User talk:Reisio/Commons:Archive1

Debian Open Use logos
Hi Reisio. If you think the Debian Open Use logos are not free, please list them on Deletion requests. They aren't candidates for speedy deletion, since they aren't obviously non-free. dbenbenn | talk 12:32, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Flag naming conventions
Hi Reisio. I'm curious why you reverted my change at Switzerland and elsewhere. Perhaps you are not aware of the flag naming convention here on the Commons. All flags are named "Flag of FOO", in English. There was some discussion a while ago about using "native language" or country codes instead of English, but it was decided such a system would be too complicated. Hence, Image:Confoederatio Helvetica-flag.svg will soon be deleted, since it doesn't conform to the convention. User:dbenbenn 22:49, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi Reisio. I'm curious why you reverted my change at Switzerland and elsewhere.
 * I was curious why you reverted my changes, as you did not give a reason. One is PD, one is CC-by-SA - as I've said it's hard to imagine a situation when PD would not be preferred.
 * Perhaps you are not aware of the flag naming convention here on the Commons.
 * Indeed I am not - and still am not. So far searching Commons (just a cursory search), I've only found a talk page or two with you claiming there's such a convention.
 * All flags are named "Flag of FOO", in English.
 * If that were true, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
 * There was some discussion a while ago about using "native language" or country codes instead of English, but it was decided such a system would be too complicated.
 * I was not part of that discussion, but if there is a formal guideline somewhere I will happily conform.
 * Hence, Image:Confoederatio Helvetica-flag.svg will soon be deleted, since it doesn't conform to the convention.
 * So would you recommend I just replace Image:Flag of Switzerland.svg?
 * &brvbar; Reisio 23:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

"Flag of Switzerland.svg" should be the most accurate possible representation of the Swiss flag. It appears that the current version by ZScout, and your version at "Confoederatio Helvetica-flag.svg", differ only in the color. ZScout's version uses Pantone 485, apparently according to. Do you have any evidence that pure red is a more accurate color? If so, please change the color of "Flag of Switzerland.svg", and update the image description page.

(By the way, at Switzerland, you changed Image:Switzerland flag 300.png to Image:Confoederatio Helvetica-flag.svg, which I then changed to Image:Flag of Switzerland.svg. Hence, I did not revert you.)  User:dbenbenn 15:55, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * "Flag of Switzerland.svg" should be the most accurate possible representation of the Swiss flag. It appears that the current version by ZScout, and your version at "Confoederatio Helvetica-flag.svg", differ only in the color.  ZScout's version uses Pantone 485, apparently according to .  Do you have any evidence that pure red is a more accurate color?  If so, please change the color of "Flag of Switzerland.svg", and update the image description page.
 * That firmenfahnen.ch page doesn't even get the dimensions of the cross correct, and the dimensions of the cross are the only thing that have ever been specifically defined (besides that the flag be a red square with a white cross inside it). The exact red and the space between the edge of the cross and the edge of the flag have never been defined.
 * Originally my image was approximately the same color as Image:Flag of Switzerland.svg, but after someone living in Switzerland told me the bright red was much more prevalent and after reviewing some admin.ch pages, I went ahead and made it bright.
 * I did not revert you.
 * You did all over en.wikipedia.org.
 * &brvbar; Reisio 23:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * By the way - if such a situation happens again, it'd probably be better if you wait until no articles are linking to an image before you replace it with the redundant cross. 2¢ &brvbar; Reisio 00:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * "Of course, there's no hard and fast rule"... /me rolls eyes &brvbar; Reisio 14:44, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

PD Request
All images you asked for me to put in the public domain have been placed into public domain. Zscout370 02:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Greece.svg
I already cleaned up this flag, so you can move onto other flags. About the Argentine one, most of the file size comes from the sun-emblem. Zscout370 04:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Flags
You might want to add your name to the list of participants. Cheers! ナイトスタリオン ✉ 06:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * And I wanted to congratulate you on your great work with updating the SVG flags to look the way it should. It was on my to-do list eventually, but it would have been some time until I'd have learned SVG and had time to actually to it. Five barnstars of your choice to you. ;) [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 09:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks. It's a compulsion. :p &brvbar; Reisio 12:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * nods And a very useful one. ;) [[Image:European-Austrian flag hybrid.svg|20px]] ナイトスタリオン ✉ 13:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Manx Flag
I went ahead and fixed the Swedish flag, but I've got something to do for you if you're feeling bored: The Image:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg has completely wrong proportions, which apparently should be 1:2 instead of 7:10. I also suspect the colours should be more like Image:Man flag 300.png or some of the other flags listed on Category:Flags of Isle of Man. &mdash;Gabbe 03:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * http://www.gov.im/isleofman/facts.xml has the flag around 7:10, so that is probably why the flag is like that. I am going to try and look for a construction sheet online. Zscout370 03:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Italy.svg
After reading the talk page I have unlocked this image. Thuresson 03:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Switzerland within 2to3.png
There's no redundant image. --Saperaud 20:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

PD Tag
Please explain your position some more on Village_pump -- Duesentrieb(?!) 02:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello
Hi, I realize that the situation on the images I have uploaded has become pretty bad during the last few days and my reason has been rather hard to prove here. As I have written on the deletion requests section, I am not a photographer. Compare the Pentium picture listed previously to the ones currently up for deletion. I do not know how else to prove, but the image quality itself is pretty apparent, and I hope you can appreciate that at least. -- WB 06:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

COM:DEL
From my talk page

''Please do not discuss the request in Polish. Thuresson 17:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)''
 * Why not? &brvbar; Reisio 02:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe because not all involved users and Admins are able to understand polish language? --Denniss 17:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * So? They can ignore it or take 30 seconds to find an online Polish translator.  It's idiotic to have a Commons where only English is allowed - people may as well stick to the local Wikipedias for their images.  Following Language policy (which follows common sense, IMO) I wish people would not discourage the use of languages other than English.  Deletion requests affects all of us regardless of the languages we can articulate in. &brvbar; Reisio 00:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * None of the polish-speaking administrators are active on Deletion requests. It is very difficult for administrators who don't understand Polish to decide what to do with a request if they can't understand the arguments for or against keeping the file. Thuresson 00:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Undo unecessary?
Hello, I just noticed that you reverted one of my edits again. I understand you have doubts in me because of that issue, but I got rid of that comment because they just put even further doubts on me, and I found that comment rather unnecessary to be put up there. Do you have any questions for me, etc? I'm more than happy to answer them. So leave them at the talk page. Thank you. -- WB 02:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If you want people to not see you as suspicious...don't do so many suspicious things. After being up for nine days, many people must have read it and they probably expect it to continue to be there (at least until archival). &brvbar; Reisio 04:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I understand you concern. That image deletion request would have been really suspicious for some people since as other people have stated, it's hard to prove. Especially after I added them for deletion right before the other deletion. But I hope you also realize that I'm also contributing here to make this place a better place. If you have seen my contributions list, I've been dilligently archiving and actively editting in places like the deletion requests. I will continue to contribute. That deletion thing is probably the only weird thing I'll ask to Commons. Not that I am saying that Commons should grant all my wishes, but yeah. As other users have suggested, I hope you can "assume good faith" and etc. Thank you for your reply. -- WB 06:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

About the Batman image
On, you mentioned people can draw whatever they like. Shouldn't we be considering the copyrights of the characters themselves? It's basically a reproduction. It's somewhat similar to the Firefox deletion request, which got deleted. You may want to read this court case about the "re-packaged" Seinfeld book and this general information about graphic characters. -- WB 07:44, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also " In Walt Disney Productions v. Air Pirates the court appeared to commingle copyright and trademark law infringement criteria by stating that the Disney characters used by the defendants had "achieved a high degree of 'recognition' and 'identification'" and that these elements helped make the characters protectable under copyright law." Those Batman images are hard to mistake. Thus falling into the protectable category. -- WB 07:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Deletion requests and redundancy
Do please checkout Category:Redundant. &brvbar; Reisio 22:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I wasn't aware that such a page existed. The symbols have now been listed there. --Fibonacci 02:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Uploading error
I was trying to upload an SVG file to Image:Flag of Wallis and Futuna.svg, but got the following error: "This file contains HTML or script code that may be erroneously interpreted by a web browser." The code contained in the SVG file was:

 <!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/DTD/svg10.dtd"> WALLIS AND FUTUNA           

What's the problem? Thanks for your help! &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 21:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The  element, most likely. Swap it out for  .  The JavaScript (ECMAScript) stuff might cause problems, too, but I know   isn't allowed. &brvbar; Reisio 21:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flag of the French Southern and Antarctic Lands.svg
This flag should probably be re-uploaded as Image:Flag of the French Southern Territories.svg, since en:French Southern Territories is where enwiki's article is... And it should be added to your table, ne? &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 07:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd have to look into the name some. The actual official French name (as the en page says) is translated much closer to "French Southern and Antarctic Lands" than it is to "French Southern Territories".  I know the precident is to have it match the en article's name, but I'm not sure it really matters when it's already this close (and is actually more accurate).  You might take it up with the WikiProject if you want more input.


 * Presently my table only has places from en:list of countries listed, but perhaps it is time to start expanding it. Maybe it's time to ask the WikiProject if taking it out of my namespace and promoting more participation would be a good idea, too. Hrmmm. &brvbar; Reisio 08:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

welcome
hi Reisio,

I completely forgot: welcome to the WikiProject Tree of Life project!

TeunSpaans 19:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) &brvbar; Reisio 19:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Argentina Flag
I would like to know why are you changing the colors of Image:Flag of Argentina.svg to the non-official colors? BarceX 20:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * You should provide summaries, otherwise people have to guess the motivation for your actions. My guess was that you changed little for no reason. &brvbar; Reisio 21:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You should assume good faith and not pretend that you are the only authority in flags. --Angus 05:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It has nothing to do with AGF and everything to do with edit summaries. With no explanation, the flag he uploaded was nothing but a slightly different image, one that didn't look as good and used more code. I don't read minds. &brvbar; Reisio 06:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Just look at the description of the file that says "Modified by w:es:Barcex with the correct blue." and at Image talk:Flag of Argentina.svg Thanks for putting the colors back. Regards, BarceX 21:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your table, Reisio, the ratio has been clarified now, so you can tag it is complete, I think. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 11:55, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah right. :) &brvbar; Reisio 15:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

redundant tag
Hi. Made I a mistake changing the tag PD-users with tag PD-self? I thought that the first ws redundant and can be delected. Can you explane me where is my mistake, please? -- RED DEVIL  666  23:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Where's it said that PD-users is "redundant" and should be deleted? &brvbar; Reisio 23:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

there is the same license indication: PD-Self: I, the creator of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. And PD-users: This image has been (or is hereby) released into the public domain by its creators. Differenr sentence, but (imho) is the same idea. -- RED DEVIL  666  23:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Then there's no point in changing it. &brvbar; Reisio 23:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I thought that this tag is redundant of PD-self. On Commons, we have over 120 tags of PD. I think that a redundant template that is used only for one image isn't necessary. -- RED DEVIL  666  23:29, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Tell that to the idiots that saw fit to shun PD. &brvbar; Reisio 09:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

My idea is that that template must be delected because is redundant and is usend only for two images (where is possible to put PD-self). Why you don't want delete it? -- RED DEVIL  666  09:46, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

PD and PD-self
rv to PD...changing the colors doesn't really make it all yours (or anyone else's)


 * My purpose was only to replace the old copyright tag with a proper one since it was asked in the old PD tag. Since user Zscout370 removed the OpenClipart tag and released his redrawn image as PD I assumed I could change the tag afterwards. I didn't mean to make it my own work; that's why I didn't use PD-user tag. If it's not allowed for other people to change the tags than the original creator, I'll stop changing them. –Vzb83 16:55, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that alone, either, sorry. This is one of the reasons I opposed the ridiculous move to deprecate PD - some things are just "Public Domain". &brvbar; Reisio 17:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Colors

 * A) I used Orange, not red.  For that very reason.  Go read Image:Symbol delete vote.svg for the explanation
 * B) Same goes for the blue one, and why it's not green.
 * C) I didn't go in and change all the users, only those that asked about it.
 * D) Some people appreciated my designing the pictures

Why do you have to be an ass about it? en:WP:CIVIL Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 04:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, these sort of icons have been used on Commons for some time. See Featured picture candidates Cary "Bastique" Bass  parler voir 04:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * A, B: The specific hue is immaterial - the colors (1) will become associated with something and (2) are distractingly distinct to everything else on the page (& if it really bothers you, you should know that not all gamma configurations [or mental perceptions or visual acuities, etc., for that matter] are exactly the same - and one popular dictionary definition of orange is " red dish yellow").
 * C: I didn't say you changed all the users['].
 * D: I didn't claim otherwise.
 * Why do&hellip;: It's just text.
 * Furthermore&hellip;: Also immaterial; they've not been used on Deletion requests for some time. &brvbar; Reisio 05:25, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Venezuela.svg
You should give some very reliable source that states the national flag of Venezuela doesn't have coats of arms in it, because FOTW and website of the government of Venezuela are using the version with coats of arms as the national flag. Also, the previous version has deformed stars not positioned corretly (all the stars are made to have same height and width which is not correct). All the Venezuelan flags I've seen have smaller stars and the government site is using the version with all the stars facing upwards. I don't oppose making the stars face out of the arc, though, as long as it's done accurately. The version I uploaded has the shape of stars correct to 42 decimals and the position calculated to 9–10 decimals. –Vzb83 10:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It does have a CoA, to my knowledge - which is what Image:Flag of Venezuela 1930-2006.svg is for. You'll have to read Image talk:Flag of Venezuela.svg to piece together the current mess involved.  As for the stars, normally I'd agree with you, but Zscout370 is apparently part of some special flag group that knows all about it (see: Image talk:Flag of Venezuela 1930-2006.svg). &brvbar; Reisio 17:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images
Hi Reisio. You may be interested in Commons:Village pump/Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images. pfctdayelise (translate?) 00:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

True Flag of Italy
Don't change Image:True Flag of Italy.jpg. As per Village_pump, this image is legitimate and used to show a point.

Reverting it is a vandalism, and will require protection. (Answer here, I am watching this page) --FlagUploader 12:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe it was being used to prove a point, but now you're using it to waste people's time and effort here and at en.wikipedia.org and probably elsewhere. Want to prove a point?  Leave everything else alone - otherwise it will be reverted. &brvbar; Reisio 13:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

If you don't like something on en.wikipedia, discuss it there. Here leave this image alone.--FlagUploader 13:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * All the Wikipedias and Commons are intertwined in such cases - discussion should be done here. &brvbar; Reisio 13:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wrong. The fact people on Commons agreed to call an image "Flag of Italy" does oblige all the Wikipedias to use that image as Flag of the Italian Republic.--FlagUploader 13:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * It's irrelevant anyways. I am both a user and contributor here at commons and at en and various other Wikipedias, and it's my right to revert your idiocy.  Luckily I have every other sane person to help back me up...you only have sock puppets. &brvbar; Reisio 13:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do not insult other people because they do not agree with you. Calling people idiots doen't help anyone. Please keep the discussion businesslike. If that's not possible, stop discussing. NielsF 14:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * What should I call someone with multiple sock puppets that refuses to bow to consensus? &brvbar; Reisio 01:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't classify his beliefs and/or arguments idiocy and insane, that's all I ask; if discussion doesn't help, stop discussing. I for one find nor his nor your arguments insane or idiocy as colour is a difficult thing to come to terms about. NielsF 01:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:I and Flags Project
You defined a fairly trivial utility template i and also y (not examined) of which the former is only used on two pages.
 * I have nefarious designs () on said name for a very useful text utility template on en.wp of the same name that I'd like to port over as part of the interwiki category matching sisterprojects work. It merely calls indent with a default of three spaces, and I've took pains to illustrate it's effect here following with long calls, but it's true use is in the simplicity of being so brief.   So for interwiki compatibility reasons and would like you to consider either (A.) subst'ing your current template and supplanting it with the interwiki ported version     or (B.) allowing me to move {{and thus rename) it and make fix-ups of the redirects then created to free up the interwiki sistername.     I can also do the subst if you prefer. Note how the indented paragraph above wraps within the main indented block... inheriting it's characteristic offset. Works the same for bulleted or '#' indented text blocks, so aids a lot in wikitalk page clarity by adding much needed vertical whitespace and clarity!

Why you ask? This imported 'I' is a very new template just getting around en.wp and also a useful beast in tables and especially in long talk pages to give some much needed whitespace relief on long discourses... whilst maintaining indented attributes from it's parent paragraph (See the wrapping above&mdash;and imagine those brief lines as paragraph lengths... ''where most text aligns left side with 'I have' and 'interwiki ported'... creating indented paragraphs like many books. Wonderful for long text agglomerations!). Just on talk pages alone, it would be well to maintain sisterproject compatibility, so here I am begging your approval! {{indent}}At the risk of being boringly repititious, I repeat...{{indent|3}}to illustrate 'font carry-along', which is also useful in interleaved talk discussions{{indent|3}}I have 'nefarious designs' (<g>) on said name for a very useful text utility template on en.wp of the same name that I'd like to port over as part of the interwiki category matching sisterprojects work. It merely calls indent with a default of three spaces, and I've took pains to illustrate it's effect here following with long calls, but it's true use is in the simplicity of being so brief.{{indent|3}}So for interwiki compatibility reasons and would like you to consider either (A.) subst'ing your current template and supplanting it with the interwiki ported version {{indent|3}}or (B.) allowing me to move {{and thus rename) it and make fix-ups of the redirects then created to free up the interwiki sistername. {{indent|3}}I can also do the subst if you prefer. Note how the indented paragraph above wraps within the main indented block... inheriting it's characteristic offset. Works the same for bulleted or '#' indented text blocks, so aids a lot in wikitalk page clarity by adding much needed vertical whitespace and clarity!

Whew! I trust you get the gist! All the '{indent|3}' commands in the source code can be replaced by the short and sweet '{i}' if you accomidate this request. Need I say more? Thanks for your time. // <B>Fra</B> nkB 21:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that's a pretty silly template that (1) not a lot of people will use, (2) doesn't work so hot (I apparently don't even have a suitable font on my system to support that char, (3) isn't really necessary (particularly since there's, and (4) if used will eat up server cycles.  With that said, since the page(s?) that use it are AFAIK not updated anymore, I see no problem with you substituting it out with something. &brvbar; Reisio 04:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks &mdash; just subst'd those. I'll leave the link to this page alone.
 * Alas, lost first answer, so must now redo whilst checking that file count.
 * Cannot really compare ':' to {i} as the latter indents off of whatever indented blocked text is already inforce, including '*' and '#' constructs, maintaining the prior indented margin, yet still creating eye-friendly legibility and ease to the eyes. {{indent|5}}You can't do that without getting either a new number or Bullet with those two indenting 'tools' (sic). {{indent|5}}Hence, it's extremely useful in long talks to allow numbered points for clarity, and within those divisions, provide whitespace clarity under the aforesaid numbered lead sentences. Follow-on '##' and '**' indenting still works properly afterwards as well, allowing for additional clarity when delving into esoteric matters.
 * Who cares about server cycles when we're talking about precious volunteers time? We only have so much to give, and clarity certainly aids in maximizing that quantity. Misunderstandings because of dense text have got to cost thousands of man-hours daily that could be edit time, instead of trying to track a dense paragraph. {{indent|5}} server cycles are only an issue if a reader is accessing the page, just as for any template, and being brief, this one will entail an insignificant amount of processing time compared to most any 'serious' template or images, infoboxes, et. al.{{indent|5}}Surely, as unpaid volunteers we deserve that minor consideration, especially since efficiency should increase by having more available time to give our WMF project(s).
 * The font 'square' is a recent 'bug' and seems linked to MediaWiki:Common.css/w:MediaWiki:Common.css changes recently implimented, and we're on that now that I'm back from vacation. I'd only seen it once before leaving and didn't have time to question it, but it seems to be (unusually) sporadically occuring even in some modern browsers like Firefox, but mainly a {{tlx|w2|MSIE6}} flaw. There's a whole dissertation ({{tlx|w2|User_talk:Fabartus#Re:_Halp.21}}) on some of this on my en.wikipedia talk if you care to look at behind the scenes stuff. One fix using {{tl|unicode}} has bombed, and we're on that too ({{tlx|w2|user talk:fabartus/unicode_bug}}&mdash; much of this (at least on en.wikipedia{{tlx|w2|MediaWiki_talk:Common.css#Commons:MediaWiki:Common.css_.26_interwiki_problem|1}}) all just blew up in the last 20 hours!) I've just gotten back from vacation and back in the wikisaddle.

Best regards // <B>Fra</B> nkB 20:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Abkhazia.svg
Hi, I notice that this flag does not have a copyright tag. Would it be possible for you to tag this flag with ? Thuresson 08:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Someone changed it after I tagged it. I've reverted that. &brvbar; Reisio 12:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Your suggestion
Thank you for the suggestion. Would you be satisfied if I continue these edits with that change, as well as the other changes I have proposed? Respond at my talk page. Poccil 07:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Mallorca category names
Hi, I've seen you created some parallel categories in english to the ones I created yesterday in Category:Mallorca in catalan. I didn't read Naming conventions (use English), but nobody warned me of that. I have been creating categories in Category:Mallorca in catalan since april of this year and noone has written me anything in my discussion tab.

I'm sorry I was wrong. I'll try to correct it.

Paucabot 09:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * There is no such "guideline" here on Commons; see Language policy. As you can see by the rest of Juiced lemon's talk page, he likes to play with things he doesn't understand. &brvbar; Reisio 18:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi reisio,

First, I categorized all photographs from Category:Mallorca in categories in catalan. After that I began to change them to categories written in english, because I saw this and User:Juiced lemon was doing the same. Is it correct now? Thanks, Paucabot 15:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * There was nothing wrong with using Catalan. &brvbar; Reisio 01:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

languages for categories?
hello there, you had a question once on the usage of local language over English in categories. I have started a discussion page on this topic, maybe you want to drop by and give your thoughts? Language for categories. sincerely Gryffindor 12:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Your revert war with
Revert wars are not good for the Commons. Please stop them. I have posted a message on the AN and also on User_talk:Juiced_lemon. -- Bryan ( talk to me ) 20:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Note, this was not a vandalism but an apparent dispute. I've moved this to the dispute section.  Please comment there explaining the nature of the dispute (which cannot be determined from all of these nondescriptive reverts.  Cary "Bastiq ▼ e" Bass demandez 04:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I could use a little help here. Raphael Lorenzetomsg 23:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. I'm in contact with two admins and I posted a new topic in the noticeboard. Raphael Lorenzetomsg 17:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know it and I'm involved in a recent edit ward with him. See the Administrators' noticeboard/Disputes. Lugusto • &#1161; 21:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Paper wasps-huddling.jpeg
I stumbled across the Image:Paper wasps-huddling.jpeg and saw the editwar. "Category does not exist" means, it appears as a red link and has not been edited yet, no matter if pictures are in it or not. You have to create the category. It is important to place it as a subcategory in another Category, something like Category:Insects or whatever. Since the picture can be found here: Polistes spec. the category is not necessary. --BerndH 10:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I know it means it's redlinked, but it doesn't matter, it still exists... just go there and look. All the categories and subcategories were setup before Olei decided to remove it all.  I prefer categories over little pages. &brvbar; Reisio 11:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, the category does not exist. No one has set up a category named polites. Click on it and it says: "Wikimedia Commons does not yet have a Category page called Polistes". A hierarchial category structure is one of the most important ways to navigate through commons.

The hierarchial category structure as it is now: Image:Paper wasps-huddling.jpeg |                              |                        (Category:Polistes) |                             ---     <--- here it stops

As it should be: Image:Paper wasps-huddling.jpeg |                              |                        Category:Polistes |                              |                        Category:Insecta         (or whatever fits) |                              |                        Category:Hexapoda |                              |                        Category:Arthropoda |                              |                         and so on...

See also Categories --BerndH 12:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * "No, the category does not exist. No one has set up a category named polites. Click on it and it says: "Wikimedia Commons does not yet have a Category page called Polistes"."
 * Click on it, and you see the image - that image has been categorized, and I can now find it by going to that category.
 * "A hierarchial category structure is one of the most important ways to navigate through commons."
 * I agree - that's why I prefer categories to pages (like the one Olei has setup).
 * "<--- here it stops"
 * "All the categories and subcategories were setup before Olei decided to remove it all. &hellip; &brvbar; Reisio 11:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)"
 * I don't have the time or inclination just now to undo all his changes again, so I'm just undoing what's actually on my watchlist. If you want to fix it now, be my guest, but I have to go to work.
 * &brvbar; Reisio 12:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

"that image has been categorized, and I can now find it by going to that category."
 * But the Category itself has not been categorised.

"that's why I prefer categories to pages"
 * I prefer pages but I don´t want to start this category or articles/pages/galleries discussion again. Either has to be categorised.

"I don't have the time..."
 * Ok, forget it. I was trying to explain how the category thing should work to prevent further editwars. --BerndH 15:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It doesn't have anything to do with understanding categories. &brvbar; Reisio 03:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Identification
Hi, can you identify any of the animals at http://www.flickr.com/photos/21445697@N00/ ? They were all taken in the Tampa Bay area, except for the lighthouse. I'll upload them under CC-SA if you think any are worthy. Smyjpmu 21:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Upload them with a suitable license, then ask Images missing information. &brvbar; Reisio 01:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Smyjpmu 19:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

ToL Newsletter issue 1
The inaugural newsletter of the Tree of Life project has been published. You may read the newsletter, comment on its contents, frequency and form, or unsubscribe by putting your name on my talk page.

Teun Spaans 21:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Geneva
Please stop! -- Rüdiger Wölk 00:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Um, why? &brvbar; Reisio 01:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

You can read the reason on the discussion pages of Category:Genève. -- Rüdiger Wölk 06:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Clearly I have already read those, as I've responded to each; clearly I do not find them compelling. Two per side is also not a consensus either way (nor is three to two, as it is now), and even if there were a consensus to move, it'd still be the wrong choice. ¦ Reisio 01:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

We have made this discussion for other cities before. Same is for Munich - München, Vienna - Wien, Roma - Rome. And Redirects on Categories don't work! -- Rüdiger Wölk 05:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * ...and? &brvbar; Reisio 02:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

and categories for these cities are in English. But when you check Munich, you will see the multilingual description. And when you search for images of München you will find the categroy and/or the articte/gallery. That means multilingual. Not the name of an category. -- Rüdiger Wölk 07:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No, that's just what en.wikipedia.org does. The 'en' part is for "English". &brvbar; Reisio 14:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The description in commons is multilingual. Not only english. es example give you a german description. -- Rüdiger Wölk 15:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * If that's all it took, then (as I've said), en.wikipedia.org would be considered multilingual; it isn't, though. ¦ Reisio 17:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Election map legend
If you're going to move the squares over on Image:2005UKElectionMap.svg, you need to hide the bullets. Currently the list item bullets partly obscure the coloured squares. I tried to get rid of them myself but something in Wikipedia's CSS was thwarting me I think. If you can't hide the bullets, can you move them back? Nickshanks 00:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

A question from a Rock'n'Roller
Hi! Maybe you know what the font is used on the image you had added: Could you answer into 'discussion' on that page? I would appreciate much. Thank you!