User talk:Nordlicht8

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Nordlicht8!

Kontakt / contact[edit]

Falls Sie mit mir Kontakt aufnehmen wollen, bitte ich meine Diskussionsseite bei Wikipedia zu nutzen.
If you want contact me, please use my discussion site at Wikipedia.

TUSC token 772644bca266292a7883d6427ffa79d0[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Autopatrol given[edit]

Commons Autopatrolled.svg

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. INeverCry 20:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


Hi, love the new images. TO the extent you are able, can you add them to some of the horse categories? Even if just "horses" and someone else can distribute them into better cats .. I'm not real good at doing mass categorization, but take a look at the Dressage and show jumping categories in particular (also horse racing). That way, they will be easier for people to find when we search on the topic. Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

As I see, most of them are in the right categories. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 21:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
"Equestrian Sport" isn't on some of the people images. Montanabw (talk) 21:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I don`t see what you mean. Can you please give me an example? --Nordlicht8 (talk) 09:31, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Something like File:Gold Ship in Takarazuka Kinen 2013 (01) IMG 4689-2 20130623.JPG, for example, buried in an obscure category of Japanese racehorses, no one would ever find it unless they were looking for that particular horse. Say, if I needed an image of a gray racehorse or something, no clue it exists without sorting through a bunch of obscure categories, don't think a word search would get it. (Aside on how overspecialized cats on commons mean a lot of good new images are buried beyond finding...) Montanabw (talk) 17:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, now I understand. Horse colors categories are OK, breeding categories maybe if I have this information. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 19:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Pretty much, so long as most "white" horses get classed as grays unless you can verify they are genetically dominant white! (LOL) Also, to the extent the specific sport can be refined (say, dressage), that helps too. Montanabw (talk) 20:27, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi. An equestrian is another word for a horse rider. "Riders" are riders of any animal (or brooms), while equestrians are associated exclusively with horsebacking. Any avocation that involves professionally riding horses (mounted military, hunting, sports, or travel) is equestrianism. Horsemen are thus male equestrians. Regards, Orrlingtalk 16:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, of course "equestrians" is another word for a horse rider. But: Category:Equestrians is part of the categories "Sportspeople by sport" and "Equestrian sports", so it is definitely a sport category. With your category system Category:Dames and Category:16th-century equestrian portraits of men are sub-categories of Category:Equestrian sports. I don't think that makes sense. By the way, the word "Pferdereiter" don't exist. With best regards --Nordlicht8 (talk) 18:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
"Equestrianism" or "Equestrian" is acceptable as a general term. For what it's worth, "horseMEN" is sexist, particularly when today, at least in the First World, most horse owners and riders are women. In British English, the phase "horse riding" is seen, and "horse riders" is klutzy but OK, I guess. But "horsemen" is best avoided here, as then we'd have to add "horsewomen," and that is ghettoization, both would need to be subsumed under a category like "Equestrian" anyway. Also, the word "horseman" implied skill and finesse, not merely some guy sitting on a horse. So there's a judgement call involved. Better to say "men riding horses" or "male horseback riders" or something. Montanabw (talk) 18:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
The point about the term Horsemen made obsolete is a good point. I'll soon attend both Horsemen and Horsewomen categories and move them to Category:Male equestrians and Category:Female equestrians respectively. Or, if this appears more accurate and widely-understood, it might be Category:Male horseriders and Category:Female horseriders. As to the categorization complexity, that's ok when not all parent-categories of a given category cover 100% of its content. Ideally, we might have a specialized "Horse riding as sport" subcategory under Equestrianism. I understand how much just the sport aspect of equestrianism involves you, but linguistically this term is as inclusive as just applying to most occurrences of sitting on a horseback. Regardz Orrlingtalk 18:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
My wish is that the categories are structured in a good way. The little problem is that the english language has not a exact equivalent for the word "Pferdesportler" (Person doing sport with horses). Your ideas are good, so will will find a good solution :-) Regarding the correct expression for "horseMEN" you two (as a native speakers) can find a better solution than I. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 19:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm not a native speaker of English Orrlingtalk 19:22, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, okay. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
"Horseriders" is not one word. I think "Equestrian" or "Equestrians" is fine. I don't particularly see the need to split male/female, particularly as there may be group images with both, but whatever. Just keep the pornographic images out of the category; that is not "equestrianism."  :-P Montanabw (talk) 19:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
My idea (today) is a new category Category:Equestrians (sportsperson) as sub-category of Category:Equestrians, Category:Sportspeople by sport and Category:Equestrian sports. The renamed categories Category:Male equestrians and Category:Female equestrians would be sub-categories of Category:Equestrians. Do you think it is okay? --Nordlicht8 (talk) 17:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Having subcategories of Male-anything and Female-anything is more than widely-used on Commons, as this is primarily a pool of different images and the distinguishing "by-sex" sorting is one primary (and important, even if not politically-correct) tools of navigation across tons of content. So this is for the male/female split; as to erotic images, you can simply re-tag those for Females with horses.
I can live with the male/female thing, I guess. The rest is getting too detailed. Montanabw (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
A Category:Equestrians (sportspeople) is of course a good idea. Regards. Orrlingtalk 19:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Not sure why (sportspeople) is needed, we have subcats for jockeys and, presumably, people on Olympic teams, other than that, you are opening up a can of worms; ALL people riding horses are participating in a sport, even if merely recreational riding. Is this a distinction without a difference? Montanabw (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

So I don't care anymore about it. Orrlingtalk 03:45, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

screen hero[edit]

screen hero is an odd description for a category for horses, surely Cary Grant and Douglas Fairbanks are screen heroes? A.W.

LOL, why not be fully inclusive? We give out animal hero awards and after all, Lassie saved Timmy when he fell in the well, right? (smiles) Montanabw (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Maybe we need a new Category:Screen Hero for real (human) screen heroes and a Category:Screen Hero (horse) for the racehorse. But so far Category:Screen Hero is a "horse category". --Nordlicht8 (talk) 16:31, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
LOL, make screen hero a dab (they do disambiguate on commons, don't they? ) and have Category:Screen Hero (human) and Category:Screen Hero (animal) (or non-human animal, if that's the trend this week...) Montanabw (talk) 17:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 ??? - Allan Warren has used a wrong category three times. I had only informed him about this. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 17:36, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm just chatting and thinking out loud, I guess. If no one is particularly motivated, I guess I'm not really, either. Montanabw (talk) 17:43, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
For your categorization of the pictures from the Lausanne Horse Show. Thank you. Pleclown (talk) 20:03, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Considering your rename requests[edit]

From the program of the Lausanne Horse Show, Rodrigo Pessoa was on Tinkabell 12 and not Cadjanine Z. I must admit I'm really not a specialist, so I ask your advice. Is it Tinkabell 12 or Cadjanine Z ?

I've refuse your requests while we discuss, and will rename them according to your answer.

Pleclown (talk) 21:37, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your question. "Tinkabell 12" is a grey mare (see [1] and File:Rodrigo Pessoa & Tinkabell 12 - 2013 Longines Global Champions Tour.jpg. The online starting order lists Pessoa with Cadjanine. The markings on her face are on the picture are the same as on the second picture here. So it must be Cadjanine Z. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 22:27, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I was reading the wrong listing... I looked at the CSI5* 1.45 and not the 1.60 one. I will do the rename later in the day. Pleclown (talk) 06:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:51. Maimarkt-Turnier[edit]

Es ist schon alle Dateien aus dem Turnier. Vielen Dank für Ihre Hilfe. :) Zwiadowca 21 14:06, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Gerne und vielen Dank für die Bilder. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 17:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

CHI de Genève 2015[edit]

It's not finished, I've got pictures of the saturday and the sunday to upload... :) Pleclown (talk) 11:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Chili con carne in Austria[edit]

Chili con carne aboard an Austrian Railjet train.jpg

What is this picture doing on a page about rail transport in Germany? It was taken on an Austrian train from Vienna to Pörtschach am Wörther See. JIP (talk) 18:38, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi JIP, User:Nordlicht8/Rail Germany is automatically generated by OgreBot. Your image is in a subcategory of Category:Rail transport in Germany (Rail transport in Germany --> Rolling stock of Germany --> Rolling stock manufacturers of Germany --> Siemens Transportation Systems --> Rolling stock manufactured by Siemens --> Railjet --> Interiors of Railjet --> your image). I have delated your image now from my page. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

CSIO Schweiz[edit]

Hallo Nordlicht

Danke für die Kategorisierung meiner vielen Reiter-Bilder (ich hab noch viel mehr, aber die muss ich erst mal noch sortieren). Wieso aber hast du bei File:Ludger Beerbaum auf Zinedine 1.JPG die Kategorie entfernt? Weil der Reiter kaum zu erkennen ist? Oder war das ein Versehen? --PaterMcFly (talk) 14:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hallo PaterMcFly, das auf dem Bild ist nie und nimmer Ludger Beerbaum. Zinedine ist übrigens ein Fuchs, kein Brauer wie das Pferd auf dem Bild. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 18:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh, gut beobachtet. Da habe ich wohl tatsächlich zwei Bilder verwechselt. Jetzt sieht das Bild deinem schon sehr viel ähnlicher. --PaterMcFly (talk) 06:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
@ PaterMcFly: Stimmt, jetzt passt es. Bei File:Ludger Beerbaum auf Zinedine 2.JPG ist der Fehler der Gleiche. --Nordlicht8 (talk) 21:30, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh ja. Ich muss mal in meinen Unterlagen schauen, dann finde ich vielleicht noch heraus, wer das wirklich ist. Die habe ich aber gerade nicht da liegen, wo die Bilder sind. Dazu muss ich mich mal davon überzeugen, den Laptop mit mir rumzuschleppen... --PaterMcFly (talk) 11:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)