User talk:RhinoMind

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

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Kategorier[edit]

Hej. Hvorfor alle de mærkelige kategorier på dine uploadede billeder. Bemærk venligst kategori strukturen, ligesom dette ikke er en dansk side. Mvh. --Pixi Uno (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hej. Tak for kommentaren. Hvor "bemærker jeg kategori strukturen" henne? Jeg har givet mine uploadede billeder kategorier på både dansk og engelsk fordi jeg er aktiv begge steder og at de så kan bruges af begge steder. At du synes de er "mærkelige" er din personlige mening. Jeg vil gerne lære mere om de forskellige kategorier, hvor kan jeg lære om det? RhinoMind (talk) 19:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

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 01:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Sølystgade 2.jpg[edit]

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

Túrelio (talk) 10:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Royal Casino 4.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Royal Casino 4.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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Túrelio (talk) 12:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Konen med Hønen.JPG[edit]

Sculptor Aage Bruun Jespersen (b. 1929) seems to be still living. If you want to try to get a permission from him, please leave a notice. --Túrelio (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bernhardt Jensen.JPG[edit]

Sculptor Jan Balling seems to be still living.[1] If you want to try to get a permission from him, please leave a notice. --Túrelio (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


Atomium[edit]

There is no non commercial use clause in Belgian copyright law so CC-BY-NC would make no difference.Geni (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

If this is really true, it would make it easier to allow for one, if Wiki Commons allowed for non-commercial licenses in the first place. By the way, the possible Belgian prohibition of non-commercial publishing, has nothing to do with the FOPs of that country. RhinoMind (talk) 14:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
The prohibition of non-commercial publishing is just standard bern convention stuff. Even Napoleonic code countries tend not to produce copyright wavies outs that wide (the closest I'm aware of is South korea which had/has a very board opt out for educational use. Caused issues with text books). Commons and the wider wikimedia movement has very little influence on how countries chose to run their copyright system and allowing NC material would provide little incentive for reform.
Worse still "non-commercial" is legaly a very poorly defined concept. See for example the recent German ruling that basically decided that all forms of publication were commercial. While I expect that ruling to be appealed I can't predict which way the appeal will go and there are many many other grey areas around the term.Geni (talk) 15:37, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Vand Dragen 1.JPG[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Vand Dragen 1.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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the 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 | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 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)‎ | +/−

--Túrelio (talk) 09:36, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

FONA[edit]

Er FONA ikke en pladebutik i Danmark? tsca (talk) 09:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

@Tsca: Hej. Nej det er en teknik- og multimedie-kæde. "Records" betyder de gammeldags vinyl-plader. De sælges ikke i FONA. Der er desværre ikke nogen shop-kategorier for FONA, men du kan lave en? Check deres hjemmeside først. RhinoMind (talk) 23:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge/2014 - April - Food and drinks worldwide/Voting[edit]

In your voting here you have two images 3 points and one 2 points. This isn't a valid vote. Can you change to 3/2/1 points. I can't guess which you meant. Can you change your vote quicky as otherwise I may have to exclude all your votes from that theme. -- Colin (talk) 15:50, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

@Colin: Done. Thanks for your notice! RhinoMind (talk) 08:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
RhinoMind, I reverted your edit as it deleted a lot of content and undid updates. Please try again. HelenOnline 09:22, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
@HelenOnline: Strange. I didn't edit that page at all. Anyway, I have corrected my voting on this page also now, as originally encouraged by User:Colin RhinoMind (talk) 09:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I think it is ok now. You may have edited an earlier version dated when you first voted via Colin's link above, in which case it should have warned you: "You are editing a prior version of this page. If you save it, any changes made since this version will be removed." HelenOnline 10:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Oops sorry, I see you have now allocated one 3 star rating and two 2 star ratings. You need to allocate one 3 star rating, one 2 star rating and one 1 star rating. HelenOnline 11:04, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
@HelenOnline: Corrected. Hope it was the right page? Sorry for my errors. RhinoMind (talk) 13:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
RhinoMind, I'm still waiting for you to fix your vote per above. Please could you do it soon, otherwise I'll have to eliminate your votes from the count and just go with the others. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 11:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
@Colin: Well it would definitely help if you told me what page I am to edit! The links you provided was bullsh... RhinoMind (talk) 13:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I told you want page to edit, in the link that makes the header of this section. What is wrong with it? -- Colin (talk) 14:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
@Colin: I don't know, but something went wrong apparently. Maybe not your fault, I dont know. Anyway hope everything is ok now. RhinoMind (talk) 14:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks RhinoMind, I think it is fine now. You have to be careful not to edit an older version than the current version (assuming that is what happened here). Colin's link was a diff to show your historical edit but you need to open the current page to edit the current version. HelenOnline 08:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

House of culture[edit]

Even stranger, we have Category:Palaces of culture and Category:Houses of culture, which appear to be the same thing. in the US, we have "cultural centers" which are much more informally structured than in the communiist bloc. I think we need to merge the cats as you suggested, and further merge these two, and create a parallel "cultural center" for all the buildings around the world not part of the communist concept.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

@Mercurywoodrose: Hi and thanks for your thoughts on this! I really endorse a meta-category so to speak, a bit like what you are talking about. Just for the sake of simplicity, usefulness and an overview. However, I see no reason why various forms of cultural centers in different cultures, should be omitted from such a meta-category? Actually, I believe every kind of cultural center should be gathered and contained in such a category. The specific everyday structure of the centers, will be explained on the specific pages. Or perhaps in sub-categories if needed. Is this something you have thought deeply about? Do you have good explanations, as to why the cultural centres of the former Soviet Union, should not be contained in any meta-category?
I think "Cultural center" is a good name-choice for a meta-category, as it does not specify the type of the specific centers. The usual problem is, if we should use the British "centres" instead of the American "centers" if you know what I mean? :-) I am not aware of Wikipedias policies on this.
Hope to hear from you.
Btw. I think we should discourage the use of the word "communist", as this is a word with different meanings to different people.
RhinoMind (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
yes, we need a metacategory for all of them, "commie" or not, with definitions of each subgroup. "Cultural center" is a great neutral choice. as to whether it should be the british spelling: if we have many more such sites in either america or the british spelling world, choose that spelling for the category. it doesnt really matter though, for a culturally neutral term. policy is mostly around culturally specific articles, such as "oscar wilde" or "ernest hemingway" using their versions of english in their articles.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 21:22, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Great, thats something to progress from there.
I would have really liked to discuss the meaning and structure of various centers in different cultures. Because I personally needs some clarifications and because it will also ease the categorization further down the road. I am however taking a break from on-line activities, as I am getting really busy elsewhere at the moment. I just state these intentions so I/we can catch up on this issue later on. That is one of the comforting aspects of on-line editing; time is not your master to the same extent :-) RhinoMind (talk) 21:34, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree the word communist is completely inappropriate. just used for shorthand in this discussion. "second world", which is never used, would be more neutral. or just "soviet bloc" and "china".Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Ole[edit]

Well, all i know is a search shows no works into english aside from "otto is a rhino: stories and drawings" ([2]), which is out of print and expensive. maybe someone would like to translate them? Rightscenter.com used to promote translation, but its long gone. getting publishing companies to move on an older childrens author is going to be very hard. you would need to make friends with a childrens book sales rep who is bilingual in danish, and get them to fall in love with his work. or an editor. I suspect the editors in new york like white wine-ship a scholastic editor a case of wine, perhaps?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Mercurywoodrose: Great info! I have had big trouble finding proper databases to search for Danish-English translations in general. Another author was "Ebbe Kløvedal Reich", but there are plenty. My "best" solution turned out to be just Google, which is really not a very good solution after all.
I dont know how you did it Mercurywoodrose, but you guessed somehow, that I would personally like to translate some works! :-) It is true. First of all though, I was simply looking for already translated works, to fill in on Wikipedia articles and as a first-order investigation on which author was noteworthy and had notability. In the long run, I might get into some publishing also, as I am translating works into both English and Danish (back and forth) as a hobby of mine. I am working on translating "Lafacadio Hearn" into Danish fx. I think with todays technology I might be able publish them myself, if it ever gets to that. I use LaTeX, if you know that program? I dont think this will ever be a way to earn money for me - unfortunately -, so I have little aspirations to engage in the proper editing business. The future might turn out different of course, so thanks a lot for the advice, I didn't knew white-wine was such a treat in NY ... lol Cheers. RhinoMind (talk) 12:11, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
i used to know some people in the publishing business, but no longer do. I do remember that 2 canadian childrens book publishers seemed to be open to quirky, nonmainstream books, of which an old danish work would possibly fit their lists: firefly books [3][4] and Annick press[5], which has a Wikipedia article. I agree this might be a good time to self publish such a work, but getting the rights to translate would be tricky, as publishers hold onto them fiercely. you would have to write to the copyright holders of his works and find out if they are open to this. Its possible that they might be willing to look at a translation if done for free, and then decide if they wanted to pay you. thats speculation on my part, and i dont know enough about the copyright status of such a work to say if thats a risk.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:57, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I guess the copyright issue is a whole chapter of its own and even though it is probably the most important one, I haven't wrestled much with it yet. At the moment, I am just translating stuff occasionally for my own enjoyment and I am not even sure, if the quality of it will be acceptable for markets abroad. I much appreciate your input on relevant publishers and I will definitely look into it. I am not sure I will ever get to the business side of things, as it has never been a die hard goal for me to get there in the first place, but it is surely interesting to play with the thought of it, so who knows what might happen? If I was only to translate and publishers handled all the copyright issues, marketing and printing stuff it wouldn't be so hard... an interesting thought.
Besides, we dont make much white wine here in Denmark (or Scandinavia for that matter), but we happen to produce excellent cherry-wines.[6] It is not so well-known for some reason, and the quirkiness of it all might perhaps suit a few Canadian publishers...?RhinoMind (talk) 21:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Folkets_Hus,_Aarhus[edit]

Rudolph Buch (talk) 15:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Peter Sabroe.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Peter Sabroe.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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the 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 | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 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)‎ | +/−

Urbandweller (talk) 19:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


Deletion frenzy[edit]

Where was the discussion about the deletion of this photo?

I know it was mentioned on File:Søystgade 2.jpg, but in the deleting-frenzy initiated there, there has never been given any reasons why this specific photo was or should be deleted.

The graffiti was (does not exist any more) painted in a place where graffiti is officially allowed. It can be debated if it is considered an artwork. I dont think so and would like to see the WP-police present good arguments that is was.

RhinoMind (talk) 23:59, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Above moved from File:Graffiti (wall peace).jpg by Jarekt (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
The discussion took place at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sølystgade 2.jpg --Jarekt (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jarekt:
No.
Please read the discussion that you (and I myself!) are referring to. The files was never discussed prior to deletion.
To spell it out in capitals: The discussion was about the specific File:Sølystgade 2.jpg. The other 8 (!) files that User:Túrelio mentioned there, has never ever been discussed prior to their deletion and no arguments or reasons for their deletion was ever given or documented. Túrelio hints that they all fall in the same category as File:Sølystgade 2.jpg, but this is complete bullocks. Complete bullocks. I am not saying that all 8 files should be restored, I am first and foremost complaining about the complete lack of arguments and discussion prior to deletion. At least 2 of the files on Túrelios random black list, should indeed never have been deleted for quite clear reasons. I have now spend time putting these reasons up here: File talk:Graffiti (wall peace).jpg and here: File talk:Grundfos Kollegiet (detalje 1).JPG. Again.
I would like to discuss specific file-related details on the specific files own talk-pages, not here. Here on my talk page, we can discuss the violation of proper procedures in general, a very important issue.
If the sad procedures I have experienced here is becoming standard on WP, we have a very serious problem! I would certainly like to call attention to this problem.
RhinoMind (talk) 17:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
As if all this mess was not enough, you (Jarekt) completely deleted my complaints on File talk:Grundfos Kollegiet (detalje 1).JPG, which was an even worse example of the disturbing Deletion Frenzy. This specific photo was not showing any kind of Art. It was a photo of a construction of which there is very clearly FOP. Túrelio even points it out specifically to me. I have re-created my post on the files talk page now, and hopefully someone could reassure me that it was indeed a violation of procedures, a mistake and perhaps write an apology?
RhinoMind (talk) 17:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
RhinoMind, we do not keep pages in file namespace which do not have files, so do not be surprised if they are deleted. As for the discussion it is quite common to have deletion requests with multiple files, when the reason for the deletion is exactly the same. If you do not agree with the deletion, or with the indirect claim that reason for the deletion is exactly the same, than please discuss it at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests instead of on the file namespace pages, which will just get deleted. --Jarekt (talk) 18:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok then, I will have a look at the page you mention and perhaps post there later. I would like deletion procedures to be taken seriously, I would like some kind of professional communication to be enforced as well. Its important. If some things needs to be explained over and over again, make a template or something for it. Bots do that, so human editors can just as well. Thanks for the info Jarekt. RhinoMind (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
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 | Български | 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, INeverCry 17:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Skole-kridt (slik).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Skole-kridt (slik).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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Josve05a (talk) 14:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Rückzug aus dem Danewerk 5-6. Februar 1864.jpg[edit]

File:Rückzug aus dem Danewerk 5-6. Februar 1864.jpg is a grisaille and not a painting in full color in the original, see here http://360-foto.dk/krigen-1864/ in room one. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 06:29, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

@Villy Fink Isaksen: I have checked up, and I remembered the original painting as being full colour, but it seems that you are right: The original was a grisaille (black-and-white monochrome). See here fx: Krigen i 1864 (danmarkshistorien.dk). However, is the painting on display, that you photographed not a reproduction of Niels Simonsens iconic and famous original or is it really the original itself? RhinoMind (talk) 18:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I am not the photografer. The source and the photografer is mentioned in the file's data/artwork. The source is http://1864.dk/wp/wp-content/themes/1864/1864tidende.ajax.php?object_id=177&img=177.jpg and copy of that. It must be a copy of the original itself. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 18:33, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Veje og motorveje[edit]

Hej RhinoMind

Jeg er bange for, at du blander nogle ting sammen med dine kategoriseringer af danske veje og motorveje. Category:Roads in Denmark er den overordnede kategori for alle slags danske veje. Almindelige landeveje vil typisk blive placeret her. Category:Motorways in Denmark er derimod en underkategori specielt for motorveje. En almindelig vej som Gammel Køge Landevej har intet at gøre i den kategori.

Derudover er Ring 3 og Motorring 3 ved København to forskellige ting. Ring 3 er en almindelig ringvej bestående af bla.a. Nordre Ringvej, mens Motorring 3 er en motorvej, der ligger parallelt med den. --Dannebrog Spy (talk) 14:37, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Tak for besked. Nu ved jeg besked. Mit engagement var primært at få kategoriseret veje i og omkring København. Af en eller anden grund, er mange emner fra og omkring København ikke indlagt i de gængse kategorier. Og nej, jeg er ikke helt stærk i hvad der definerer en motorvej, så tak for hjælpen.
Mht. Ring 3 og Motorring 3, så troede jeg at det var én og samme ringvej. Jeg havde oprettet kategorien Ring 3 og ville egentligt nedlægge den igen, men den genopliver jeg så lige. Tak for inputs. RhinoMind (talk) 15:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Gastromé i Aarhus[edit]

Hejsa. Jeg kan se du har taget mange billeder i Aarhus. Flot arbejde. Du var vel ikke et liggende af denne Michelin-restaurant i Rosensgade - da:Gastromé. hilsen Royal Export (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hej og tak for interessen. Nej jeg har ikke nogen, men kan måske snuppe ét ved lejlighed. Facaden er dog ikke videre interessant.
PS. Hvis du er interesseret i mad i Aarhus og mangler lidt inspiration eller et kort overblik, så har jeg skrevet en mindre guide på Wikivoyage. RhinoMind (talk) 05:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
@Royal Export: Tilbage igen. Jeg har fornyligt uploadet et billede af Gastromé (File:Gastromé.jpg). Det er taget tilbage i marts. Det er ikke vildt godt, men kan måske bruges? RhinoMind (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Det er meget fornemt. 👍🏼👍🏼 Jeg har nu indsat det i artiklen om Gastromé. Hilsen --Royal Export (talk) 17:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Rød metal kunst.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Rød metal kunst.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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Fnielsen (talk) 11:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Strandbaren 1.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Strandbaren 1.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 | Български | 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)‎ | +/−

Fnielsen (talk) 11:02, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Mulnæs / Mols[edit]

Hej RhinoMind, jeg undrer mig over at du har døbt kategorien Mols Mulnæs et totalt ukendt navn både i Danmark, på Google, på en.wiki og på commons. Jeg er ikke så fortrolig med procedurene vedr. flytning på Commons, men finder det ret frustrerende at blive omdirigeret til Category:Mulnæs når man prøver at oprette Category:Mols. - Nico (talk) 09:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Hej. Det er noget tid siden, men som jeg lige husker det på stående fod, så er Skødshoved kun en pynt på halvøen Mulnæs. Mulnæs er simpelthen navnet for halvøen øst for halvøen Helgenæs. Vi er så vandt til at tale om Skødshoved, fordi den er et ret synligt "hoved" i Aarhusbugten, men selve "næs"-set som Skødshoved er en lille del af hedder Mulnæs. Det fremgår blandt andet i navnene "hoved" og "næs".
Jeg har aldrig omdirigeret hele Mols til Mulnæs, det har du fået galt fat i. Jeg omdirigerede derimod Skødshoved til Mulnæs, fordi Mulnæs - som forklaret - er metakategorien. Vi kan eventuelt danne Skødshoved som en underkategori af Mulnæs, men det mener jeg er for meget af det gode. Så stor er Mulnæs trods alt heller ikke at der skulle være behov for sådan en ekstra underkategori.
Jeg har generelt ladet mig lede af geografisk korekthed og ikke hvad der er mest brugt i folkemunde, eller popper mest frem ved google opslag. Fordi det er selve geografien, placeringen som har været det centrale. Af én eller anden grund er vi i Danmark (generelt set) helt utroligt dårlige til geografi; også når det gælder vores eget land. Jo mere jeg har arbejdet med det, jo mere overrasket er jeg blevet over denne faglige blindhed i vores nuværende kultur. Et slående eksempel er at der kun meget sjældent vises kort når sted-specifikke begivenheder beskrives i medierne. Prøv selv at se efter. Det er meget mærkeligt at opleve, når man lige får øje på problemet. Og det er radikalt anderledes end hvad man eksempelvis finder i den engelske kultur, især den amerikanske, som jo er en dominerende kultur internationalt. Dér har vi åbenbart meget at lære. Nå, det var lidt ekstra, for at sætte problemet i perspektiv.
RhinoMind (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
En anden grund til at bruge ordet Mulnæs, var muligvis at lade det omfatte alle de mange halvøer i Syddjurs. "Mols" er ikke et særligt veldefineret begreb og det er muligvis derfor jeg undgik det. Blandt andet omfatter Mols sjældent Helgenæs, af uvisse årsager. Mens Mulnæs kunne omfatte alle de "næs" der stikker ud på Syddjurs. Men det er svært at gå videre med Mulnæs ordet så længe jeg ikke kan levere kilder på det. Mols er derimod ikke særligt veldefineret og et vagt geografisk begreb, uanset dets popularitet i daglig sproget. RhinoMind (talk) 14:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Opfølgning Her er lidt referencer til en start: Mols Hoved. Andre "hoveder" på Mulnæs udover Skødshoved, er Mols Hoved, Drejet Øhoved og Tved Øhoved. "Hovederne" er alle en del af en lille halvø, et "næs". Jeg har ikke fundet kilde på navnet Mulnæs endnu, men kan se at næsset ofte omtales som "halvøen", "Tved-halvøen" eller "Tvedhalvøen". Sikkert fordi Tved Sogn omfatter halvøen/næsset. Udviklings- og bevaringsplan for landsbyen Tved, Dejret - Kulturmiljøer i Århus Amt, Mols Hoved
Ændringer Jeg har nu oprettet kategorien Tvedhalvøen, med udgangspunkt i ovenstående referencer. Indtil videre har jeg omdirigeret Mulnæs til hele Mols og vender så tilbage hvis der dukker flere kilder op, mht til Mulnæs. RhinoMind (talk) 14:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Jeg er stadig forvirret. det er OK med Tvedhalvøen, men du siger Mulnæs er simpelthen navnet for halvøen øst for halvøen Helgenæs. og at du lader dig lede af geografisk korekthed samtidig med at Mulnæs ikke findes på hverken nye eller gamle kort, eller i en tekstsøgning. ... men la' nu det være, det ser rimeligt ud som det er nu. - Nico (talk) 22:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Altså med den kommentar kan jeg jo ikke "la' det nu være". Som jeg tydeligt skrev er det lang tid siden og jeg var/er ikke lige i stand til at finde kilden på Mulnæs frem. Fakta er at Mols ikke er et særligt veldefineret geografisk begreb. Mols omfatter ikke hele det samlede Syddjurske "næs" med de tre halvøer Hasnæs, Helgenæs og hvad jeg nu har introduceret som Tvedhalvøen. Spørgsmålet er så om Mulnæs gøre det? Og om Mulnæs egentligt ikke blot var et andet "næs" navn for Tvedhalvøen. Det ville være rart at få afklaret og jeg skal nok vende tilbage med kilde hvis muligt. Du må også gerne hjælpe, eventuelt med et bedre navn. Mols er fint, det bruges jo konstant i daglig tale, men når vi taler geografi, ja så er det ikke nogen velfunderet kategori. Problemet er ikke løst. Læs hvad jeg skriver, så er der ikke nogen grund til sure miner. RhinoMind (talk) 15:18, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Ingen sure miner her, jeg mener bare ikke det giver nogen mening at bruge, eller at lede efter kilder til et stednavn der ikke bruges nogen steder, - det kan da højest være som en historisk kuriositet i en artiklerne, men ikke som kategori. Som jeg skrev ovenfor, synes jeg Tvedhalvøen er en ok løsning på et, som du selv siger, ikke klart defineret område. Tvedhaløen bruges også i flere artikler om området. - Nico (talk) 15:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Hej. Ja, men hvad stiller vi så op med den store halvø som består af de tre halvøer Tvedhalvøen, Helgenæs og Hasnæs? Den er også en halvø, men Mols omfatter normalt kun Tvedhalvøen og Hasnæs samt lidt af fastlandet i Syddjurs. Det har desværre stadig den effekt at Mols ikke rigtig er et geografisk brugbart navn. Men hvad vi så skal bruge, det er stadig et åbent spørgsmål. Inden vi finder en løsning på det, kunne det være godt hvis vi specificerede hvad der menes med Mols som Wikicommons kategori. Hvis vi altså har et valg mht det. Der er to opgaver her at kaste sig over. Men selvfølgelig kun når der er tid og det er sjovt at arbejde med. RhinoMind (talk) 15:15, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Øllebrød 2.jpg[edit]

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

(tJosve05a (c) 13:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
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 | Български | 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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)