User talk:Chris.urs-o

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}} For more information read the full deletion guidelines.
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

---

Hello, Chris.urs-o!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT (talk) 05:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Image:Worldecozonesi.pt.jpg is uncategorized since 24 December 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 05:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Worldecozones.pt.jpg is uncategorized since 24 December 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 05:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Mount Kilimanjaro 2007.jpg is uncategorized since 10 January 2009. BotMultichillT (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Erica.1926.jpg was uncategorized on 11 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:14_WWF_biomes_8_biogeographical_realms.pt.JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:14_WWF_biomes_8_biogeographical_realms.pt.JPG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Multichill (talk) 09:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

This file is just a translation of an english file on Wiki. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editor's summary: Please send a permission for File:14_WWF_biomes_8_biogeographical_realms.pt.JPG to OTRS

http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/GraphicResources.aspx

Graphic Resources

Maps & Data The World Data Center for Biodiversity and Ecology (WDCBE), with United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), the UNEP - World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), and the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) will launch an interactive system that will allow easy access to reports, maps, and the data collected during the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment global evaluation of ecosystems.

MA Data Portal All maps used in the various MA synthesis reports can be downloaded for use in presentations, printed materials, and on web sites. Please credit “Millennium Ecosystem Assessment” as the source for all maps, unless another source is specified with the file.

File:Tofua.Tonga.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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 ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--Telim tor (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grosser Mythen 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support I like the composition, and informative --Vomirencostard 17:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris, I saw your work on the history of tectonophysics on the English Wikipedia. I once made a small timeline for the "discovery" of nappe/thrust tectonics that may be interesting for you too. The idea was to have some overview who did what and when. Unfortunately, in the Swiss accounts their countrymen, although important, are often given undue weight. The same is probably true for British accounts. It's an interesting story, because it illustrates the fact that 70 years before the break-through of plate tectonics, geologists fought a similar battle about the smaller scale. Of course, the idea of having large scale horizontal dynamics in the crust should have automatically been an important argument for plate tectonics, but somehow noone had the insight just yet (or dared speak about it - geologists were a very conservative mob). I don't claim my list to be complete, it's probably far from, but it is enough to give a broad insight in what happened. Here it is:

• 1841 Arnold Escher is the first to describe the Glarus Thrust in the Alps of Eastern Switzerland (now an UNESCO world heritage) as a thrust. He was hesitant to publish his unconventional idea.
• 1848 Escher shows Roderick Murchison the Glarus thrust. Murchison is convinced and enthusiastic about Escher's theory.
• 1866 Escher finally publishes his work on the Glarus thrust, but he describes the structure as a double anticline. The idea follows the conventional geologic theories of the day, but Escher privately admits it is absurd. He never dared to publish his real ideas.
• 1883 Charles Callaway interprets the Glencoul Thrust (Scotland) as a thrust.
• 188? Charles Lapworth discovers a ductile thrust at Ben Arnaboll and is the first to use the word mylonite.
• 1884 Marcel Bertrand shows that observations on the geology of Glarus by Escher and Albert Heim (Escher's pupil and successor) are easier to explain with thrust tectonics. Though Bertrand never visited Glarus, he knew about the Faille du Midi, a large thrust fault in Belgium. Bertrand is ignored by Heim and August Rothpletz, who think the idea to be absurd.
• 188? Benjamin Peach and John Horne map the thrusts of Scotland in a major survey.
• 1884 Archibald Geikie becomes convinced by the thrust theory for Scotland.
• 1893 Hans Schardt discovers that in the west of Switzerland Jurassic layers are on top of Tertiary flysch, which matches the prediction of Maurice Lugeon. Lugeon was an adherent of Bertrands ideas. With the new found prove, the thrust theory is for the first time proposed as a geologic model for the Alps.
• 1894 Rothpletz also describes the Glarus thrust as a major thrust. He is viciously attacked by Heim.
• 1902 Albert Heim finally converts himself to the thrust theory.

All the while, these geologists constricted themselves to the study of their own backyard (Alps, Ardennes or Scottish Highlands). For some reason, the nappe theory was only very slowly put into practice at other places worldwide. Even in the 1980's, some geologists in places like Russia still ignored the idea when studying the geology of the Caucasus or Pamir mountains. Woudloper (talk) 13:06, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know for sure. I separated the theory of thrusting by Suess (Suess, E. (1875). Die Entstehung der Alpen [The Origin of the Alps]. W. Braumüller. Quote: "A mass movement, more or less horizontal and progressive, should be the cause underlying the formation of our mountain systems.") and the acceptance of the Thrust faults by the Austrian Geologic Society in 29 August 1912. I hope it is right so... The theory of thrusting was common view in alpine geology (e.g. Otto Ampferer), Wegener and his brother hiked with a full professor of geology in Innsbruck. You see thrust everywhere in the Alps once u heard the idea. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. But science wasn't as quick in the 19th century as it has become today. Method and theory could differ significantly between scientists in Paris, New York, London or Berlin. Perhaps the language/culture barrier prevented the flow of information. People also need time to adjust to new ideas. Sometimes a generation of scientists has to die out completely before a new idea gets accepted. So once the British geologists were converted, thrusts were accepted in Scotland. Because the Alps were the almost exclusive domain of Austrian, French and Swiss geologists, it first took time to convert them too before thrusts were given a role in publications on the Alps. The same sort of differences appear between old literature about the Austrian and Swiss Alps, or the Norwegian and Swedish Caledonides, for example. Even though they are the same mountain range!

Thanks for mentioning Suess. As far as I understand, Ampferer and Suess came after Escher. But Suess fits in right after Escher indeed. Suess' role was more or less to provide a large scale theory in which thrusts can exist without being really important. In fact he was still trying to minimize mobilism, even though his contemporaries thought his ideas already too far-fetched at first. I didn't know Wegener was influenced by the Austrian school. I think his role is often exaggerated. He wasn't taken very serious in his time, no wonder if you see the physically ridiculous concepts he came up with to explain continental motion. Woudloper (talk) 10:31, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copied, pasted and modified ur timeline on my timeline of tectonophysics talk page. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 09:18, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The JPEG file format is really not suitable for that type of image data, which is why it looks "dirty"... AnonMoos (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, I notice it :s --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris.urs-o, please give useful categories to your images so that they can be found by other users. For instance Category:Eudicots is not at all useful for your File:Flower.1601.jpg. One short view into the category shows that your image does not belong to it. For images of unidentified plants there ist Category:Unidentified plants. But keep in mind that there is a Project scope and contibuted images must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. What is hardly the case in more images of unidentified plants. -- Ies (talk) 10:27, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'll try to improve it. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as above mentioned, please, please use 'useful' categories and don't over-categorize your images, i.e. please do not categorize your uploads (an example representing your recent categorizations):

Category:India +

Category:Rickshaws +

Please use as far as possible the category of the regarding city/town/village or district (if there's no category) etc., or, a localized better 'fitting' i.e. the 'most fitting"' category(ies). Do not add - in addition - the categories of the "parent category", among them cities, states and countries etc. For further information on categories please read Commons:Categories referring to an accurate categorisation, simplifying your further uploads and categorisation in general. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the commons:help desk. Thank you for your assistance, Roland 17:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, there was no city in the description. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've seen you recategorized this species' photos as Elymus farctus, is this a major synonym of A. junceum or the determination of the species was wrong? Thank you.--Etrusko25 (talk) 10:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there are problems. Sometimes, the botanic databases disagree with each other, specially which one is the accepted scientific name and which one is the synonym. I need the german Category:Deutschlands Flora in Abbildungen for a botanic atlas at de.wikibooks.org/ Regal:Biologie. I'm revising these illustrations with the help of the german FloraWeb (Elymus farctus (Viv.) Runemark ex Melderis, syn. Agropyron junceum (L.) P. Beauv. [1]), and The Plant List (Agropyron junceum (L.) P.Beauv. is a synonym of Elymus farctus (Viv.) Runemark ex Melderis [2]), mainly. I'm doing my best, I think that it's correct now. It's a small contribution, someday a wikipedian will try to improve this edit, a never ending story ... --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:00, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

We are indeed facing a similar issue. I do not think that NCBI is a better list than European ones, as e.g., "ThePlantList", which is a list of names, not a taxonomic classification ruling on the best name for a species.

In case of Hylotelephium telephium I have not participated in categorising it (see [3].

The polymomorphous genus Sedum has not yet been reviewed within the framework of the Kew World Checklist [4], as were already, e.g, Colchicum, Crocus, Narcissus, Clinopodium and Origanum.

I would propose to wait to the name choosen by the Kew World Checklist (when they will have reviewed the genus Sedum), before ruling on the best name for this species.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

There is apparently some confusion about this taxon.

Not everyone (e.g., the GRIN taxonomy [5] and the Flora of Belgium) agrees that Ononis repens should be called Ononis spinosa subsp. maritima, as stated by Tela botanica [6].

In addition, the prostrate, glutinous plants frome the maritime dunes, which are are also called O. maritima, O. procurrens var. maritima or O. repens var. repens, are called O. spinosa var. maritima by Tela botanica [7].

Beste regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) _Ononis_spinosa_subsp._maritima?" class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">11:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The GRIN taxononmy considers that Ononis repens L. is the correct name and that Ononis maritima Dumort., Ononis procurrens Wallr., Ononis spinosa subsp. maritima (Dumort.) P. Fourn. & Ononis spinosa subsp. procurrens (Wallr.) Briq. are all synonyms of O. repens. See GRIN Species Records of Ononis. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Meneerke bloem

I just want only one category on Commons for the same plant, and of course I want to write down the right name on the botanic atlas at de.wikibooks.

I hoped the databases tell all the same, it isn't so :(

Regards

Thank for nomination!--Paris 16 (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

I have seen that you have asked for rotating some of my pictures.

Yesterday I have manually asked for the rotation of six ones. However, when I saw that about 1/3 (i.e., about 1,000) of my more than 3,000 pictures should be rotated, I have informed Village Pump about this issue. See: Village Pump#Image rotation - I am desperate.

They have replied that they will try to solve the issue globally.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 08:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Reginald

I saw ur writings.

If I remember right, they say that it's a wikimedia problem, and that there's no way back. It's really a mess to read the EXIF note. Of course, someday they'll have a bot to sort out the mess.

I only asked for a dozen rotations. Just from the galleries that I visited recently.

Ok, I'll stay quiet 2011

Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, some time ago you asked me for the correct name of this plant. Now, I have found a paper (PDF) that helps to solve the question. According to this, Stellaria is paraphyletic, if it does not include Myosoton. So, it should be named Stellaria aquatica. --Franz Xaver (talk) 18:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx ;) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From my understanding, all those ships are either owned by NOAA or the US Navy, and are leased to the various institutions and universities under the University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System program. It's a very, erm, tricky situation. My thoughts are that all the ships run through the UNOLS program should be categorised under NOAA, and any ship ordered and delivered to the US Navy should additionally be categorised under an appropriate USN category, as the Kilo Moana is.

Additionally, I'll be undertaking a naming standardisation task, since there are various schemes used in that category tree. Any actual NOAA ship will read "NOAAS Name (R ###)" or "NOAAS Name (S ###)", etc. I was a bit bewildered by the mess when I first saw the category. :/ — Huntster (t @ c) 09:59, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, fair enough for me. I'm trying to categorize images from NOAA, so I'm learning by doing right now. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:57, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, yeah, there's a ton of images to go through, and *way* too many duplicates. Good luck with your efforts! — Huntster (t @ c) 12:31, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You categorized (at least) 3 images as Category:Trams in Lisbon which I had to correct to Category:Trams in Brazil and Category:Horse trams in Brazil. If you cannot identify the country, better leave them at Category:Trams, alright? -- Tuválkin ✉ 19:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello !!! Cool down please, it was uncategorized for ages, I didn't know that Santos had trams, my mistake, no disaster. I should have looked better, more kindness please. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:21, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you didn’t know what the city was (you could not, like I did, check the files use to find out — why?), but, if you didn’t know what the city was why did you just plopped these files in Lisbon at random? That’s truely weird. As for kindness, well, it was unkind of you to miscategorize these images. -- Tuválkin ✉ 21:10, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was sure that I read Lisbon in the description of the first from three files, slipped through :/ --Chris.urs-o (talk) 04:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

According to the World Checklist[8] the plants currently put in the category Crocus vernus sl. should be redirected as follows:

• The category Crocus vernus should be restricted to Crocus vernus (L.) Hill ss. (Syn. Crocus napolitanus Loisel.) (E. Alps to Carpathians)
• Crocus vernus subsp. albiflorus (Kit. ex Schult.) Ces. = Crocus caeruleus Weston (Pyrenees to W. Balkan Peninsula) should be redirected to the category Crocus caeruleus
• Crocus heuffelianus Herb. (E. Hungary to Carpathians), Crocus exiguus Schur = Crocus heuffelianus subsp. heuffelianus and Crocus scepusiensis (Rehmer & Wol.) Borbás ex Kulcz. = Crocus heuffelianus subsp. scepusiensis (Rehmer & Wol.) Dostál (W. Carpathians), should be redirected to a new category Crocus heuffelianus

Redirecting Crocus vernus subsp. albiflorus to Crocus caeruleus would not be a big issue. On the contrary, dividing Crocus vernus sl. and redirecting it to Crocus vernus ss. and Crocus heuffelianus (including subsp. scepusiensis) would be a tricking issue. In addition, there are pictures in the current category Crocus vernus, which are presumably cultural plants. How should these pictures be categorised? Perhaps we could put these plants in the category Crocus vernus cultivars.

Your thought about this issue? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These cultural relic cultivars are a difficult issue. You are the masters (Réginald alias Meneerke bloem, MPF, Uleli, Franz Xaver, Robert Flogaus-Faust, Orchi), I follow you. The experience of User:Robert Flogaus-Faust might improve your decisions. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 16:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! I took the time to create the basics required for running an upload bot from my system. I would appreciate any help! Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 15:54, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx ;) What help am I able to give you? What do u have in mind? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I listed some of them on the request page. E.g. ideas how to do best categorization, whether you have already a template to put on the images, ... -- RE rillke questions? 17:14, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some examples, after revising the description/caption: File:Arabis thaliana Sturm6.jpg File:10 Chrysanthemum leucanthemum.jpg

I'm building Deutschlands Flora in Abbildungen (1796) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:25, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

I have already reviewed the plant beginning with A, B, C and D. I am now reviewing E.

I have one problem:

• File:Aster puniceus — Flora Batava — Volume v5.jpg: This is not a native plant, but an introduced American aster, which currently does not occur in Netherland

I am currently only categorising the pictures. The description section is not yet adapted accordingly.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(",) Things aren't so easy, I notice it as well. We do the easy part, and ask help for the left overs. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 13:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have already categorised all plants till the first part of P, except the mushrooms, mosses and seaweeds (which I do not know). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 20:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(",) RE rillke didn't upload all yet (c. 600 of c. 1700). I don't know the mushrooms, mosses and seaweeds either. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 01:50, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All current uploads of plants are identified and categorised. The summary section (currently accepted latin name) should be adapted accordingly. Someone specialised in mushrooms, mosses and seaweeds should review the remaining uncategorised pictures. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thx. Don't want to destroy ur joy, but Category:Unchecked Flora Batava images needs a look too ;) Could you tell me why u classified Betula alba as Betula pendula and not Betula pubescens, I want to learn more :) Asked de.wikipedia for help ;) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making a double check, because I am of course not infallible. I have the advantage to know the flora of Belgium and Netherland very well, so that it was almost very easy to perform. Betula alba is a nom. rejic. because it has been allocated by several authors to both Betula pendula and Betula pubescens (B. pendula being the more white). On the twig on the picture I can not see which one it is. Perhaps we should indeed relate it to both species...

To facilitate my life, if new pictures of plants have still to be uploaded, they should be put separate from mushrooms, mosses and seaweeds.

In addition, I have my doubts about the names allocated to some pictures. One example: Calamagrostis haller(i)ana (= Calamagrostis villosa) is a plant of the Alps and the Carpatian mountains, which does not occur in Netherland... The picture should be rather of C. stricta or perhaps of C. pseudophragmites, which occurred in the past along the great rivers in Netherland. I have also some doubts about the identification of some Potamogeton species. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:12, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I didn't double check Betula alba, we edited it at the same time ;) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NCBI and theplantlist.org have mosses too. RE rillke is on vacation, so things will sleep one week. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which is the difference between Category:Unchecked Flora Batava images and Category:Uncategorized Flora Batava images? The file name of the "uncategorised" pictures is sometimes with typographic errors, which was the reason why they were uncategorised. Please let me know how I have to proceed with the "unchecked" pictures. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So far I understand, the pictures in the Category:Unchecked Flora Batava images matched with an existing category, but their identification has still to be checked. Correct?

I have put the picture of Betula alba, Calamagrostis halleriana and a couple of others in that category, so that a double check will occur. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 14:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as Chris.urs-o requested, my bot checks whether a category with the given name exists and if not it puts the image into Category:Uncategorized Flora Batava images. If the category exists, and the category is a category-redirect, the bot will change the description accordingly. BTW Thanks for your work on it. -- RE rillke questions? 14:50, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Category:Uncategorized is the "difficult job" n priority one, the name is obsolete; the Category:Unchecked is the "easy job" n priority two, the name should be up to date. The file description should be updated anyway. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 15:45, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris, I have ended my review of the plants put in the Category:Unchecked Flora Batava images.

Don't hesitate to contact me for any additional purpose or if you find that some of my identifications are to be reviewed.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 14:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, I hope it improved our virtual botanical garden ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lieber Chris.urs-o,

ich schreibe auf Deutsch, da Du es vermutlich besser lesen kannst, als ich Englisch schreiben kann ;-)

1. Bitte bewirb Dich als Admin! Du bist ein lieber, netter, hilfreicher, erfahrener und kenntnisreicher Kandidat und solltest die Rechte erhalten, um Dich hier weiterhin einzubringen.

2. Vielen Dank, dass Du mich nicht gleich als Botanik-Vandale geoutet hast (Tussilago farfara nicht von Pestwurz zu unterscheiden). Ich mag mich gar nicht mit dem Tunnelblick auf die Kategorien zu entschuldigen.

3. Alle Unklarheiten/Hinweise/Fehler zu Botanischem sollten auf einer Unterseite gesammelt werden, um nicht die anderen ständig zu nerven. (viel zu drastisch formulierte Passage von mir gestrichen); besser: ... um sie für alle nachvolziehbar zu machen. --Hystrix (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm

1. Danke für die Einladung u für die Blumen
2. Weiss nicht so recht. Ich habe eine Mineralien Liste bei en.wikipedia, zwei Bücher bei de.wikibooks, Illustrationen bei Commons, Typlokalitäten bei de.wikipedia, Category:Mineral groups and series, Bestimmungsbuch für Mineralien in en:, alles im Bau ... Ich werde einfach nie fertig ...
3. Ich wollte kürzer tretten
4. Ich sollte mehr Zeit in meiner "real life" verwenden
5. Ich habe "nur" ein Windows XP PC
6. Ich sammle zu Flora Batava:
   1. Category talk:Flora Batava, Netherlands#Plant list for peer review
7. Bei Flora Batava sind wir erst am Anfang es fehlen (87 + 971) von 1579
8. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... ach komm, ich habe auch so viele Projekte am Laufen und „real life“ kenne ich nur noch vom Hörensagen. Komm, Du hast sicher nicht nur meine volle Unterstützung. --Hystrix (talk) 20:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... Willst Du wirklich, dass ich mein 100k edits Abzeichen kriege ? ;D

... Übrigens ist es 1. April, ich werde Dich Heute nicht ernst nehmen ... :D Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... auch wenn immer noch der 1. April ist, ich meine es ernsthaft: Blümchen, Pilze und Moose kann jeder einsortieren. Aber nur jemand mit 100k edits Erfahrung kann andere dabei sinnvoll und vertrauenswürdig unterstützen. Mit den Rechten erst recht. --Hystrix (talk) 21:59, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... Danke wieder für die Blumen. Ich lese so ungern, dann muss ich wohl Commons:Ratgeber zur Administratorentätigkeit lesen. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 01:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... Vielen Dank für Dein Engagement hier und in anderen Projekten. Und etwas lesen wird man schon müssen; aber es wird jemanden, der mehrsprachig bewandert ist, nicht schwer fallen. Grüße --Hystrix (talk) 18:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... Danke wieder für die Blumen. Dein Schlussstrich war auch gut ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... Wenn ich so denke, ich bin gar nicht so gut, Rainer rillke z.B., der ist unglaublich. U Du, frisch aus dr Admin-Presse, u schon fragst mich an, das ist gewagt !!! Ich bin mehr aelter u abgenützt als jung u mutig. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Materialscientist eine Klasse für sich diese Bewerbung, da bin ich ja nur ein Anfänger. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:18, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alles fängt im Frühling an, aber mit den 1. April habe ich ein Trauma. Ich habe ein schlechtes Gefühl. Ich habe so viele Sachen angefangen, etwas muss halbfertig werden. Ich hoffe, dass ich ein neuen PC kriege, aber sofort werde ich nicht kandidieren. Aufräumen ist ein riesen Stress, sorry ... --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Solltest Du die Tools brauchen, zögere nicht, einen Antrag zu stellen. Gruß -- RE rillke questions? 10:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Danke Rainer ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 11:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

I have reverted your adding "mosses" to File:Lycopodium selago — Flora Batava — Volume v12.jpg‎, because Lycopodiaceae (Lycopodium, Huperzia, Lycopodiella, Diphasiastrum), as well as Selaginaceae, are not mosses, but vascular plants, i.e., plants with roots.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 07:33, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, I notice afterwards, "Farnpflanzen", I thought that they aren't so bad there ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:36, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

I am currently making a second review of all plants in the Category:Flora Batava, Netherlands. As you can see in A second critical review, I am finding some residual errors (mispelled or bad file names, and incorrect identification) which I am correcting step by step. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 21:02, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, I notice it, Commons needs improvement on the categorization of the tree of life. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 04:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have just completed this second review, during which I have reallocated some files which were not correctly identified, mostly because of the confusing synonymy (obsolete name which should be rejected). En passant, I have also renamed a few files, which were obviously misspelled. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The name of some files is still misspelled, because of misreading of character ſ (old s), which was recognised as f (example: File:Geranium disfectum — Flora Batava — Volume v7.jpg).

Thx, good u did that. These obsolete scientific names are a pain. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 16:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sapphrine group 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 category, 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. 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 ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JuTa 12:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message. They do look quite different. But on the NHM lepindex they seem to be considered as the same species (see lepindex).
I'm not a lepidopterist, and not really good in zoological nomenclature and systematics. If you have a reason to change my identification, please do so! I try to mention a source with all the identified species, but I'm sure that there are a lot of mistakes in my Cramer and Stoll pages. For me the important thing is to make these beautiful plates accessible in an easy way and give a first try in identifying all the figures with modern names. All help is very welcome. Maybe you could ask User:Notafly for advice?
Cheers, Maarten Sepp (talk) 10:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx --Chris.urs-o (talk) 11:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cramer has described the differently coloured male of his "Pasiphaë" as a different species arcas Notafly (talk) 20:46, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chris I have already been in contact with "Maarten Sepp" and made a few changes. I'm using Global Lepidoptera Index in part. This gives the valid names but I'm assuming that means valid for nomenclatural purposes (The term is not defined on the website so far as I can see). The accepted name is a different matter but like Maarten I'm going by Funet provisionally but I'm sure it's out of date sometimes. I'm working thru your problem species one by one and editing the description page. All the best Notafly (talk) 19:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:37, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fountainea ryphea‎ doesn't look right by Google images [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's correct though. Perhaps figured from a damaged specimen or just not one of his best figures Notafly (talk) 20:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I should do as I promised Maarten and check the whole work as far as I am able. Let me know of any doubts.Notafly (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mean Sphinx dares seems to belong to a different genus than Fountainea. Ok, Category:Neacerea looks better, sorry my mistake . Ok Boss, I'll give smoke signals if problems appear ;). I want to use the Category:Arctiinae tribes on Wikispecies, if it's ok. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 03:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about:

• Ordo: Lepidoptera • Familia: Arctiidae • Subfamilia: Category:Ctenuchinae

or after Wikispecies:

• Ordo: Lepidoptera • Familia: Arctiidae • Subfamilia: Category:Arctiinae • Tribus: Arctiini • Subtribus: Ctenuchina

Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rule about ranking or central authority to adjudicate or consult and often no agreement (just argument). It is better to be consistent however and so I would opt for Wikispecies making it clear that the alternative exists - citing source if possible. see the note on Lipteninae here [14]best regards Notafly (talk) 20:52, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx Notafly. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 04:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man I need your help because I'm new, I made a montage to make a picture out of other pictures, the pictures I used are in public domain and other are licenced by the govt. This is my first time doing this, I just got a message saying it will be deleted, Should I be afraid of any problems that I may face. I didn't know and I don't care if it gets deleted (I don't want problems). This is the pic > File:Americans.png List the files, are they commons links? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:09, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nein, ich habe keine literatur über Motten von Madagaskar. Ist auf jedem Fall eine Geometridae - Geometrinae, sieht ähnlich aus, wie viele Pingasa-Arten aus Indien, von denen es aber auch einige auf den Inseln im Indischen Ozean gibt, und in Afrika.

Mein Tipp: durchblättern bei www.africanmoths.com Ich fand auf die schnelle ein paar Ähnlichkeiten zu dem linken Foto von Pingasa abyssinaria, (Guenée, 1858) = Webseite: Africanmoths:pingasa_abyssinaria Greetz vom Tonton User:Tonton Bernardo

Tonton Bernardo (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

edith: jetzt habe ich mal meine eigenen Links eingetippt.... Ein ähnliches Foto kam auch mal von Flicker aus Australien unter: Category:Unidentified_Geometridae

Foto ist hier:

Verschiebe das Foto ruhig in die gleiche Rubrik, ich würde es als probably Pingasa sp. nennen User:Tonton Bernardo

Moin chris; Für mich sieht die stark anders aus, als die [Pingasa chlora] Der innerste Zeichnung ist bei der einen stark gezackt, und bei "Deiner Motte" sehr weich gezeichnet. Auch der äussere Kranz an der Flügelspitze ist stark anders. Pingasa chlora kommt zudem in Madagascar gar nicht vor - aber ausgeschlossen ist das trotzdem nie. Die Gegend um Ampasimbe (es gibt übrigens 2 Ampasimbe an der Ostküste M'car), es ebenfalls Lychee-Anbaugebiet. greetz vom Tonton User:Tonton Bernardo

Danke. Du kannst recht haben, Du kannst teilweise recht haben. en:Pingasa chlora listet Unterarten:

• Pingasa chlora chlora (Stoll, 1782) (=)
• Pingasa chlora candidaria Warren, 1894
• Pingasa chlora subdentata Warren, 1894
• Pingasa chlora sublimbata (Butler, 1882)

Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:44, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi some months ago you changed some categories for items with Mine Names - to Mineral Names. It doesnt make sense. Just was checking this lot edited today - and each specifically in english has the word Mine in the title - yet you hot-catted Mine to Mineral.

the bot was doing them today...

• Category:West Comet Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]
• Category:Renison Bell Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]
• Category:Mt Cleveland Sn Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]
• Category:Magnet Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]
• Category:Kapi Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]
• Category:Comet Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]
• Category:Colebrook Hill Mine‎ (diff | hist) . . (-3)‎ . . FrescoBot (talk | contribs | block) (Bot: misplaced invisible LTR marks) [rollback]

Please explain. It would be appreciated. SatuSuro (talk) 13:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Minerals by country --> Category:Minerals of Australia --> Category:Minerals of Tasmania

Category:Minerals by country --> Category:Minerals of Japan --> Category:Minerals of Akita Prefecture

User talk:Ra'ike#Just a note: Category:Minerals by country and Category:Mines by country have twice the same, in part.

Category:Mines by country should only have mines, no minerals. Some photos of minerals don't have a mine, just a location/ a district.

Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 14:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I dont like what i see as the simple process of hot catting makes the categories and information provided nonsensical content - the uploader and original categoriser has put a mine name and details against a mineral - IMHO the process should include another category 'minerals found at...' and then a second tier of categories makes more sense - as it stands it is blatantly incorrect to have a mineral against a mine name with inadequate explanation of what is going on SatuSuro (talk) 00:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I wanted to save time. If I move the images, the mine categories will stay empty. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:11, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a chance that I will be able to access either plans/maps/images related specifically to those mines - but not over night - thanks for considering the problem! ~ SatuSuro (talk) 09:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check my edits ;) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are generous - I am time challenged - I have about 40 mines i have info about in western tasmania I have never got around to writing up - maybe this will be a motivation... thanks SatuSuro (talk) 13:55, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, yw --Chris.urs-o (talk) 14:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit and other similar edits: I'm not sure how a shot of the peak from Paradise is a "remote view" of Rainier. Paradise is fully one mile up the mountain. - Jmabel ! talk 16:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly for the shots from the Nisqually River near Cougar Rock, only slightly lower down the mountain. I wouldn't usually use the term "remote view" for any view taken on the mountain itself. - Jmabel ! talk 16:53, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's the full mountain. The other pictures from Seattle are similar. If u r on the mountain, than u can't see it whole anymore. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jmabel. I propose using the definition that remote views are taken outside of the Narional Park (almost all of which is on lava that was produced by the Mountain). I used cat-a-lot to sort the pictures by this definition. — hike395 (talk) 18:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Hike395. Cheers ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop the nonsense edits you are currently doing or is it a failed bot test? I'll block you if this doesn't stop! --Denniss (talk) 20:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry: I wanted to use the gadget cat-a-lot to add Category:Photographs by Hsu Hong Lin,

it did Category:pictures and images instead :[ Sorry. My mistake, I think but I'm not sure. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You placed ~1600 images in this cat, please find a way to revert this. And be a little more careful in the future. Plus it's not permitted to run a bot from your user account, especially if it's doing that many edits per minute. It should be temporarly acceptable to repair the images. --Denniss (talk) 20:38, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cat-a-lot is a Gadget, an option on the Special:Preferences, on the top menu. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know this gadget but I don't know how a human is able to do 500 edits in five minutes. --Denniss (talk) 21:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The gadget adds categories to search results too. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 21:10, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Chris.urs-o,
vielen Dank für Deine Grüße zum Neuen Jahr. Auch ich wünsche Dir für 2013 alles erdenklich Gute.
Orchi (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Danke. Falls es Dich interessiert. Dalton Holland Baptista hat Heute Bilder auf Commons gespeichert: Category:Campylocentrum robustum, Category:Campylocentrum pauloense, Category:Campylocentrum aromaticum, Campylocentrum rhomboglossum (Category:Campylocentrum aff. iglesiasii), Category:Campylocentrum densiflorum und Category:Campylocentrum crassirhizum ;) Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...ich bin froh, dass er wieder "on board" ist. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 19:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...Ich bin froh, dass Du froh bist ;) Kannst Du mal schauen:

• Campylocentrum rhomboglossum (Category:Campylocentrum aff. iglesiasii), in Category:Campylocentrum oder Category:Campylocentrum aromaticum ???
• File:121215 Fata Morgana Prague unknown 007.JPG

Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...ich wär (nochmals) froh, wenn ich das wüsste. Ich hab mir die cat mal auf die Hauptseite gelegt, damit ich sie nicht vergesse. Das Dendrobium ist wahrscheinlich ein Cultivar. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Danke --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 08:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year[reply]

Dear Chris, I think you are taking on a rather huge job which I have to thank you for although I am not sure about what purpose that might serve. I usually get to find my uploads (currently >12000 files and will increase over time) by using the search option. Also not all of the images are mine. Some are uploaded on behalf of others and still others from old books. Shyamal (talk) 07:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I wanted the butterflies from India only ;) But I wasn't expecting more than 12,000 files ;) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:PHOTOGRAPHS BY USER: KLOTZ

Thanks for helping out with User:KLOTZ's uploads - adding categories, trimming borders, etc. Roy is an older gentleman who has been taking photos for many, many, many decades, but has a bit of trouble with some newer technologies. He's been uploading pix of cultural heritage sites (NRHP-listed) in the US, which I've been able to help him with, He's taken photos in almost every US county and in over 150 countries. He mostly goes alphabetically (by US states so far) and is up to "Australia" now on his countries list. Some of the photos document heritage sites that have since been destroyed, making him a favorite at WP:NRHP (on en).

Any further help would be greatly appreciated!

Sincerely, Smallbones (talk) 20:23, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yw ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please have a look at Category_talk:Calamagrostis_epigejos. You did the move back in 2011. I could not find any discussion, not even a edit summary, where you stated your arguments in favor of the move. Please note that in scientific literature this species is referred to as Calamagrostis epigejos. Regards, --Burkhard (talk) 19:53, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bist du dir sicher das es Müstair ist und nicht Münster VS? Moutier schliess ich jetzt auch mal aus.--Bobo11 (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ach ja, Müster (Westfallen) so wie der Bot das zugeordet hat ist es sicher nicht. --Bobo11 (talk) 18:34, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Das sind Engadiner Häuser. Ich wusste nicht, dass es Münster VS gibt (kein de.WP Artikel).

File:Ortschaftsbild von Münster mit einer Gruppe Soldaten - CH-BAR - 3238735.tif

File:Dorfbild von Münster mit einigen Soldaten - CH-BAR - 3238736.tif

Referenz: [15]

Val Müstair ist an der Grenze, Müstair war bis 1949 Münster. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Das sich das bis 1949 so schrieb ist mir auch klar, aber eben auch, dass Münster als Ortsname in der Schweiz sehr Mehrdeutig ist, denn Moutier heisst auf deutsch auch Münster. PS: den de: Münster VS gibt es. --Bobo11 (talk) 19:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, es gibt de:Münster VS, aber kein Category:Münster VS Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Chris, besten Dank für das Foto, das du als File:Solothrun.3816.JPG hochgeladen hast und einen weniger oft fotografierten (da touristisch ja nicht so interessanten) Teil von Solothurn zeigt :-) - Ich denke, das Foto wurde vom Bürgerspital aus aufgenommen? Als Einheimischer habe ich die Beschreibung mal präzisiert. Da der Dateiname einen Tippfehler hatte ("Solothrun"), habe ich es nach File:Solothurn Schoengruen Zuchwil.jpg verschoben. Gestumblindi (talk) 22:46, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ich sehe gerade, du hast noch mehr Fotos gemacht... bei File:Kapelle.3828.JPG habe ich die Beschreibung auch schon mal ergänzt, es handelt sich um Kapelle und Scheune des Sommersitzes "Weisse Laus", dieses Foto ist nützlich für de:Liste der Kulturgüter in Solothurn, wo ein Foto für diesen Eintrag noch fehlte :-) Gestumblindi (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte, das Laub hat gestört. Ich möchte es im Februar wiederholen, Aarau und Solothurn. Kannst Du File:Solothurn.4151.JPG auch brauchen? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:07, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, really appreciated. --Ilario (talk) 14:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WLM CH (Deutsch) Liebe/r Teilnehmer/in des Wettbewerbs Wiki Loves Monuments CH 2014, Herzlichen Dank dass du zu Wiki4Alps beigetragen und deine Bilder mit der ganzen Welt geteilt hast. Im Rahmen des diesjährigen Wettbewerbs sind über 2500 Bilder von Kulturgütern in alpinen Regionen auf Wikimedia Commons geladen worden. Und die Jury ist daran, diese Bilder zu bewerten. Wir kommen so bald wie möglich wieder auf Dich zu, um die Gewinner bekannt zu geben. Auf der Wettbewerbsseite http://wiki4alps.ch findet ihr alle notwendigen Informationen, oder ihr könnt euch auch gerne an info@wikimedia.ch wenden. Mit den besten Grüssen, Das Organisationskomittee

WLM CH (Français) Cher participant-e au concours WLM CH 2014, Nous vous remercions de votre contribution à Wiki4Alps, et de partager vos photos avec le monde entier! Le concours a réuni plus de 2500 photos du patrimoine culturel des Alpes et le jury a commencé l'évaluation. Nous reviendrons bientôt pour annoncer les gagnants. Vous trouverez sur le site web du concours http://wiki4alps.ch ou envoyez un e-mail à info@wikimedia.ch. Avec nos salutations les meilleures, le comité d'organisation.

WLM CH (English) Dear participants to the WLM CH contest 2014, Thank you for having contributed to Wiki4Alps and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! The contest gathered more than 2,500 pictures of cultural heritage objects of the Alps and the jury is currently evaluating them. We will come back soon to announce the winners. You will find the contest's website http://wiki4alps.ch necessary information there or you may write to us using the following address: info@wikimedia.ch. With our warmest regards, The organising committee

WLM CH (Italiano) Gentile partecipante a Wiki Loves Monuments CH 2014 Grazie per aver contribuito a Wiki4Alps e per aver condiviso le tue fotografie con tutto il mondo! Il concorso ha collezionato più di 2.500 fotografie del patrimonio culturale delle Alpi e la giuria ha cominciato la valutazione. Presto saranno noti i vincitori. Per ulteriori informazioni si prega di visitare il sito web http://wiki4alps.ch o potete scrivere a info@wikimedia.ch. Con i nostri migliori saluti, Il Comitato Organizzatore

WLM CH (Deutsch) Liebe Teilnehmerin/Lieber Teilnehmer von Wiki Loves Monuments CH Gerne bedanken wir uns hiermit noch einmal für deine Teilnahme am Wettbewerb WLM. Die Liste der Gewinner kann nun auf unserer Website sowie auch auf Wikimedia Commons eingesehen werden. Wir gratulieren den Gewinnerinnen und Gewinnern, die wir persönlich kontaktieren werden, ganz herzlich. Der Verein Wikimedia CH trifft gerade die Vorbereitungen für Wiki Loves Earth 2015, ein Fotowettbewerb rund um das Thema Natur und Nationalparks. Dieser neue Fotowettbewerb wird bereits am 1.Mai 2015 starten. Wir freuen uns sehr, wenn ihr wieder mit dabei seid! Mit besten Grüssen, Das Organisationsteam

WLM CH (Français) Cher/chère participant(e) au concours Wiki Loves Monuments CH, La liste des gagnants est disponible sur le site ainsi que sur son pendant Wikimedia Commons! Nos félicitations aux vainqueurs, qui seront contactés séparément. Wikimedia CH se prépare maintenant pour Wiki Loves Earth 2015, un concours photographique consacré à la nature et aux parcs, qui débutera le 1er mai prochain et auquel nous vous invitons à participer! Meilleurs messages, Le Comité d’organisation

WLM CH (English) Dear Wiki Loves Monuments CH participant, We would like to inform you that the list of winners has been published on our website as well as on Wikimedia Commons - our congratulations to the winners, who will be contacted individually. Wikimedia CH is now gearing up for Wiki Loves Earth 2015, a photo contest dedicated to the nature and to parks. This new contest will start on May 1st, 2015: feel free to join! With our best regards, The organization's committee

WLM CH (Italiano) Gentile partecipante a Wiki Loves Monuments CH Vogliamo informarti che la lista dei vincitori é stata pubblicata sul nostro sito come anche su Wikimedia Commons - le nostre congratulazioni ai vincitori, che saranno contattati individualmente. Wikimedia CH sta ora organizzando u nuovo concorso per Wiki Loves Earth 2015 dedicato alla natura e ai parchi. Questo concorso inizierà l'1 maggio 2015: ci auguriamo di avervi tra i nostri concorrenti! Saluti, Il Comitato Organizzatore

Was soll der Sinn dieser Umkategorisierung sein? Geplant war, das Museum von Kerzers nach Kallnach zu zügeln, nicht umgekehrt. Da das Projekt aber gestorben ist wird es im Kürze weder das eine noch das andere mehr geben. Also? --Хрюша ^?? _Kerzers_?" class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">08:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bahnmuseum Kerzers (BMK). BMK existiert, Bahnmuseum Kallnach ist ein Traum. Die Kategorie Bahnmuseum Kallnach habe ich erst später gesehen. Sorry --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:28, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Chris. I noticed that you added Template:PhotographsYear to your user page. You might not have known, but doing that adds your user page to some categories that shouldn't contain user pages. I wonder if you would remove the template. If you want it there, maybe you could substitute it, and then remove the categories that it adds. That would be appreciated. If you have questions about this, feel free to ask. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 05:40, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oki doki boss ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:43, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) --Auntof6 (talk) 06:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Chris.urs-o, Dir ist ja zwischenzeitlich auch schon aufgefallen, dass die Bildkategorien von anerkannten Mineralen ohne Angabe von Gründen aus der Hauptkategorie Mineral entfernt wurden.
Leider ist mein englisch nicht so gut, daher meine Bitte: Könntest Du unter anderem User:Edgar181 mal deutlich erklären, dass alle von der IMA/CNMNC anerkannten Minerale auch in der Category:Minerals stehen sollen (nein, eigentlich müssen)? Die Unterkategorie Category:Minerals by contained chemical element‎ ist nur eine zusätzliche Einteilung für Benutzer, die Minerale nach chemischer Zusammensetzung sortiert suchen (ähnlich wie Minerals by continent‎, Minerals by habit‎ u.ä.). Die Kategorie nach chemischer Zusammensetzung ist kein Ersatz für die Hauptkategorie Minerals!
Zudem werden die in der Hauptkategorie stehenden, anerkannten Minerale von einem Bilder-Bot durchsucht, um Mineral-Kategorien mit Bildern zu finden, zu denen es noch keinen Artikel gibt. Jetzt wurden durch die unsinnigen Änderungen von Edgar181 schon wieder zahlreiche Bildhinweise aus der Wartungsseite vom WikiProjekt Minerale entfernt. So kann man nicht arbeiten, weil völlig unnötig wichtige Informationen vernichtet werden :-( Viele Grüße -- Ra'ike T C 20:37, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oki doki Chef Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iolanda Pensa ist jetzt fertig mit Wikimania 2016. Ich werde sie noch einmal über Bilder anfragen. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris, can I ask you why you did this? Have you seen Commons:Categories#Over-categorization? Why didn't you just add category Category:Slovak Paradise National Park to Category:Prielom Hornádu? Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 19:03, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. 'Categories:1920-29 photographs' had 200 files with 'Slovak Paradise National Park'. So I added the category. But I should have added it only to black & white images. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 01:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see them! I'm gonna try to categorize them to more specific categories. I've reverted some your edits similar to one I mentioned, I hope it's OK :) Keep on doing a good job, categorization is needed here! Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Categories:1920-29 photographs: There is a river that goes from Slovakia to Poland, do you have any idea? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 01:50, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Chris.urs-o, welche Absichten hast du mit Category:19th century photochrome prints of the German Empire? Sie ist bisher nicht in Ortskategorien eingebunden. Die Bilder, die du dorthin verschoben hast, würden in die Category:19th century photochrome prints of Germany passen, weil die Orte auch heute noch in Deutschland liegen. Die Kategorien von Orten, die ehemals zum Deutschen Reich gehörten, heute jedoch nicht mehr zu Deutschland, die damit am ehesten nach "photochrome prints of the German Empire" passen würden, hast du jedoch unter "photochrome prints of Germany" belassen. Wie sieht also dein Plan aus? Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 07:32, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Sitacuisses. Es geht nur um Handling, bitte nicht so eng sehen. Photochrome Prints sind angeblich vor 1890 und 1910 (vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg, Zweiten Deutschen Reich). Jetzt habe ich dort nur TIF Type Dateien gelagert, ich könnte die Kategorie auch als Zwischenlager benutzen. Die TIF Type Dateien stören nur. Langsam, es sind 10 000 Dateien; ich kann sowieso nicht alles selber machen. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 09:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mal langsam. Weder im Titel noch in der Beschreibung der Kategorie steht etwas von tif. Ich erkenne immer noch kein tragfähiges Konzept. Und als persönliches Zwischenlager sind öffentliche Kategorien nicht gedacht. Also, was soll das bitte werden, wenn es fertig ist? --Sitacuisses (talk) 10:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Photochrom prints collection ist eine Hilfskategorie. Sie hat die 'Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division collection', 'Galerie Muriset collection' and 'Howard L. Gottlieb collection'.

Ich habe das Gefühl, dass einige Bilder noch nicht sortiert sind.

Wäre es Dir recht, wenn wir 19th century photochrome prints of Austro-Hungarian Empire‎, 19th century photochrome prints of the German Empire‎, 19th century photochrome prints of the Russian Empire‎, 19th century photochrome prints of the Ottoman Empire‎ und 19th century photochrome prints of the UK and Ireland‎ im hidden modus umschalten?

Konzept

• Austro-Hungarian Empire‎
  • Austria
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Croatia
  • Hungary
  • Slovenia
• German Empire
  • Germany
  • Poland
• Russian Empire
  • Georgia
  • Ukraine
  • Russia
• Ottoman Empire
  • Turkey
• UK and Ireland
  • Channel Islands
  • England
  • Ireland
  • Northern Ireland
  • Scotland
  • Wales

Alles braucht sehr viel Zeit. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ich fürchte, Du verlässt Dich dabei zu sehr auf die Dateinamen. In den Dateien heißt es wohl Hartz, gemeint ist aber der Harz. Die Aufteilung in Anhalt sehe ich auch problematisch. Ballenstedt beispielsweise ist unter Hartz eingeordnet, war zu dieser Zeit aber auch Anhalt. Der Harz ist unter anderem auch ein Teil von Niedersachsen. --Migebert (talk) 08:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, das sind Hundert Jahre alte Begriffe. Photochrome Prints sind Zeitkapseln. Ich sehe keine Photochrome Prints aus Niedersachsen. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 08:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Im Ordner Harz (Danke für die Umbenennung) liegen auch Dateien aus Bad Harzburg, Bad Grund, Göttingen, Goslar und mehr, das ist der niedersächsische Teil des Harzes. --Migebert (talk) 09:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Danke. Ich haben ein Beitrag gemacht, Andere werden es schon ändern. Gruss --Chris.urs-o (talk) 09:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Es gibt übrigens schon eine Parallelstruktur in Category:Germany on photochrome prints, in der Kopien der gleichen Bilder liegen. Aber die hast Du sicher auch schon gesehen. --Migebert (talk) 20:49, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ja es gibt eine Parallelstruktur. Ob es die genau gleichen Bilder sind? Ich wollte nur die Category:Photochrom prints collection sortieren, in Hilfskategorien. Es geht mir auch nicht um England, Germany, Italy, Spain, Austria und Hungary, sondern um den Rest. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:03, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are all members of Category:Photochrom pictures also implictly members of Category:Photochrom prints collection?

If they are not (and I don't believe they are) then your edits to remove that category are a problem. As I understand Category:Photochrom prints collection, this is for a specific US collection of such generic Photocrom prints, i.e. it is a sourcing category, not just a media type. As such, it should be preserved. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:46, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Photochrom prints collection (United States Library of Congress's Prints and Photographs division, LCCN), quote: "The Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division assembled this collection from two sources that provided prints in mint condition. In 1985, the prints of Europe and the Middle East were purchased from the Galerie Muriset in Switzerland. In 2004, Howard L. Gottlieb generously donated the North American views".

I am just building a categorisation tree, because some pictures are not categorized yet. I am difusing 'Category:Photochrom prints collection', 'Category:19th century photochrome prints of the German Empire' and 'Category:19th century photochrome prints of Germany'. There is a parallel categorisation tree for all Category:Photochrom pictures (Category:Photochrome prints by country). Category:Photochrom prints collection had 10k images, this is useless. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:11, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photochrome pictures of North America are missing. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:31, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Photochrom prints collection should not be diffused, as it has no valid subcategories.

Category:Photochrom pictures has sub categories of Category:19th century photochrome prints of Belgium‎ etc. (although maybe this should be "Photochrom"?). This category could usefully be diffused, on the basis of location of subject.

The problem is, as I noted and which you don't appear to have addressed, is that the collection category is not parallel to the pictures category. They are not duplicates, one is only for prints from a specific source collection. That is different, disconnected from the geographic categories, and ought to be preserved. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:19th century photochrome prints of Belgium‎ (sourcing category) and Category:Belgium on photochrome prints (media category)
• Category:Photochrom prints collection: if it is a sourcing category, then it should have been hidden. I can not review 10k pictures, without moving them to subcategories. We could rename 'Category:19th century photochrome prints of XYZ' to valid subcategories. Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Roumania and some typos were forgotten. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• I organized 'Category:19th century photochrome prints of XYZ' to only have -LCCNnnnnn photochrome prints. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 13:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, right, I see. If Category:19th century photochrome prints of Belgium‎ really is a sourcing category, and only contains sub-children of Category:Photochrom prints collection, and if there is a parallel structure of Category:Belgium on photochrome prints as a location, then I see what you're doing.

This is rather unclear though. There's nothing in the category names to indicate their different function. Wouldn't it be clearer with a note on each category page, and maybe even renaming them? As the scope is the same, this rename could just be done as a 'bot move, so wouldn't be too difficult. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Category:Photochrom prints collection might not be a valid category as Category:Photochrom pictures from the Library of Congress exists too. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is not easy to know who is who on Prussia (East & West) = Poland & Kaliningrad, and on the Austro-Hungarian Empire. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Forest_texture has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Takeaway (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2016 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Chris.urs-o,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2016 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eleventh edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2016) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 20 April 2017, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
--Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 08:42, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Seasons_in_Einsiedeln has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 04:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am contacting all active commons users I can find more interested in the management of pictures related to scientific topics. If you have time, could you take a look in Commons:Village_pump#Upcoming_Wiki_Science_Competition. Thank you.--Alexmar983 (talk) 07:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional clothes by country has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

E4024 (talk) 00:31, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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 ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Danioth.5260.JPG

And also:

• File:Danioth.5261.JPG

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 11:11, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19th century photochrome prints of Moscow has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Retired electrician (talk) 09:05, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear uploader of Wiki Loves Earth in Switzerland and Wiki Loves Monuments in Switzerland, we would like to remind you that Wiki Science Competition 2021 has started in the whole world. It is now open in your country until December, 15th.

If you want to take part in WSC2021, please consult this page. There are different categories that can be used (you might therefore have something already interesting in your archive). Prizes can be allocated for the 1st and 2nd positions in every category.

If you are an expert user, we remind you that the images uploaded within the deadline can be included in any case in their national category even if not uploaded with the main interface by simply adding the national category.

If you take part, please consider improving the description in English of your files, since such description is what the international jury will use to evaluate them at the following step. World finalists will be finalized after March 2022.

Sorry for bothering you and have a nice wiki.

Message discussed here. If you do not want to receive these messages in the future, please unsubscribe from this list

Social media: Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Wiki Science Competition
Hashtag: #WSC2021 #WikiScience #WikiScience2021

Alexmar983 (promotion team and academic committee) using MediaWiki message delivery--18:52, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ralph.hospenthal.8.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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 ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Lascaress (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]