jetzt kann ich ja die Bilder auch noch in die Kategorien Category:Landkreis Teltow-Fläming, Category:Brandenburg und Category:Germany setzen, oder? Mal im Ernst: Damit die Category:Luckenwalde nutzbar bleibt, kann ich doch eine Unterkategorie Category:Gebäude in Luckenwalde einrichten, oder? da kommen dann die Bilder mit den Häusern und Kirchen rein und wir haben wieder Ordnung in der Kat. Einverstanden? --Plasmarelais (talk) 21:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Cities_in_Hardin_County,_Ohio

Nyttend (talk) 00:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Fanny_Lú

Duque Santiago (talk) 18:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Standish James O'Grady

Hi, NeverDoING, I noticed your edit. Why, if I may ask so? If you take a look at Category:Journalists from Ireland, his name no longer appears alphabetically correct. Hence I will undo your edit. Lotje (talk) 04:26, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

[11] --NeverDoING (talk) 05:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi again, this, this is why I did it. Lotje (talk) 08:52, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Eurocentrism

I have nominated your exceedingly insulting and bigoted category for deletion. Jcwf (talk) 03:37, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 2 weeks

Blocked user.svg
You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 2 weeks for the following reason: . If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. See block log.

Azərbaycanca | Български | বাংলা | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Gaeilge | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Simple English | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

See above + creating category redirects like Category:Postcards of mautains in Slovenia (just to name a single example) are absolutely inacceptable. --A.Savin 17:38, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "Sperre ohne vorherige Ansprache / unverhältnismäßigkeit / Sperradmin ist Ankläger und Richter in einer Person!NeverDoING (talk) 08:00, 16 July 2015 (UTC)"
Unblock reason: "Not a valid reason to block w/o warning/discussion. Granted, the categories don't make much sense to me either. Usually the blocking admin is judge and executioner as well. Not ideal, but that how it works."

This template should be archived normally.

(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | हिन्दी | Magyar | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Português | Русский | 中文(简体)‎ | +/−

Thanks

Thanks for this revert of my change. I'll check later to see if I made the same change to any other redirected categories. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Rail infrastructure by country

--Choess (talk) 22:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Frage

Hallo NeverDoING, was bedeutet das? Gruß, --Arnd (talk) 07:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Saint_Mary_the_Virgin_Church_(Radwinter)

108.60.185.122 18:33, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Sealing stamps of Wallendorf

Hallo, ich bin mir nicht sicher, wie die Siegelmarken in dieser Kategorie korrekt zuzuordnen sind: "Wallendorf, Kr. Merseburg" müsste eigentlich Category:Wallendorf (Luppe) sein, sie sind aber unter Category:Wallendorf (Lichte). Ich glaube, Du hast die ursprüngliche Zuordnung unter Category:Wallendorf gemacht, vielleicht kannst Du es klären. Beste Grüße, --Rudolph Buch (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Tenement_houses_in_KrakówŚwiętego_Wawrzyńca

Misiek2 (talk) 10:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Saint Cunigunde of Luxembourg Church (Miesenbach bei Birkfeld)

Hallo NeverDoING, danke für das vorsorgliche Anlegen der Kategorie Category:Saint Cunigunde of Luxembourg Church (Miesenbach bei Birkfeld) (als Beispiel) und in froher Erwartung der weiteren Bilder zur Kirche, die du demnächst hoffentlich hochladen wirst. Einelementige Kategorien sind mE ja nicht so das Gelbe vom Ei, ich hoffe, du stimmst mir da zu. Im Denkmallistenprojekt verwenden wir einelementige (und nullelementige) Kategorien bewusst nicht in den Denkmallisten, weil der link auf weitere Bilder damit zum Häckel degradiert. Allerdings scheinen auch die einelementigen Kategorien in der Wartungsliste der nicht eingebundenen Commons-Kategorien auf, was das Filtern mit zunehmender Anzahl einelementiger Kategorien zunehmend schwierig gestaltet. In diese Sinn, hilf mit und lade möglichst viele zweite und dritte und … Bilder hoch, um solchen Kategorien den Makel der Einelmentigkeit zu nehmen. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

New categories

Before you create categories like Category:2019 in the United States by state, please look at what's in them. Most of the ones you recently created for future years in the United States contain only empty categories and empty subcategories. The better thing to do with those is to ask for them to be deleted by tagging them with {{empty page}}. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Modification of the page Category:Église Saint-Andéol de Bourg-Saint-Andéol

Hello, I don't understand why you made a modification on that page after mine. Cause, you made that page appear in two categories wich are related. So, I don't understand... Can you explain it to me ? Thanks. LllC (talk) 13:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Heads-up

Hi, as an active colleague on upload projects, I thought I'd drop you a personal heads-up for my request for adminship, today being the last day for views. RFA's tend to only have a small proportion of the community taking part, so it can be difficult to judge if this is representative. :-) -- (talk) 13:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Allerheiligenkirche (Neualbenreuth)

Hallo Richard Huber, hallo NeverDoING, bitte die Kritik nicht übel nehmen, aber ich glaube, dass das Lemma "Allerheiligenkirche (Neualbenreuth)" sowie die Category der Bilder "All Saints Church (Neualbenreuth)" und ihre Namen falsch sind. Die Allerheiligenkirche gehört zwar zur Pfarrei Wernersreuth, welches in der politischen Gemeinde Neualbenreuth liegt, aber die Allerheiligenkirche selber liegt auf dem Gebiet der politischen Gemeinde Leonberg, Ortsteil Pfaffenreuth und nicht auf dem Gebiet der politischen Gemeinde Neualbenreuth. Deshalb müssten meiner Meinung nach das Lemma in "Allerheiligenkirche (Leonberg)" und die Category in "All Saints Church (Leonberg)" geändert werden. Mit Neualbenreuth hat die Allerheiligenkirche garnichts zu tun. Die ursprüngliche Spezifizierung in Klammern (Wernersreuth) hätte man noch nehmen können, wenn man sich auf die Pfarrei bezieht. Allgemein üblich in der WP ist aber - glaube ich - die politischen Gemeinden in den Klammern zu benutzen. In der Denkmalliste wird die Allerheiligenkirche auch unter Pfaffenreuth, Gemeinde Leonberg, aufgeführt. Viele Grüße --Allexkoch (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Martin-Niemöller-Briefmarke-Ersttagsbrief09.01.1992.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Martin-Niemöller-Briefmarke-Ersttagsbrief09.01.1992.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Martin-Niemöller-Briefmarke-Ersttagsbrief09.01.1992.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Jarekt (talk) 12:13, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Auxiliary_bishops_of_the_United_Kindom

BethNaught (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3wl7zNEQdp6z9Vb

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Clyde-built ships

We already have Category:Ships built in Clydebank which would seem to cover this topic, so I've taken the liberty of moving its content and deleting the cat. If there's a good reason to have it, please let me know. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Coding da Vinci 2015/FFM-Workshop

Hallo NeverDoING,

da du dich damals an der Übertragung der Siegelmarken auf Commons mittels des GWToolsets beteiligt hattest, möchte ich dich gerne auf diesem Workshop in Frankfurt/Main hinweisen. Vielleicht hast du ja Interesse daran teil zu nehmen. Viele Grüße, --Nicolas Rück (WMDE) (talk) 13:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Distinction between Category:Topics in fiction and Category:Fiction by topic?

You created both Category:Topics in fiction and Category:Fiction by topic at the same time (27 April 2014), but didn't provide a description for either of them. It's not at all clear to me what distinction you intended to make between the two of them. Could you clarify (preferably on Category_talk:Fiction by topic)? JesseW (talk) 06:27, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, findest du keine sinnvollere Arbeit ...

als 1-Fotos-Kategorien anzulegen? Bwag (talk) 17:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Kommt da noch etwas ...

oder soll das wieder einmal eine 1-Foto-Kategorie werden? -- Bwag (talk) 18:47, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Übrigens, ...

Gratulation zu dem Rätselspiel. Beispielsweise hier. Wenn ich dort die Pfarrkiche von Grafenberg suche, dann werde ich fast ganz unten unter dem Buchstaben "S" fündig - sehr gut gemacht dieses Rätselspiel. Bwag (talk) 19:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Kirchenjahrkath.gif

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kirchenjahrkath.gif 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)‎ | +/−

Robert Weemeyer (talk) 12:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Blade_weapons

578985s (talk) 10:15, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Deaths_by_cause

Themightyquill (talk) 13:05, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:European_university_and_college_presidents

Themightyquill (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Modern_history

Zoupan (talk) 18:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know

Why? This is a category of churches in a territory, church-building, but this is a category of a Diocese and I don't know if this Diocese have a the Our Lady of Mont Carmel as "patron saint", but if so the mother category could be "Dioceses by patron saint", do you agree? :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 14:08, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, Our Lady "of the Rosary".--Threecharlie (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Aline_Muniz

Yanguas (talk) 12:29, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Churches_in_the_Eparchy_of_Osječko_polje_and_Baranja

Zoupan (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Júlio_Endi_Akamine

Yanguas (talk) 16:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Local_government_districts_of_England_by_county

Themightyquill (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Saint Michael's church, Inveresk

Please note all Scottish churches are, or should be, DEFsorted by saint's name, then location. In this way they appear under the initial of the saint in local categories and by location where the saint's name is part of the category. This practice has been adopted for at least the last three years. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:13, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Denkmalkategorien

Hallo NeverDoING, Du schreibst, Denkmalkategorien sind Metakategorien, Dann entferne bitte sofort alle Einträge in Denkmalkategorien, die nicht selbst Kategorien sind. Schließlich dürfen Metakategorien keine Direkteinträge enthalten. Warnung: Ich halte das für totalen Unsinn. Denkmalkategorien sind ganz normal verwendbar und haben mit Metakategorien nichts gemein, außer dass Du und vielleicht noch irgendjemand der Meinung ist, sie müssten welche sein. Genauso gut könnte man Category:Churches in Rosdorf als Meta-Kategorie behandeln. Dass die Bauwerke normalerweise zusätzlich eine weitere Kategorie haben, die zur Gemeinde gehört, hat mE drei Ursachen: 1. Im Idealfall gibt es unterhalb der Gemeindekategorien nicht nur die Denkmal-Kategorie, sondern auch eine Bauwerks-Kategorie: Buildings in XYZ. Diejenigen Kulturdenkmale, die auch Bauwerke sind, sind dann auch dort einzusortieren. Das ist in größeren Gemeinden fast überall der Fall, aber in Obernfeld noch nicht. Könnte man mal machen. 2. Einige Fotos zeigen neben dem Kulturdenkmal auch noch größere Teile des Ortes, z.B. Ansichten des Ortsterns mit Kirche von einem erhöhten Standort aus. 3. Es gibt schlicht viele Fehler. Eine Einsortierung in die Gemeinde-Kategorie und gleichzeitig in die Denkmalkategorie derselben Gemeinde halte ich nur in Ausnahmefällen für sinnvoll. Du kannst mir gerne nachweisen, dass ich da völlig falsch liege, aber im Moment bin ich noch völlig uneinsichtig und halte es für richtig, zumindest die Gemeinde-Denkmalkategorien wie ganz normale Kategorien zu behandeln. --Dehio (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Vielleicht habe ich den Begriff „Metakategorie“ in diesem Zusammenhang falsch benutzt. Mein Vorgehen ist eigentlich üblich und noch nirgendwo auf Probleme gestoßen. Wenn der unbedarfte User in einer Ortskategorie ist und nach einem Bauwerk sucht, dann muss er nicht zwangsläufig in die Denkmalkategorie schauen und findet das gesuchte Bauwerk dann nicht. --NeverDoING (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Ja, das sehe ich einerseits ein. Andererseits wurde so etwas bei mir eben schon heftig kritisiert, selbst dann, wenn auf dem Foto noch mehr als das eine Bauwerk zu sehen war (da weiß ich immer noch nicht, wie man das regelkonform machen sollte). Bei Ortsteilen, die ja häufig auch nicht kleiner sind als die Gemeinde Obernfeld, ist das einfacher, weil sie keine eigene Kulturdenkmal-Kategorie haben. Die Baudenkmale, die gleichzeitig Gebäude sind, kommen dann in die Ortsteil-Kategorie und in die Gemeinde-Kulturdenkmal-Kategorie und in die Gemeinde-Gebäude-Kategorie. Mein Vorschlag für Obernfeld wäre langfristig eine neue Kategore Category:Buildings in Obernfeld, in die alle Gebäude hineinkommen, aber eben nicht die denkmalgeschützten Bildstöcke oder Bodendenkmale usw. Dann können die denkmalgeschützten Gebäude aus der Ortskategorie regelkonform entfernt werden, weil sie auch für jeden, der nicht weiß, was da nun Kulturdenkmal-Status besitzt, in der Gebäude-Kategorie zu finden sind. Ob sich das jetzt schon lohnt, weiß ich allerdings nicht. Es gibt ja außer meinen paar Fotos nur noch die drei vom ehemaligen Haltepunkt. Von mir aus kann es auch gern erst mal so bleiben, ich werde bloß manchmal verrückt, wenn einer die eine Handlungsweise und die andere für grundsätzlich falsch erklärt. --Dehio (talk) 20:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Anordnung der Object location und der Denkmalnummer

Hallo,
ist die Anordnung der Object location und der Denkmal-Nummer irgendwo geregelt? Falls dem nicht so ist, folge ich gerne Ihrem Vorschlag, diese Angaben oberhalb der weiteren Erläuterungen anzuordnen.
Hans G. Oberlack (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Villages_in_Herefordshire

Dudley Miles (talk) 23:59, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Villages_on_the_Isle_of_Wight

Dudley Miles (talk) 00:02, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Villages_in_England_by_county

Dudley Miles (talk) 00:02, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

People by name

Hola NeverDoING:

Veo que estás añadiendo las categorías "People by name" y "Men by name" de manera incorrecta. Cuando existe una subcategoría como "Men of Spain by name" no es necesario añadir categorías superiores ("People by name" o "Men by name") ya que es redundante. Un cordial saludo:--Raimundo Pastor (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Move by bot/script of Category:Districts of Kerala-related sub-categories (established in 2009) instead of to create 'new' ones in February 2016

Just a few minutes ago, i noticed that you created (again) the related sub-categories of Category:Districts of Kerala (for instance Category:Alappuzha district) by ignoring the fact that all related categories were established years ago ... but you copied all descriptions made by other Wikimedia Commons enthusiasts (Category:Alappuzha District, for instance), by also ingnoring the individual version histories – Alapuzzha district, for instance, was established in 2009! it's absolutely not ok to create these long-year established categories by ingnoring all the work of the Wikimedians who really were engaged to take care of by investing lots of work. as you created instead of moving these categories, you appear as the creator of those categories, and so one, instead of renaming them, so there's need. Hence, pls restore the established categories by resolving the redirects that you 'established' in February 2016, and delete your 'new' ones of these 14 districts of Kerala, to make place for a proper invidual move ("district" in small letters), or as per Commons:Rename a category. thx for taking notice and for re-establishing the status quo as of end of January 2016, by a proper renaming process including the individual version histories, Roland zh (talk) 21:35, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Alpine_GTA

Purzelbier (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Kategorisierung von Kirchen

Hallo NeverDoING, ich habe keine Lust, wegen so etwas Lächerlichem einen Edit-War zu führen, aber vielleicht kannst du mir erklären, was du unter dem "üblichen Vorgehen" verstehst. Die Pfarrkirche Barwies ("Holy Trinity Church") ist die Pfarrkirche der Pfarre Barwies [12] und steht in der Ortschaft Barwies. (Die kirchliche Verwaltungsstruktur ist unabhängig von der politischen, zwar oft ähnlich, aber eben nicht immer.) Dass Kirche und Pfarre Barwies zur politischen Gemeinde Mieming gehören, ist im vorliegenden Kontext unerheblich und Außenstehenden vermutlich gar nicht bewusst. Dass man "Holy Trinity Church (Barwies)" unter "M" suchen muss (ein Buchstabe, der im Begriff überhaupt nicht vorkommt) ist doch völlig widersinnig und erschließt sich nicht einmal Ortskundigen. Viele Grüße, --Luftschiffhafen (talk) 07:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Kategorisierung von Kirchen

Hallo NeverDoING, ich habe keine Lust, wegen so etwas Lächerlichem einen Edit-War zu führen, aber vielleicht kannst du mir erklären, was du unter dem "üblichen Vorgehen" verstehst. Die Pfarrkirche Barwies ("Holy Trinity Church") ist die Pfarrkirche der Pfarre Barwies [13] und steht in der Ortschaft Barwies. (Die kirchliche Verwaltungsstruktur ist unabhängig von der politischen, zwar oft ähnlich, aber eben nicht immer.) Dass Kirche und Pfarre Barwies zur politischen Gemeinde Mieming gehören, ist im vorliegenden Kontext unerheblich und Außenstehenden vermutlich gar nicht bewusst. Dass man "Holy Trinity Church (Barwies)" unter "M" suchen muss (ein Buchstabe, der im Begriff überhaupt nicht vorkommt) ist doch völlig widersinnig und erschließt sich nicht einmal Ortskundigen. Viele Grüße, --Luftschiffhafen (talk) 07:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Cities_in_Wyandot_County,_Ohio

Nyttend (talk) 00:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Cities_in_Defiance_County,_Ohio

Nyttend (talk) 00:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Generals_inquisitors_of_Spain

Achim (talk) 17:16, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't thank that middle name equals given name

Greetings, I don't think that we should be adding people to the given name categories for a middle name. Reguyla (talk) 20:41, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

OK!--NeverDoING (talk) 17:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Lead, South Dakota

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Lead, South Dakota 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 category, 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.
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)‎ | +/−

Baronnet (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

The Georgetown University

I've never heard Georgetown University referred to as "The Georgetown University." Why did you change the categories related to the school to use the indefinite article? What's the argument for that? Why didn't you use the discussion tab to propose these changes first?-- Patrick, oѺ 12:07, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Exactly what I was coming here to say. Any basis for this? I believe this should be reverted, but would like to hear from you first. - Jmabel ! talk 15:30, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Like other cats. Its not "The Georgetown University" it is "People of the 'Georgetown University'" like alle Cats or the Roman catholic dioceses (Look at Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Dallas)--NeverDoING (talk) 16:03, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
No, I don't think it works that way. In English, we say "The University of [insert name]", but not typically "The [insert name] University", and not in this case. In the future, I recommend using the discussion tab on individual categories and the Template:Move before making these sorts of changes. If you want to help move these back, that would be appreciated.-- Patrick, oѺ 17:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
In enwiki it namend "Georgetown University"--NeverDoING (talk) 17:16, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I think this is a misunderstanding of English grammar. I came here because of Category:People of the Vanderbilt University. It can be confusing, because in some instances a leading "the" is appropriate, such as with Category:Alumni of the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. If you want a general rule of thumb, if the school name starts with "University of", then a "the" would be appropriate in subcategories. If the school name starts with a proper noun, such as Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Oberlin, etc., then a "the" should not be used. Make sense? Huntster (t @ c) 17:33, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

OK---NeverDoING (talk) 17:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

@NeverDoING: Weil ich durch dich drauf aufmerksam geworden bin und die Frage irgendwie noch nicht ganz geklärt scheint habe ich mal eine Diskussion zum Thema eröffnet: Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/03/Category:Alumni of the Technische Universität Berlin --Anika (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

There are a few that always use "The", E.g. "The Evergreen State College". - Jmabel ! talk 23:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Are sure?

This File:Statue of San Procolo .jpg isn't the Proculus of Pozzuoli, this is a bishop and haven't any martyrdom iconographic attribute. I find little Wikipedian not perform an edit control done by user with little experience, true that in the Commons here is one of many but if the flag in it.wiki I have it for 4 years maybe it will be a guarantee of reliability, think that. ;-) PS: see this.--Threecharlie (talk) 17:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

PS 2: the description of file is "stone statue of St Procolo in Verona, church of San Procolo, near San Zeno church", why move in Category:San Procolo (Florence), a church in Florence? In it.wiki this is a superficial enough to merit a yellow card...--Threecharlie (talk) 17:21, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
this is the statue photographed by Alinari study and originally positioned in the nearby church of Saint Zeno.--Threecharlie (talk) 17:34, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out that template

Thanks for pointing out that template. Should I start using that instead of the cats? I could easily modify my code to use that. Reguyla (talk) 23:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Animal_diseases

El Grafo (talk) 08:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:Animal_diseases_by_host

El Grafo (talk) 08:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Löschantrag Jean Jules Linden

.....was gedenkst Du mit diesen Verlinkungen zu machen? Orchi (talk)

Danke für den Hinweis, habe meine Änderung revidiert. --NeverDoING (talk) 13:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
..o.k.

Commonscat

Hallo NeverDoING, ich habe drei Bitten:

  • Sei doch bitte so knieweich und ändere auch die Verwendungen, wenn du Commons-Kategorien umbenennst ([14]). Die Unterkategorien von Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria werden jedenfalls auf den Denkmallisten auf WP:de verwendet [15] und sind auch auf WD eingetragen [16] (dieser Eintrag ist kein Schnörksel, sondern wird beim Hochladen von Bildern ausgewertet).
  • Gibt es eine Festlegung in welcher Reihenfolge Commons-Kategorien zu beschreiben sind? Warum meinst du, dass die Koordinate vor der Objekt-ID stehen muss? Ich mache immer Beschreibung als erstes, danach die ID (weil die Teil der Objektdefinition ist, aber sprachunabhängig) und danach die Objektkoordinate (weil die sich gelegentlich ändert, ohne dass sich die ID ändert, etwa wenn ein Denkmal umgesetzt wird). Ich kann das gerne anders machen, wenn es dafür eine Festlegung geben sollte. Falls es aber eine Geschmackssache ist, dann wäre es mir lieb, du ließest die überflüssigen Vertauschungen.
  • Warum ich die Saint Anne Church in Breitenstetten jetzt unter L wie Leopoldsdorf suchen soll, verstehe ich nicht [17]. Commons:Categories#Creating_a_new_category und DEFAULTSORT geben das für mich so direkt nicht her. Selbst wenn es hier irgendwo Festlegungen geben sollte, wäre noch zu prüfen, ob die für DE, für DACH, für Commons oder was auch immer gelten. Mir sind bis jetzt keine diesbezüglichen Festlegungen bekannt. Ich halte die von dir gewählte Sortierung für ungünstig, die Sortierung ist ja eine Funktion, die ausschließlich für den menschlichen LeserIn Sinn macht, Tools ist die Sortierung wurscht.

Jedenfalls ist unser Schnitt - ich kümmere mich um AT, du um Kirchen/Baudenkmäler - an der Schnittmenge problematisch. Eine davon ist die Sortierung in die Gemeinde- / Ortskategorie. Dass das Tool Sum-it-up iw-Links liefert und nicht mittels WD verlinkt, muss wohl das Tool lernen. Über den Link in der Toolleiste passiert auch nicht das Erwartete (das wäre: Eintrag von Commons-Kategorie in WD (Property|373)). lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 19:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Commonscat

Hallo NeverDoING, ich habe drei Bitten:

  • Sei doch bitte so knieweich und ändere auch die Verwendungen, wenn du Commons-Kategorien umbenennst ([18]). Die Unterkategorien von Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Austria werden jedenfalls auf den Denkmallisten auf WP:de verwendet [19] und sind auch auf WD eingetragen [20] (dieser Eintrag ist kein Schnörksel, sondern wird beim Hochladen von Bildern ausgewertet).
  • Gibt es eine Festlegung in welcher Reihenfolge Commons-Kategorien zu beschreiben sind? Warum meinst du, dass die Koordinate vor der Objekt-ID stehen muss? Ich mache immer Beschreibung als erstes, danach die ID (weil die Teil der Objektdefinition ist, aber sprachunabhängig) und danach die Objektkoordinate (weil die sich gelegentlich ändert, ohne dass sich die ID ändert, etwa wenn ein Denkmal umgesetzt wird). Ich kann das gerne anders machen, wenn es dafür eine Festlegung geben sollte. Falls es aber eine Geschmackssache ist, dann wäre es mir lieb, du ließest die überflüssigen Vertauschungen.
  • Warum ich die Saint Anne Church in Breitenstetten jetzt unter L wie Leopoldsdorf suchen soll, verstehe ich nicht [21]. Commons:Categories#Creating_a_new_category und DEFAULTSORT geben das für mich so direkt nicht her. Selbst wenn es hier irgendwo Festlegungen geben sollte, wäre noch zu prüfen, ob die für DE, für DACH, für Commons oder was auch immer gelten. Mir sind bis jetzt keine diesbezüglichen Festlegungen bekannt. Ich halte die von dir gewählte Sortierung für ungünstig, die Sortierung ist ja eine Funktion, die ausschließlich für den menschlichen LeserIn Sinn macht, Tools ist die Sortierung wurscht.

Jedenfalls ist unser Schnitt - ich kümmere mich um AT, du um Kirchen/Baudenkmäler - an der Schnittmenge problematisch. Eine davon ist die Sortierung in die Gemeinde- / Ortskategorie. Dass das Tool Sum-it-up iw-Links liefert und nicht mittels WD verlinkt, muss wohl das Tool lernen. Über den Link in der Toolleiste passiert auch nicht das Erwartete (das wäre: Eintrag von Commons-Kategorie in WD (Property|373)). lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 19:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Das hier war ein Angebot, mir die passenden Festlegungen zu liefern und ein Kompromissvorschlag. Da du nicht geantwortet hast, nehme ich an, es gibt diese Festlegungen nicht. Daher habe ich rückgesetzt. Trotzdem: 2 Chance. Bisher war unser Verständnis was die Verwendung von Eigennamen in Kategorien angeht (proper names) divergierend. Jetzt versuchst du nach einem System die Kategoriesortierung zu vereinheitlichen? Die Frage nach welchem System und wo das abgestimmt ist, ist berechtigt. Gerade Kategoriesortierung in etwa einer Gemeinde kann man ja nicht an einer Kirche machen, da braucht es die anderen Kategorien in der Gemeinde auch. Entweder braucht es ein durchgängiges Konzept für die Kategoriesortierung (und dann wohl auch für die Kategorienamen) - beides gibt es nicht - oder zumindest eine durchgängige Sortierung in der Elternkategorie. So ein System ist aber nur durchzuhalten, wenn es dokumentiert ist, oder wenn man ständig dahinter ist. Eine Sortierung nach einem Text, der im Namen der Kategorie nicht vorkommt, entspricht jedenfalls nicht der User-Erwartung. Man kann ja der Meinung sein, dass die Kategorien eh nur von Tools wie CatScan gelesen werden, aber dann wäre die Sortierung ohnehin irrelevant. Aber spätestens mit HotCat navigiert man direkt in der Benutzeroberfläche im Kategoriebaum herum.

Seit Anfang 2015 wird von vielen Seiten (ich halte mich da weitgehend raus) an den Auswirkungen der Steiermärkischen Gemeindestrukturreform gearbeitet und es ist immer noch nicht fertig. 2015 wurden auch 2x2 Gemeinden in Oberösterreich zusammengelegt. Bezirk Wien-Umgebung wird demnächst umstrukturiert. Ortschaften sind in diesem Kontext relativ stabil, Gemeinden sind es nicht. Eine Benennung und Sortierung von Objektkategorien nach Gemeinden birgt daher ein gewisses Wartungsrisiko. Ich habe das auch oft falsch gemacht, man lernt ja dazu. Ja, inzwischen ist das meine Meinung, aber es ist kein Dogma. Argumente werden registriert und abgewogen. Bitte daher nochmals um deine Argumente und passende Hinweise auf Festlegungen. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Es würde mich wundern, wenn du eine Antwort bekommst. Auch meine Anfrage (und die von anderen) zu dem Thema wurde kommentarlos archiviert. Viele Grüße, --Luftschiffhafen (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Replacing DEFAULTSORT with MenByName as appropriate

Greetings, I just wanted to let you know I stared a discussion about replacing DEFAULTSORT with {{|tl|MenByName}} at the Village pump. Reguyla (talk) 20:31, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Edith Tolkien

Hi. For galleries, there is standard reason for speedy deletion "empty or single-image page", where empty means no images. Galleries with two images are not eligible for speedy deletion. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Hosianna-Glocke Beinstein.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hosianna-Glocke Beinstein.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)‎ | +/−

Taivo (talk) 08:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Why?

i.e. this revert? --JuTa 06:58, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Alexis Bledel is a woman --NeverDoING (talk) 06:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Then it should be in male and female subcats. Otherwise one would not find it in i.e. the male cat. Acceptable? --JuTa 07:03, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
OK--NeverDoING (talk) 07:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Biserici_din_Arad

T.seppelt (talk) 08:13, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Futurama_Kids

IagoQnsi (talk) 23:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Schrödersbusch

Was du machst, das machst du nicht richtig!!!

Du hast jetzt das Wohnquartier und die Straße Category:Schrödersbusch vermischt. Und ich fürchte du machst noch mehr Unordnung in den Zuordnungen bei den Kategorien. Ich fürchte, da muss ich heute Abend sehr kräftig nachräumen! Leider lässt sich vieles durch revert nicht mehr korrigieren. --Atamari (talk) 07:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Den gleichen Bockmist² bei der Schenkstraße! --Atamari (talk) 07:44, 24 May 2016 (UTC)


Hallo! Category:Sedansberg ist eine Straße! .. gewesen --Atamari (talk) 07:48, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

mbyname

Hi, schau doch bitte auf diese und diese Diskussion. Ich denke diese Vorlage(n) sind eine gute Idee, aber es ist besser sie zu substen. Danke und Gruß --JuTa 07:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Beaches in Pembrokeshire

--Sionk (talk) 19:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Neuss-Marienkirche Fenster1.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Neuss-Marienkirche Fenster1.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)‎ | +/−

Rosenzweig τ 16:54, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Category reversed

Dear NeverDoING,

Sorry, I had not seen that Category:Churches in the Dominican Republic had a link.

Because I have no sense of religious classifications and am working to organize the categories of the Dominican Republic, I want all religious parts in one place and discoverable for everyone. A municipal boundary is easy for anyone to determine, but a "Roman Catholic Diocese" not follow this limits. There are perhaps more differences with other religions religions. --Jos1950 (talk) 12:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Bishop

Do you know a good place for "Category:Residencia Arzobispo Santo Domingo" in the category catholic environment?--Jos1950 (talk) 16:12, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Regions_of_the_Southern_United_States_by_state

Auntof6 (talk) 02:59, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Bernardo de Balbuena

There is a erroneous portrait (the first) in the gallery of Bernardo De Balbuena. A priest from the early sixteenth century can not have costumes of the eighteenth century. Regards--Zumalabe (talk) 19:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Syriac_Christians

Zoupan (talk) 23:15, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Cats

Hallo NeverDoING, danke für deine unermüdliche Kategorisierungsarbeit! Nur ein kurzer Hinweis: Category:Annual sporting events läuft Gefahr gelöscht zu werden, weil sie seit längerer Zeit leer ist. Gruß, --Achim (talk) 19:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Coralliophila monodonta (Blainville, 1832)

Dear Never,

Thanks for your work on shells. However, i found that WoRMS does not accept Coralliophila madreporarum (G. B. Sowerby I, 1834)

but instead calls it Coralliophila monodonta (Blainville, 1832)

where i had put these images before. So please check before creating new categories. Thanks!, then uploader of Naturalis images Hansmuller (talk) 11:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

PS. Around 11 and 25 May 2016 you created other categories of Naturalis pictures with category names that are unaccepted by WoRMS etc. That is why they were not yet categorised beyond the genus category. However, i must admit the genus categories get overcrowded that way.
Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 11:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Germany_vs_Russia

Auntof6 (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Wilderness areas

Hi NeverDoING. I saw that you had created Category:Wilderness areas and placed it into both Category:Wilderness as well as in Category:Protected areas. But what happens if someone uploads an image of, let's say, an empty plot of land which is completely overgrown, and places this image into Category:Wilderness areas? It's not really a protected area is it? Perhaps Category:Wilderness areas could be renamed to show that it is supposed to only contain protected wilderness areas? How about something like Category:Protected wilderness areas? - Takeaway (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

People of Atlanta

You're kindly requested not to disambiguate topics which don't need any disambiguation. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 15:11, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Robert_Falcon_(given_name)

Auntof6 (talk) 16:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Wilderness areas

Hi NeverDoING. I saw that you had created Category:Wilderness areas and placed it into both Category:Wilderness as well as in Category:Protected areas. But what happens if someone uploads an image of, let's say, an empty plot of land which is completely overgrown, and places this image into Category:Wilderness areas? It's not really a protected area is it? Perhaps Category:Wilderness areas could be renamed to show that it is supposed to only contain protected wilderness areas? How about something like Category:Protected wilderness areas? - Takeaway (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2016 (UTC) - Takeaway (talk) 08:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)