User talk:Zaccarias

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} . For the archive overview, see Archive/. The latest archive is located at Archive/2018.

Emergency vehicle lighting[edit]

Hi Zaccarias,

Thank you for reverting my edit at File:Asali gnangarra 160915-136.jpg.

Reviewing categories about special transports e.g. category:Oversized loads, I wanted to categorize the gear used to warn drivers for road hazards. Not sure where to place them, I found the article nl:Zwaailicht in my native language. This Dutch word (literally: 'swinging light') is used for all types of signalling lights that are placed on vehicle roofs and outlines as warning signs. However, the article is coupled to en:Emergency vehicle lighting, which has a different focus but somewhat thoughtlessly I took the emergency lights to be equivalent to the zwaailichten. Waking up this morning I realized my mistake but I had not yet found time to correct it. Thank you for doing so.

As far as I can see, there are no categories specifically for this type of gear although there are various related categories:

There are probably some more but these would do as parent categories I suppose. Another issue is the naming of a new category. My choice would be create Category:Vehicle hazard lights within Category:Road hazard lights but then I am no native English speaker. Googling I found that the term hazard lights includes the use of all four turning lights as warning signs, which may give rise to a corresponding subcategory.

Your advice would be welcome on both the category structure and the naming issue but feel free to refer me to pages like the Village pump if you prefer so. — bertux (=user:B222) 10:07, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Community discussions[edit]

When something is marked for community discussion, eg. {{delete}} discussion, then please do not remove that and make it a COPYVIO. Community discussions will manage it appropriately and for a 2008 upload it is better that we have that discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 16:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok. --Zaccarias (talk) 16:29, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Visteon Corporate Campus.JPG[edit]

The description of this file is:

"English: Visteon corporate campus at Grace Lake Corporate Center, Van Buren Township, Michigan"

Why did you add it to unknown locations in Michigan category? Rmhermen (talk) 03:25, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rmhermen: I clean up littered general categories such as Category:Companies, Category:Industries, Category:Factories and so forth. Usually these are littered with hundreds of files listed directly in the category. When I move files I take care of the subject and categorize them: it this case it was "automotive industry" and "Michigan". Because I didn't want to check the precise location in detail I used the maintenance category Category:Unidentified locations in Michigan to make sure that someone eventually will do that. Sometimes I search for the exact location for myself sometimes I leave that up to other users who might be more familiar. This is my understanding of a normal workflow. --Zaccarias (talk) 16:24, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Cooolbox.jpg[edit]

Hi, Zaccarias. I'm author of this file. --Dfotev 09:16, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dfotev: I've converted the "missing permission"-tag of the file to a regular deletion request (these are the rules) and linked your comment there. (Otherwise your image would have been deleted without further discussion. This is takes place 7 days after the files have been tagged.) Please place your further comments on the page of the deletion request: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Cooolbox.jpg Eventually an administrator will handle this task.

If you are related to that firm it would be best to give official permission via Commons:OTRS. You can find the link and some instructions for that procedure in the box on your talkpage. Thank you. --Zaccarias (talk) 16:59, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons IRC Office Hour, Tuesday 26 June[edit]

Greetings,

There will be an IRC office hour for Structured Data on Tuesday, 26 June from 18:00-19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. You can find more details, as well as date and time conversion, at the IRC Office Hours page on Meta.

Thanks, I look forward to seeing you there if you can make it. -- Keegan (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

What properties does Commons need?[edit]

Greetings,

Structured Commons will need properties to make statements about files. The development team is working on making the software ready to support properties; the question is, what properties does Commons need?

You can find more information and examples to help find properties in a workshop on Commons. Please participate and help fill in the list, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons Newsletter - Summer 2018[edit]

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter and contribute to the next issue. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates
  • Our dedicated IRC channel: wikimedia-commons-sd webchat
  • Since our last newsletter, the Structured Data team has moved into designing and building prototypes for various features. The use of multilingual captions in the UploadWizard and on the file page has been researched, designed, discussed, and built out for use. Behind the scenes, back-end work on search is taking place and designs are being drawn up for the front-end. There will soon be specifications published for the use of the first Wikidata property on Commons, "Depicts," and a prototype is to be released to go along with that.
Things to do / input and feedback requests
Discussions held
Wikimania 2018
Partners and allies
Research

Two research projects about Wikimedia Commons are currently ongoing, or in the process of being finished:

  1. Research:Curation workflows on Wikimedia Commons—a project that seeks to understand the current workflows of Commons contributors who curate media (categorize it, delete it, link to it from other projects, etc.).
  2. Research:Technical needs of external re-users of Commons media—soliciting feedback from individuals and organizations that re-use Commons content outside of Wikimedia projects, in order to understand their current painpoints and unmet needs.
Development
  • Prototypes will be available for Depicts soon.
Stay up to date!

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 21:07, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data Newsletter - Research link fix[edit]

Greetings,

The newsletter omitted two interwiki prefixes, breaking the links on non-meta wikis as you might see above. Here are the correct links:

  1. m:Research:Curation workflows on Wikimedia Commons—a project that seeks to understand the current workflows of Commons contributors who curate media (categorize it, delete it, link to it from other projects, etc.).
  2. m:Research:Technical needs of external re-users of Commons media—soliciting feedback from individuals and organizations that re-use Commons content outside of Wikimedia projects, in order to understand their current painpoints and unmet needs.

My apologies, I hope you find the corrected links helpful.

- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:21, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Mess[edit]

Someone has deviated away from how the IWM titles its categorizes for its images, We have "British Women's Land Army in World War I" whereas IWM call it The Women's Land Army in Britain, 1915-1918. What to do? There are other worse examples than this. We shouldn't deviate away from IWM's take on this. Do you not agree?Broichmore (talk) 10:59, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Why[edit]

I created a cat for "Agriculture in Britain during the First World War" the same cat as used by the IWM. You deleted ALL that work I did, because "you think" they fall under "British Women's Land Army in World War I". Well that's just not the case, indeed its the other way round. Deviating away from IWM cats just creates confusion. Please revert your edits. The IWM's take, might not be perfect but it is at least workable. Considering that the IWM is the prime source and authority in the matter we shouldn't mess with it. Thank you. Broichmore (talk) 08:31, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I see you cant be arsed to reply, so I'll treat your mis-guided edits of me accordingly. Broichmore (talk) 12:29, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Art Deco automobiles[edit]

Hallo!
I think that the "Art Deco automobiles" category that you created should be deleted, or at least renamed, as if some 1920-30 vehicles are without a doubt inspired by Art Deco trends, no automobile designer nor design team claimed to be part of the movement as such. And in fact, only the late form of the movement known as Streamline (de, en) had really an influence on car bodies (from mid-1930s onward), but even then, the design used for the concerned vehicles was never seen as a specific component of the movement but was (and still is) just regarded as a part of the streamlining design. As said in WP:

“As part of the Streamline Moderne trend, the term [streamliner] was applied to passenger cars, trucks, and other types of light-, medium-, or heavy-duty vehicles, but now vehicle streamlining is so prevalent that it is not an outstanding characteristic.”

About the subcategories that were gathered in yours:

  • the "Art Deco" name of the 1941-47 Chevrolet truck line is just a nickname given some decades later by fans (being a truck fan doesn't imply to have a huge knowledge of art history Clin), it never appeared in any contemporary document.
    (I created the category with that name waiting something better, as it seems to have been sold without a truck line name. Using the model codes would be a real mess)
  • As far as I know, the GMC siblings never got that nickname.
  • The 1939-47 Dodge trucks (added by GeeTeeBee) were promoted as "Job Rated" trucks by the Mopar sellers (like their 1948-56 followers), with no mention of an Art Deco influence in the available documents I found.
  • The Stout Scarab (added by GeeTeeBee too) is maybe, for me, the only one to really be a streamliner.

For now, I just "decategorized" the mentioned subcategories, as recreating a deleted category (in case you disagree with the idea) is certainly less easy than reassigning the subcategories Face-smile.svg - Beste Grüße - BarnCas (talk) 07:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
___
Edit: sorry for that long message, but I eventually found the "Streamlined automobiles" category, which seems to be exactly what you intended to create. It is more or less related to the movement and to Streamline Moderne: "Art Deco" can be found in "Design by movement" along with "Streamlined design", and in this latter you have "Streamline Moderne architecture‎" near "Streamliners‎", which in turn contains "Streamlined automobiles".‎
I "sent" the Stout Carab in it, but still think that the 3 other categories shouldn't be in it nor in any Art Deco related category. - BarnCas (talk) 08:04, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi !     That's a big post about a small category !
1). Why did you put it on your user talk page, instead of on the category discussion page ?
2). This is not a WP article, nor a commons page — it's just a category: a means to sort and help people find media. Unofficial nicknames serve that purpose too !
3). By your own acknowledgement, "..some 1920-30 vehicles are without a doubt inspired by Art Deco trends..", and "..the "Art Deco" name of the 1941-47 Chevrolet truck line is .. a[n existing] nickname given .. by fans..". Furthermore, the automotive press / sales industry uses the term for certain models, for example see here.
4). As for the Stout Scarab: many reviewers, art and car critics call the car's styling an example of art deco car styling, see for instance here, here and here.
5). Moreover, you can find an article listing no less than 25 cars whose styling is described as art deco here !
6). Please don't try to read my mind — the category 'Art Deco automobiles' is what I intended to create. That's why I called it that. 'Streamlined automobiles' are only somewhat related, but for the most part entirely a thing onto their own.
In summation: I think the value and the justification of the existence of the category 'Art Deco automobiles' is abundantly demonstrated, and I'm completely against deleting or renaming it. I will reinstate the membership of the Stout and the Dodge trucks to the Art deco cars category, and I will also add the Category:Chevrolet Art Deco trucks to it, for consistency. Beste Grüße - --GeeTeeBee (talk) 11:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

___

P.S. If you Google 'Art-deco cars', you get almost 32 million results .. --GeeTeeBee (talk) 11:44, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
@GeeTeeBee: this page is not my talk page, but the one of Zaccarias, the person who created the concerned category. I just mentioned you as a courtesy, as you used that category after it was created. I never tried "to read [your] mind", as you say: I just expressed my thoughts to Zaccarias.
And I don't understand why you say that the category 'Art Deco automobiles' is "what [you] intended to create", as you're not the creator of this category. - BarnCas (talk) 23:16, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
My apologies — my mistake — honest confusion .. --GeeTeeBee (talk) 00:32, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - Depicts statements draft requirements[edit]

Greetings,

A slide presentation of the draft requirements for depicts statements on file pages is up on Commons. Please visit this page on Commons to review the slides and discuss the draft. Thank you, see you on the talk page. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - structured licensing and copyright[edit]

Mockups of structured licensing and copyright statements on file pages are posted. Please have a look over the examples and leave your feedback on the talk page. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

New discussion on Commons talk:Structured data[edit]

Hello. I've started a new, important discussion about creating properties for Commons on Wikidata. Please come join in, if the process is something that interests you or if you can help. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)