User talk:Stunteltje/archive 2008

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

|} --SieBot 19:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC) Neat! Thanks for that. Now that I saw the pic on the nails themselves, I guess over here we call them finishing nails. I think I have some actually. Fastening carpets to the underlay strips makes sense and those tape ribbons shown on one of your pages, at NL wiki. I had not seen that before either. But the German word Tapeziernagel, does not make sense to me because it does not mention carpets, only wall paper. But I googled it and found out you're right. I guess that's our friends in Moffrika for you :-) There are actually German language jokes about nailing wallpaper on the wall and they go ahead and call a nail that right here: and here too: . The Dutch and English terms are better, although perhaps not as humorous :-) --Achim Hering 18:39, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello again! I was just admiring your gallery. What beautiful pictures you provided! Wow! Say, do you have any to add to this perhaps: ? Best regards, --Achim Hering 18:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately: no. I know the subject. I standardised a few jears electrical materials for Shell's Central office in The Hague in the Material and Equipent Standards and Codes department and was responsible for Group 68. As being retired I don't have the possibility to make pictures of the subject on oil rigs. Cable ducts for halogen free cables. Never heard of the jokes, as Moffrika is foreign country ;=)) My mother used the word, as she was of 1913.

Pictures: have an look at Zoetermeerse Plas and Broekwegwetering on nl Wikipedia. Rathe icy, a few weeks ago and I was able to take nice pictures. B.R. --Stunteltje 20:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I had a look. Very nice indeed. An cold of course! Reminds me of an outing the other day with my youngest daughter: One thing too is so striking, which is that construction and infrastructure in the Netherlands are so much better than in North America. Just look at this: I imagine there would be serious consequences for that sort of thing in the NL. Over here, we bury that sort of thing in paper and hide it behind ceiling tiles. "Don't stir the pot!" Our codes and regulations look great, but the reality of it all is a different kettle of fish altogether and the culture, such as it is, permits it sight unseen. It is sad. But then again, we have South Park. So there is always hope! Best, --Achim Hering 02:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
I am not so sure we do better. Lovely picture of cable salad. Im my time I engineered the instrumentation and telecommunication installation of a control room (chemical plant Moerdijk) and forgot to make such a picture. Outside this branche fireproofing is in many cases a suppositious child. BR--Stunteltje 08:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
I dunno. I always thought TNO did a great job. Rijkswaterstaat do a great job and your buildings just look a whole lot more sturdy than what we have here. NL is a nice, clean, beautiful place, with the best coffee and cheese around. I always had a good time there and got on well with the people. If NL had strong winds etc, you would not expect to find the houses in bits and pieces blown down the road as easily as the way it happens over here. Still, they build out of wood. Burns well, flies away quickly. Go figure. :-) Best, --Achim Hering 04:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lishgroep Piet Hein op de werf 1963.JPG[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 00:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rotterdam Het witte huis Vooruitgang.JPG[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Wrijfhout.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Wrijfhout.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

Image:2008 Station Leidsewallen (3).JPG[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 20:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Barges of...[edit]

Hello Stunteltje - thanks for sorting the images into "Barges of..." - could I ask you to check your new-made categories to make sure that all "Barges of X-country" categories are also subcategories of "Ships of X-country"? Thank you! Ingolfson (talk) 11:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

These are not barges![edit]

These small river boats were never intended for cargo work, nor for barge-style living - so what are they doing under barges? OK, we've got barges, tugboats, passenger river craft, ferries, yachts - none applicable. Any clues how to name these? NVO (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, in the speed of working categorised as barges. You're right, please correct them yourself with the right category. I suggest service vessels for Image:Moscow, Vodootvodny Canal working boats.jpg and probably a ferry for Image:Moscow, boat by Lu Bridge (1).jpg --Stunteltje (talk) 20:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
They are often called launches. See w:Launch (boat).
Sv1xv (talk) 17:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


Category Aachen means the city of nl:Aken, this category was for ships, known as Aak. Defenately a different category --Stunteltje (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I think “Aken” ist not the right name - mybee “Aaken”. Unfortunately, in en.wikipedia there is no article about the Aaken (flat barges). Greetings --Botaurus stellaris (talk) 01:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
You are right, there is no English translation for Dutch "Aak". My specialised dictionary for the profession gives:
So I assume the best category will be Traditional barges. Can you agree and move the pictures?--Stunteltje (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
The translations are not precise however. The German word " Kahn" is for example a very general term. I think, literally one cannot translate Aaken. --Botaurus stellaris (talk) 18:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
The best solution is to move them to Category:Unidentified ships and wait till someone has a better idea. --Stunteltje (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Barges of the Netherlands is ok, maybee „Traditional barges“ but it is not a unidentified ship - its a Aak, a traditional sailing barge type of Netherlands. --Botaurus stellaris (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Duwboot in Heumen[edit]

Hallo, ik zag je mooie "description" bij Image:Heumen(Gld,NL),duwboot in sluis Maaswaalkanaal.JPG‎. het is de mooiste foot van een serie van negen. Als dat zin heeft, kun je me vragen enkele of alle te uploaden. Groeten, Havang(nl) (talk) 16:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Het heeft - denk ik - alleen zin als die foto's ook ergens in Wikipedia gebruikt worden. Ik zit regelmatig op het water met m'n eigen schip 03011455 en kan ook gemakkelijk van veel binnenschepen plaatjes schieten. Maar dan zou het betreffende schip moeten voldoen aan de Wikipedia-criteria om erin opgenomen te worden. Ik kijk af en toe bij Wikipedia/Commons foto's van Nederlandse schepen even bij of er details bekend zijn en als het de moeite loont zet ik die maar bij de description. De binnenvaart is tot nu toe slecht beschreven in de Nederlandse Wikipedia en als amateur-schipper heb ik daar al wat aan gedaan, maar er ligt nog een geweldig terrein braak. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC).
Ja, gewoonlijk upload ik alleen foto's voor artikelen. Jouw goede beschrijving bracht mij op het idee de foto voor te dragen als valuable. Ben benieuwd naar reacties. Dank alvast. PS: zou een categorie voor duwboten zinvol zijn? Er staan best wel foto's in die zestal wikipedia's. Havang(nl) (talk) 22:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Is lastig. Heel veel sleepboten hebben een duwsteven tegenwoordig. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Tugboats or Towboats[edit]

In reference to the PeterFanchi.jpg image at Wikimedia Commons. You incorrectly categorized it as an image of a tugboat. The Peter Fanchi is a Towboat not a Tugboat.

I permit me to join in this discussion. I have considered that dilemma too and found on en:Tugboat A tugboat, or tug, is a boat used to maneuver, primarily by towing or pushing,.... So for towboats the Category:tugboats is adequate, and you will find numerous towboats at the tugboat category. But it is always possible to refine the categories, as p.e. category:River tugs contains only towboats; in fact the whole tugboat category tree needs improvement and refinement. Waiting for that, I propose a (temporarely) soft redirect from Category:Towboats to Category:Tugboats. Havang(nl) (talk) 14:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I am no native speaker of the English language, so my problem is that I don't know wether or not a pushboat is common knowledge in English. I found in my dictionary the main description for this type of boat/ship is tug(boat), secundary towboat. I myself thought that a tugboat is for the Brittish what a towboat is for the Americans. I prefer 1 (one) category for this type of ship/boat, and it is no problem when for definite towboats you can find a category there. I even think that Tugs is a better description, because in that case you don't have to find out it's used on rivers/lakes or at sea. No discussion about boat or ship. --Stunteltje (talk) 15:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I found the answer in my Webster's new twentieth century dictionary. Tug means to tow with a tugboat. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and double categorizations[edit]

Hi Stunteltje, Thanks for working on the Commons categories! It's often a tedious work receiving little appreciation, so it's great you're doing it!!

Just one "how-to" remark--please try to avoid "double categorizations": If an image/a file is already in one category, please don't sort it additionally into a higher-order category. As an example, pictures in the Category:Oosterschelde (ship) should not additionally be categorized in Category:Sailing ships of the Netherlands, Category:Sailing ships, Category:Ships and so on. (Everyone who looks into one of these categories, can find a subcategory that's more suitable for images of the ship, leading directly to the Category:Oosterschelde (ship).) That's why I've already taken the two "double categorized" images of the ship out of Category:Sailing ships of the Netherlands. In case you've "double categorized" other images as well, maybe you could delete them from the higher-order category? Thanks! ... and again, also thanks a lot for helping keep the Commons well-categorized! Regards, Ibn Battuta (talk) 04:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I realised the problem, but unfortunately up till now I haven'd made a scheme of categories on a piece of paper. So sometimes i categorise a ship, but doesn't realise it's a lower/higher category. I'll work on it. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! :o) --Ibn Battuta (talk) 02:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Good work[edit]

Dag, ik zie dat je hier bijzonder goed werk verricht. Eén kleine opmerking. Blanken van een pagina geeft extra werk aan tal van mensen. De meest efficiënte manier is er een {{Badname|Goede catnaam}} template op te zetten (zonder cat prefix noch andere haakjes). Voor ongebruikte categories is {{Speedy|Unused, empty}} de snelste manier. Veel plezier nog. --Foroa (talk) 06:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Die laatste zocht ik, maar had hem (nog) niet gevonden. En omdat ik af en toe fouten maak en pas later herstel gaat er wel eens iets mis. Vandaar. --Stunteltje (talk) 13:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
De eerste (badname) wordt wel snelst geaccepteerd omdat het gewoon een verplaatsing is. Bij een ledige cat gaan wij dikwijls na indien er iemand weer eens iemands anders category leeggehaald heeft omdat hij die extra cat de moeite niet vindt. Sommigen maken er een sport van om zoveel mogelijk categoriën af te schaffen, anderen maken er dan te veel. --Foroa (talk) 13:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


Thanks a lot for categorising my images of electrical equipment! I'm learning and will be able to properly categorise such images in the future myself! --Specious (talk) 05:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Please be so kind to correct my English if necessary, as I am not a native speaker. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:56, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Reactie op nieuwe categorie-namen[edit]

Ik heb al op Commons:De Kroeg#Herindelen elektrotechniek en elektronica aangegeven dat het nadelen heeft de namen van kategorien te wijzigen. Het veranderen van category:Electrical commutators naar category:Commutators is helemaal nergens goed voor. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Geen andere reden dan dat er gewoon geen andere commutators bestaan. En zoeken wordt zo gemakkelijker. --Stunteltje (talk) 11:00, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Jawel, er bestaan bijvoorbeeld commutatoren in de wiskunde en in de quantummechanica. En ook al zou dat niet zo zijn, dit soort kosmetische wijzigingen veroorzaakt alleen maar dat commonslinks niet meer werken. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, die had ik niet op mijn netvlies en bovendien repte mijn coding schedule en Websters er niet van. Vul maar aan, zou ik zeggen. Wordt het beter van. --Stunteltje (talk) 11:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Wat ik op een vriendelijke manier probeer te zeggen is dat je het veel rustiger aan moet doen met jouw "coding schedule". /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Prima, snap ik. Maar ik heb alleen het probleem dat als ik af en toe wat dingen aanpas, de structuur niet duidelijk wordt. Door het te doen zoals nu, wordt die snel zichtbaar. Had ik het in de zandbak kunnen doen, had ik het daar eerst gedaan en dan gevraagd of het beter kon. Als het goed is, moet nog steeds zichtbaar zijn waar alles te vinden is, alleen zijn er een aantal categorieën bij gekomen en maar enkele verdwenen. Dan kan ik wel files gaan verplaatsen zoals gevraagd, maar dat voegt - in mijn ogen - minder toe dan dat ik eerst de structuur opschud. --Stunteltje (talk) 11:31, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[edit]

Isn't that one lovely? Just warms your heart about how seriously codes and standards are taken in North American industrial settings right? :-) --Achim Hering (talk) 03:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Residual current devices[edit]

Hello Stunteltje,

en:Earth leakage circuit breaker states that: Current-operated ELCBs are generally known today as RCDs (residual current device). These also protect against earth leakage, though the details and method of operation are different. When the term ELCB is used it usually means a voltage-operated device. Similar devices that are current operated are called Residual-current devices.

My opinion is, that devices you've recently re-categorized as ELCBs are in fact RCDs/RCCBs (see a label on the front of Image:Residual_current_device_2pole.jpg...) and I would prefer to see them either (at least) in both of these categories, or in RCCBs only, and have ELCBs just as reference/redirect to RCCBs.

Also note, that for those of images, that are of german origin, either the device itself, or it's file is named FI-Schalter, FI-Schutzschalter, which according to de:Fehlerstromschutzschalter refers to RCD/RCCB.

The last thing is, that it's generally not wise to just "wipe out" a regular category, which correspond and is referenced from equivalent article at english wiki.

Regards, --Teslaton (talk) 21:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with that last thing. That is what I wrote in Dutch on this page. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • First of all:I am very glad to have this discussion. What I tried to do is to group the subjects in a technical structure. My problem is that in my days as electrician - many years ago - I did a worldwide electrical standardisation job and time didn't stop since then. So I knew from before that things could go wrong and in the Dutch version of the village pump I asked to correct me if I made mistakes or things could be done better. No other reaction than from Pieter. I told him that it is inevitable that regrouping leads to temporary results, later corrected.
On the subject: I used an old Shell General index to MESC and recent equipment isn't mentioned. So I missed this development, as I am retired now. I checked "Earth leakage circuit breakers" on the internet and I found that these devices can be bought all over the world and for not eletricians it was - in my opinion - a better name for a category to find than Residual-current devices. You make clear that this is not correct any more. OK, let things do better. Unfortunately we have to work with the fact that most images are of German origin and I am not able to differ in ELCB's and RCD's, nor it is wise to do so. I'll reverse the action and make a copy of this discussion on the discussion page of the subject.
Can you help me with finding a category for Magnetos? --Stunteltje (talk) 07:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I think that with en:Magneto (electrical), they mean a special class of dynamo's (electrical high voltage generators) with which they seem to overlap (used in engines but equally in old (field-, army-) telephone equipment). Don't know if a new name needs be invented. Note that I did not comment on your naming choices because I had no real comment. --Foroa (talk) 09:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
@Foroa I didn't intend to make a special category. Shell MESC coded it in group 58 under Machinery accessories and I assumed it should have an electrical category. I suggested on User talk:Andy Dingley, the uploader, to categorise it under category:dynamos. He correctly reversed my other categories before, so I ask first now. Besides: I changed category:kWh meters in category:Electricity meters (kWh). Regret solution of Eric Baas didn't work, as I have insufficient experience in coding in Wikipedia. --Stunteltje (talk) 10:11, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Dynamos are indeed convertors from rotational energy into electricity and in some countries, they are used for everything that generates electricity, including the power plant generators and the ones on the bike. --Foroa (talk) 10:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


I did not interfere because I was disagreeing with most of the meter names. Normally, I would expect that you state for each measurement device what you are measuring, not in which units. So in theory, it should be Electrical power, Electrical current, Electrical tension, pressure, weigth, distance, ... meters and not (k)Watts, amp(ere), Volts, psi of bar (si), kg (or pounds), (k)M (or miles), ... meters. Problem indeed is that popular naming tends to be ... well popular and more used. --Foroa (talk) 10:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Start for me is my assumption that Wikimedia Commons is intended to be used for everyone who looks for an image. Not a categorising tool. Problem is that I am not a native English speaker and don't know the popular names for certain devices. Other, related problem: light switches, mains switches (in line with mains sockets and mains plugs) or, as created, domestic electric switches. --Stunteltje (talk) 11:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I would agree with Foroa about units. "Electricity meters" in itself is sufficiently clear, additions do not really contribute anything. And if Stunteltje is not sufficiently fluent in English (and only announces his revamping of these categories in the Duch version of the village pump), then maybe he should just leave these terminology issues to someone else. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Verifying current and practical naming is very time consuming and quite region specific. As a minimum, I would suggest to announce name changes through {{Move|category:xxx}} announcements so that people can respond before it is changed. --Foroa (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for that suggestion. A constructive comment. --Stunteltje (talk) 12:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Dank je wel![edit]

Moin Stunteltje, danke fürs kategorisieren der Bilder, habe momentan keine feste Möglichkeit die Bilder hochzuladen und kam schnell mal in den Genuss von Hyspeed, allerdings nur kurze Zeit. Tschüß --Ra Boe (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:58, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Ships by IMO number[edit]


Thank you for your work in categorising ship-related images. Do you know the tool "Hot Cats" ? It helps adding / removing / altering categories much more quickly. You can activate it in your preferences, thumb "Gadgets"... give it a try !

However, I do not understand your categories "Ships by IMO number". As far as I know, IMo umbers are unique, so why not using a ship's name instead ? For instance you have put Image:Salica Frigo.jpg into an IMO category, but why not use a category Category:Salica Frigo instead, which is much more understable ? This is what is done usually when there are many pictures of a ship (for instance Category:Ivory Tirupati, Category:La Paimpolaise). It is a bit confusing if we have both categories with IMO numbers and categories with names, and I think names are easier to understand.

le Korrigan bla 17:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

A ship may change ownership, name and radio callsign but the IMO number remains the same. Sv1xv (talk) 19:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
This is exactly the reason why I added this category. Not to replace the categories by name, just adding there the IMO number. Each sea-going vessel of any importance gets an IMO number and the number doesn't change during the lifetime of that ship. I'll add a few ships with even 5 or 6 names, the ship remains the same, with the same IMO number. Besides:Thanks for the tip. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
OK. May I just suggest that you do not replace existing "name" categories with IMO ones? Just in case this was your intentions :-) Thanks, le Korrigan bla 22:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

mogelijks copyvio[edit]

Beste. Gelieve geen tekst letterlijk ([1] over te nemen van websites om geen last te krijgen met copyright. Lycaon (talk) 11:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO Number[edit]

Hi Stunteltje - I removed the IMO numbers because all those pictures are already in the "Sapphire Princess" category which you in turn put into the appropriate IMO number category. It makes little sense (and is against Commons sorting policy) to have a file be sorted both ways. All you end up is X files in the IMO number category, and when you click on the subcat, you get all exactly the same files again.

So I suggest that NONE of the individual files should be categorised with the IMO number IF there already is a ship name category for this number. Solely make the ship cat a subcat of the number cat.

This way also helps in case the ship name changes, as two subcats could then cover the same ship at different stages of its life. Of course that only applies if a ship keeps the same IMO number during its life - no idea there. Still, the above way should be best even then. Cheers, Ingolfson (talk) 05:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

You are right. The only reason why sometimes I add the IMO category to a single file is that if you click om the IMO category, you start with a single picture and the rest is in the category above the picture. You picked up the reason for the category yourself: During the lifetime of a ship in most cases she changes several times her name, the hull with machinery never changes the IMO number. See e.g. Image:Star Libra in Keelung Harbor.jpg The reason is that the regulations for ships from the flag nation become stricter and strickter during the lifetime. Ships are sold to nations where they can stay in service because the law is less strict. --Stunteltje (talk) 07:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I also added Image:GTSSummit.jpg. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:49, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice picture. Why didn't you add the IMO number? --Stunteltje (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
OK, I added it. Sv1xv (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

What is an IMO number?[edit]

Don't know what an IMO number even is. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Have a look here: w:en:IMO ship identification number. Sv1xv (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO number (again)[edit]

Hello Stunteltje,

Thanks again for your huge work of categorising shipping images ("parts of ships" really needed some work). I am a bit surprised with Category:Emma Mærsk : you have put individual images in the Category:IMO 9321483 category, but not Category:Emma Mærsk itself. I would have done the inverse : Category:Emma Mærsk would be a subcategory of Category:IMO 9321483 in order to avoid duplicating categories on a single image. I don't understand why you did the inverse. Can you tell me why ?

Thanks, le Korrigan bla 17:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the appreciation. There isn't a reason for not putting the category in the IMO category. Plain overseen or forgotten. I work on the edge of Wikipedia "rules" as I try to give at least 1 file in de IMO category and the rest in the subcategories. I assume that it is for information a good thing to see a picture of a ship in this IMO category also, as all pictures can be found in existing subcategories. Hope that an overawakened super super user will refrain of skipping these. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I took some of the text of Category:IMO 7211074 and dropped it in IMO 7211074. This is a nice example why the IMO category scheme is extremely useful. --Foroa (talk) 10:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I can understand why. My problem is that it is very, very time consuming to make separate artikels for each ship in IMO numbers. I don't intend to search for all information for all ships. User:Mtsmallwood is creating a separate schema for Category:Motor ships by name. I don't see the advantage for Motorships and suggested him to use Category:Ships by name or Category:Ships by individual name. In that case we can work together to bring the complete Commons fleet under Name and IMO number. Perhaps you can support that suggestion on his page. --Stunteltje (talk) 11:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Ferry Image[edit]

Hey, Thanks for the added description on my ferry image. Are you part of the team that constructed it? Muhammad 17:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. Gathered the information from the Internet. (Mainly the Schottel info.) Still looking for an IMO number, if given. The harbour master didn't react on my related question via e-mail. --Stunteltje (talk) 18:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to bother again. I used the ferry image in the english wikipedia article about ferry, but some users said the image did not have encyclopedic value. You being an expert with ships as far as I can tell, do you think you could have a look at the page here and place the image in a suitable location in the article with a matching caption? Thanks for the help, Muhammad 15:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Did my best. Hope sufficiently. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Muhammad 03:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


Hoi Stunteltje,

Ik wil je werklust niet om zeep helpen, maar school en schoolgebouw zijn toch eigenlijk hetzelfde ding? Maak je het zo misschien niet onnodig ingewikkeld? Ik hoor graag je mening hierover. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Ik merkte dat er twee routes bestonden, schools en schoolbuildings, waarbij de ene keer naar education en de andere keer naar buildings in cities werd verwezen. Dus je hebt volkomen gelijk, maar als ik een bestand school voor het schoolgebeuren laat bestaan en het gebouw bij de gebouwen onderbreng heb je het probleem niet meer dat iemand zoekt naar iets dat met leerlingen en lesgeven te maken heeft en dan bij gebouwen uitkomt. Vandaar dat ik nu probeer de splitsing te maken. Ik zal het eerst afmaken, dan is het beter zichtbaar wat de opzet is, hoop ik. --Stunteltje (talk) 07:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
De meeste scholen bestaan uit meer dan een gebouw. In eerste instantie komen de foto's van gebouwen eraan, maar dan kan er van alles bijkomen: feesten en events, parking, sportfaciliteiten, professors, oud-leerlingen, verwezenlijkingen, uitstapjes, bosklas, ... Niet altijd eenvoudig om een structuur uit te bouwen die die "groei" aankan. --Foroa (talk) 07:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Dat had ik me ook al gerealiseerd, dus de keuze was of de ene kant op of de andere. Ik zit er niet mee om alles terug te draaien, maar dan zou alles uit de Category:School buildings overgeheveld moeten worden om in het vervolg die splitsing te voorkomen. Ik zie ook nog Category:Education buildings. Ik wacht nu even --Stunteltje (talk) 07:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Algemeen kun je dan zeggen dat dit ook voor museums, bibliotheken, universiteiten, enz., zou kunnen gelden en volgens mij gaat dat net iets te ver. Maar om op scholen terug te komen, een categorie als Category:Amsterdams Lyceum kun je nu zowel onder Category:School buildings in Amsterdam als onder Category:Schools in Amsterdam sorteren. Dus linksom of rechtsom kom je dan toch altijd bij hetzelfde uit? Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Zou ik geen enkele moeite mee hebben, maar er zijn nu eenmaal heeeeel strakke informele regeltjes die ervoor zorgen dat je geen dubbele verwijzingen mag hebben. Ik zou zelf de school gebruiken voor de Amsterdamse school en dan zit je bij de schilders en/of architecten. Even praktisch: hoe gaan we verder. Wie hakt de knoop door? Ik doe er nu even niets aan, ben met de vloot van Commons bezig. --Stunteltje (talk) 13:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Het eenvoudigste lijkt mij de "school buildings" category eenvoudig weg te laten en schools zowel onder buildings als onder education te klasseren. Dat werkt trouwens ook voor museums, bibliotheken, universiteiten, enz., --Foroa (talk) 13:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Prima, dat lost het inderdaad op. Had ik eerder moeten zien. Maar ja, --Stunteltje (talk) 13:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
ok, bedankt. Ja, ik heb ook moeite met het Engelse begrip school. Misschien maakt Category:Schools by type het iets duidelijker. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Ik heb er nu stevig de bijl in gezet en alleen de losse bestanden staan nog in Category:School buildings. Misschien kan dat met een bot overgezet worden naar Category:Schools. --Stunteltje (talk) 22:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Link categories[edit]

I am not familiar with the Swedish ships, whatever categories you think best please make. Motorships by name I thought useful to distinguish from steamships by name. Ships by name seems too large to be useful without greater specificity.Mtsmallwood (talk) 13:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at the Village pump. I made a wider suggestion there, you are right. Without IMO number you don't find ships or have to specify with long descriptions. I picked one of your files to show what I mean. --Stunteltje (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/Current requests/2008/12[edit]

Somethink went wrong there. Could you fix that please? --32X (talk) 19:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to fix the problem. I nominated a file for deletion. Asked a question about the reason at the Village pump and received an answer that caused reverting the deletion. I deleted the file from the page. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Category:Barges by ENI number[edit]

Hallo Stunteltje, what is a ENI number? --Botaurus (talk) 21:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

An ENI number is an unique number, given to European barges. Like the IMO number for sea-going ships. It doesn't change during the lifetime of the ship. Ships will get many names during their technical life, but only one IMO or ENI number. The advantage of categorising by IMO and ENI number is, that files from different periods gather on the same ship, independent of her name. See e.g. ss France and ss Norway. Category:IMO 5119143 --Stunteltje (talk) 21:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank for the information. --Botaurus (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice example of the use of the IMO number Category:IMO 7126322 1 ship, 11 names. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:44, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Shipinfo template[edit]

Hi Stunteltje. After your contribution of shipinfo to File:Slæber.jpg i started looking for a ship information template but couldn't find any. So i began making one and for now the result can be seen on User:Hebster/Shipinfo (usage). As i have a nasty habbit of getting carried away with things i have already ended up with a lot of parameters. I would like to hear your comment on the current number and choice of parameters. I think that a lot more could be included (i.e. proupulsion, cargo pump capacity for bulkers, icebreaking capacity, armament for warships etc.) but on the other hand it would make the template rather large, and i'm already in doubt weither passengernumbers, TEU's etc. is to much? Please comment on this :) Kind regards Hebster (talk) 10:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I waited for that one !!! I am not familiar with templates and wasn't able to create one. Great. A few remarks:
  • Please separate the technical ship information from the use information, as MMSI numbers and callsigns change with the owners. Crew numbers with the nationality. New flag = smaller new crew. Just the information that stays with the ship itself.
  • It doen't cost much time to find a lot of order-, keel laid- , launch- and completion dates, builder and yard numbers. Can these be added, as the main engines, number of screws and speed in knots?
  • I gather the information from various sources and they all differ in tons. Can you - as a naval officer - give a small explanation as you did on metres and feets. I am just a simple pleasure skipper of a barge of 83 tons Stella Maris and for me tons are tons. (I know better, but I am a bit lazy to find all the differences.)
  • It seems to me a very useful tool on the ship information part. For a lot of ships - not all, it takes to much time - I gathered the historical information too. Makes it possible to find ships by name. Problem is, that files only seldom have a good category by ship-name, so they cannot be added to Category:Ships by alphabet. Have a look at Category:IMO 7126322
  • I am looking for a possiblity to combine these two things: a page with ship-bound info and a separate page with historical info e.g. names and owners, so the combination can be found via Category:Ships by alphabet and via Category:Ships by IMO number. I am afraid that in due time a wiki-literalist skips all the information I gathered, because categories in Commons are not to intended to contain information. I categorised more than 500 ships under IMO and I am of the impression that the Commons fleet is about 2000 to 2500 ships. Still a lot of work to do. Best regards --Stunteltje (talk) 13:08, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Stunteltje. I think the idea of separating the technical information (fixed or static) with the curent identification (dynamic) is great and will split the template to two. I'm not quite sure of the details yet, but will make something in the next couple of days or next weekend.
All sorts of information can be added to the template. I'll expand it with all characteristics in can come up with, and should it be to much i'll just remove some of it.
With all the different sort of tons there should be links on the template to explanations of the different types - most of them on this page. But in short: Gross Tonnage is the total volume of the ship, meassured on the outside of the hull framing and accommodation. Net Tonnage is only the volume that can hold cargo. The Gross Register Tonnage and Net Register Tonnage is basically the same, but with some exempts. These values are mainly used in places like the Suez and Panama Cannels, where they are the basis of the price the ship has to pay. They are much more complicated to calculate and there are strict rules for how these should be done. All four of these is typically represented in m3, but is occasionally as tonnes, with seawater as convertions-factors (depending on the time of year and area these changes - also the current template is faulty in this area; i will fix it :)). The final is the Death Weight Tonnage, which is the sum of the weights or masses of cargo, fuel, fresh water, ballast water, provisions, passengers and crew. It is used as a base for the Plimsoll line.
I can see no problems in having information about ships on category pages, but thinks that the best would be to raise this on the Commons:Village pump. Kind regards Hebster (talk) 20:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I will add the question to the village pump, but will wait to see the result of your fine template. You have to know that also User:Ingolfson is working on a template. It looks good, because it shows a nice header in the files itself. Please contact him as I am not familiar with templates, don'n know how to implement. A combination will make the result even better. We have to find a bot after categorisation of the bulk of the ships, to transfer the texts of categories in normal files. Ingolfson showed the result, but I can't find an example. To much files in de list. Over 700 ships have an IMO number now. Very greatfull for your help. --Stunteltje (talk) 20:57, 11 January 2009 (UTC)