User talk:De728631
|
|
Contents
TUSC token 211033b1711e51385fa1da3b5f03b199[edit]
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
Ships by name[edit]
- Привет, ты не убирай категорию Ships by name, sondern ergänze durch bzw. um eine weitere wie Tugboats by name, Ferry ships by name, Gruß,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 10:28, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- @PjotrMahh1: Hallo. Das "Ergänzen" um eine weitere Kategorie ist aber falsch, siehe Commons:Overcat. Z. B. Category:Ferry ships by name ist bereits im Kategoriebaum von Category:Ships by name enthalten, darum darf diese Hauptkategorie nicht zusätzlich verwendet werden. De728631 (talk) 11:46, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- In der Praxis machen wir so, wie ein Beispiel vom obersten Schiff in dieser Kategorie Category:Adamantios Korais (ship, 1987). Und das machen wir alle, Category:Ships by name muss unbedingt, alles andere ist unwichtig. Hast du es nicht gewusst oder ignoriert? Und ist die Fähre hier im Sinne der Seeschifffahrtsstraßen-Ordnung (SeeSchStrO) oder wie? Und wenn aufgelegt, heisst dieses Schiff auch Ferry? Type of ship ist es nicht, und für Type schreiben wir Category:General cargo ships oder Category:Passenger ships, Ferry ist ein Übersetzer von einem Ufer bis zum anderen und weiter nix, Gruß,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 21:46, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- Tut mir leid, aber da muss ich dir ernsthaft widersprechen. Erstmal zu den Grundsätzen von Commons: nur weil es in der Praxis vielleicht gemacht wird, heißt es nicht, dass es richtig ist und den Regeln entspricht. Das System für alle Kategoriestrukturen ist einmal verbindlich entschieden worden: Commons:Kategorien#Kategoriestruktur. Wenn also Category:Ferry ships by name eine Unterkategorie von Category:Ships by name ist, dann darf laut dieser Richtlinie von Commons nur die am tiefsten "sortierte" Kategorie verwendet werden. Und das ist eben Ferry ships by name. Abgesehen davon wird der Begriff ferry im englischen und auch anderswo auch für große Passagierfähren verwendet. Das hat nichts mit der Größe des Schiffes oder dem Einsatzort zu tun. Darum sind in Category:Ferry ships by name auch solche Schiffe wie Category:Bencomo Express (ship, 1999), Category:European Voyager (ship, 1974) oder Category:Stena Nordica (ship, 2000) vorhanden. Du selbst hast sogar damals Category:Gardenia Seaways (ship, 2017) so angelegt. De728631 (talk) 00:07, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Ich habe jetzt eine Diskussion auf Category talk:Ships by name begonnen, damit wir das mal allgemein besprechen können. De728631 (talk) 00:33, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- Eben, man muss diese Frage mit den Kollegen besprechen, denn ***Tugboats by name (Tug), Sailing yachts by name (Sailing Vessel or Pleasure Craft?) haben mehr Rechte und Anlässe dazu als Ferry. (Fall Gardenia Seaways) Ich habe um Category:Ferry ships by name ergänzt, nicht statt Category:Ships by name verwendet. Fähre als Type zu betrachten und dazu noch unter Category:Ships by name by type ist falsch, wenn ja, dann schon direct und zusätzlich, Category:Ships by name und Category:Ferry ships by name ohne Vermittlung durch Category:Ships by name by type, спасибо,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 06:30, 26 July 2018 (UTC) Noch was vergessen. Für mich wäre wichtig, alle Schiffe nach dem Namen in der Geschichte dabei etwa als in einer Liste haben (etwa abc-Verzeichnis), denn irgendwelch Wasserfahrzeug ist in der Liste, das andere dagegen nur von einer Unterkategorie erfasst. So mein Vorschlag, wie ich bisher die Sache auch verstanden habe, alle Schiffe bekommen automatisch oder manuell Cat. Ships by name, und die andere Cat. zusätzlich, danke--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 06:41, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- @PjotrMahh1: Weil sich auf der Diskussionseite dort nichts getan hat, geht es jetzt auf Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Ships by name weiter. Ich hoffe, dass die Angelegenheit dort mehr Aufmerksamkeit erfährt. De728631 (talk) 14:47, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Eben, man muss diese Frage mit den Kollegen besprechen, denn ***Tugboats by name (Tug), Sailing yachts by name (Sailing Vessel or Pleasure Craft?) haben mehr Rechte und Anlässe dazu als Ferry. (Fall Gardenia Seaways) Ich habe um Category:Ferry ships by name ergänzt, nicht statt Category:Ships by name verwendet. Fähre als Type zu betrachten und dazu noch unter Category:Ships by name by type ist falsch, wenn ja, dann schon direct und zusätzlich, Category:Ships by name und Category:Ferry ships by name ohne Vermittlung durch Category:Ships by name by type, спасибо,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 06:30, 26 July 2018 (UTC) Noch was vergessen. Für mich wäre wichtig, alle Schiffe nach dem Namen in der Geschichte dabei etwa als in einer Liste haben (etwa abc-Verzeichnis), denn irgendwelch Wasserfahrzeug ist in der Liste, das andere dagegen nur von einer Unterkategorie erfasst. So mein Vorschlag, wie ich bisher die Sache auch verstanden habe, alle Schiffe bekommen automatisch oder manuell Cat. Ships by name, und die andere Cat. zusätzlich, danke--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 06:41, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- geht klar, Gruß,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 17:14, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
A cheeseburger for you![edit]
|
thanks Stapmoshun (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC) |
File:Olga Sharij.jpg[edit]
Hi, if you dont understand Russian or dont understand words combined in sentences its your problem but plz dont make it a problem for other people.
Do you know what you should do next? --Алый Король (talk) 09:05, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Алый Король: Yes, I know what to do. I'm going to point you to COM:UDR. I do see now that the file was actually released under a CC licence at Instagram, but with such snarky remarks as yours I'm not inclined to undelete this myself. We all make mistakes, and if you had simply asked me to restore the file, I would have done it. But this attitude of yours is just inappropriate – even if your upload was deleted. De728631 (talk) 09:51, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, of course, inappropriate, but is yours appropriate? You didnt spend even one second to open my user page and try to understand I am a vandal or an experienced user, didnt spend even two more seconds to ask me "I see black, but you are saying that is white, what is going on?" You didnt think about my emotions and deleted this file. so I didnt as well. --Алый Король (talk) 10:08, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- I did check your userpage and contributions and it made me wonder why you would upload a seemingly unfree image. Turelio, who tagged the file, is an experienced user and admin as well and I trust his judgement when it comes to copyright violations. Moreover, you could have objected to the speedy deletion by leaving a comment on the file's talk page, or by turning the speedy deletion template into a full deletion discussion. Anyhow, to save us both more bureaucratic acts, I have now restored the file. I really appreciate your contributions, but for such non-obvious licensings as chat streams, I would recommend that you leave a note in the summary where to find the free licence. That would help reviewers to verify the licence. De728631 (talk) 10:22, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Actually this deletion was really FAST (I really didn't have time for any reaction). Anyway, thanks for understanding. I will put a note next time. --Алый Король (talk) 10:57, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- I did check your userpage and contributions and it made me wonder why you would upload a seemingly unfree image. Turelio, who tagged the file, is an experienced user and admin as well and I trust his judgement when it comes to copyright violations. Moreover, you could have objected to the speedy deletion by leaving a comment on the file's talk page, or by turning the speedy deletion template into a full deletion discussion. Anyhow, to save us both more bureaucratic acts, I have now restored the file. I really appreciate your contributions, but for such non-obvious licensings as chat streams, I would recommend that you leave a note in the summary where to find the free licence. That would help reviewers to verify the licence. De728631 (talk) 10:22, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, of course, inappropriate, but is yours appropriate? You didnt spend even one second to open my user page and try to understand I am a vandal or an experienced user, didnt spend even two more seconds to ask me "I see black, but you are saying that is white, what is going on?" You didnt think about my emotions and deleted this file. so I didnt as well. --Алый Король (talk) 10:08, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Duplicate[edit]
Hallo De728631, das von dir hochgeladene File:Luftwaffe (German Air Force) 54+01 Airbus A400M - 22550413067.jpg ist im Grunde das gleiche wie File:Luftwaffe (German Air Force), 54+01, Airbus A400M (22550413067).jpg und stammt vom gleichen Ursprungsbild bei Flickr. Nur die Dateigröße bei der neuen Version ist geringfügig größer. Keine Ahnung, wie da am besten vorzugehen ist. Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 01:53, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Sitacuisses: Danke für den Hinweis. Ich habe meinen Upload wieder gelöscht. Wenn jemand die volle Auflösung 1200x800 haben möchte, kann er die Dateigeschichte von File:Luftwaffe (German Air Force), 54+01, Airbus A400M (22550413067).jpg benutzen. De728631 (talk) 11:45, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Category:Coats of arms of families of England[edit]
Hi, you have moved some images from Category:Coats of arms of families of England to Category:Coats of arms of English nobility (for example Category:Herbert arms). This is a problem: Category:Coats of arms of families of England should be the top category. The nobility category is difficult as English gentry families enter and leave the nobility over time. Nobility may just be a temporary phenomenon for many gentry families. Thus the Category:Coats of arms of English nobility is problematical for English usage. I believe the German nobility is different as titles do not die out so easily as there is a true aristocracy, as opposed to the English system which is not a true aristocracy as only eldest sons are noble, their younger brothers are merely gentry. Therefore I suggest all members of Category:Coats of arms of English nobility should also appear in Category:Coats of arms of families of England. I would ideally like to see Category:Coats of arms of English nobility closed down. We need an all inclusive category which includes ALL English coats of arms. No English reference book of arms categorises by "nobility". Thanks.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 23:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, Lobsterthermidor. Thank you for clarifying this issue. You may want to start a dicussion at Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry so there can be some sort of consensus on what to do. De728631 (talk) 13:48, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Before I consider that, what is your opinion on my suggestion? Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Well, I wouldn't mind having only one central category like "Coats of arms of families of England". The nobility category could then be redirected. De728631 (talk) 14:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree, I think that would be best. Gentry is the common factor in heraldry and there are hundreds of English gentry families which have had just one member ennobled, who died childless, maybe centuries ago. So which cat would those arms go in? So can we both start work on recategorising images back to the cat "Coats of arms of families of England", then adding a re-direct when completed? I don't think this is a controversial issue. Many thanks.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Well, I wouldn't mind having only one central category like "Coats of arms of families of England". The nobility category could then be redirected. De728631 (talk) 14:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Before I consider that, what is your opinion on my suggestion? Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
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, such as a copyright issue. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Gorch Fock (1933) ice-915698.jpeg
- File:Halcyon smyrnensis-584636.jpeg
- File:Kyoto traffic jam at night-1208986.jpeg
- File:Monkey with a mirror-1207875.jpeg
- File:Sliced orange citrus fruits-943632.jpg
- File:Vevey paddlesteamer-789537.jpeg
Yours sincerely, De728631 (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
LA[edit]
Moin De728631, kannst du mal bitte hierher schauen? Das Gepinge will hier irgendwie nicht funktionieren. Gruß -jkb- (talk) 11:02, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Un-coordinated category moves again[edit]
The very same user who has already been admonished by you not to continue with un-coordinated category moves, renaming and inventing shows being absolutely unimpressed by that. He had been advised "... you had quite a few discussions on this talk page where people complained about your introduction of new categories since they were not regarded as improvements."
For the latest actions like that, please see User talk:Joshbaumgartner, last three items, starting with "Layout clash ...". Additionally, he performed such moves like this one moving "aircraft of the US" to "aircraft from the US", which does not appear to make much sense from a linguistic point of view; it just creates hundreds of moves of connected files and sub-cats. Please be so kind and take care of that ever growing problem. Thank you. --Uli Elch (talk) 11:18, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Uli Elch: See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Joshbaumgartner. --De728631 (talk) 13:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
_54%2B01_Airbus_A400M_-_22550413067.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_54%2B01,_Airbus_A400M_(22550413067).jpg){kind=link}
_ice-915698.jpeg){kind=link}
