User talk:Jane023/Archive 5
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Pieter de Hooch
Hi Jane. I just discovered your work on Pieter de Hooch. Great, great job. Thank you! Olivier (talk) 21:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I should rephrase: this is amazing! As you know, I had done this, but since we talked about it, I still don't have a Catalogue Raisonné about de Hooch. Olivier (talk) 21:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks! Of course I used all of your work, so you can go ahead and take credit for half the job. I only picked De Hooch because you made it so easy. I don't have a catalog about him either, but I just borrowed the Peter C. Sutton from my local library. --Jane023 (talk) 06:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Glad to hear that you built upon what I had done, and even more glad to see that we now have a great list of de Hooch's works available. Talking about de Hooch, maybe you could contribute your knowledge at Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/09/Category:Portrait of a Family Playing Music: as I see it, it is pretty much about naming, and a painting can have many names. Not sure which one is the most appropriate in this case. Olivier (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks! Of course I used all of your work, so you can go ahead and take credit for half the job. I only picked De Hooch because you made it so easy. I don't have a catalog about him either, but I just borrowed the Peter C. Sutton from my local library. --Jane023 (talk) 06:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Monuments 2015
Beste deelnemer,
Bedankt voor het insturen van jouw foto’s van cultureel erfgoed in het kader van Wiki Loves Monuments 2015. Een professionele jury kiest straks uit alle inzendingen de beste foto’s in drie categorieën: beste foto van een monument, beste foto van een ornament en beste foto van een Dudok monument. Daarnaast is er ook een speciaal klassement voor de inzenders van de meeste foto’s van unieke monumenten. Wil jij ook kans maken op één van de vele prijzen, beschikbaar gesteld door onze partners en sponsoren? Vergeet dan niet om op Wikimedia Commons, onder voorkeuren (rechts bovenin, naast je gebruikersnaam) het vinkje bij e-mail van andere gebruikers toestaan (onder het kopje e-mail in het gebruikersprofiel), aan te vinken. Alleen deelnemers met een e-mailadres maken kans op prijzen. Benieuwd welke prijzen je allemaal kunt winnen? Kijk dan op http://www.wikimedia.nl/projectpagina/prijzenoverzicht
Groeten,
De Wiki Loves Monuments werkgroep 2015 13:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
File:Diana Coomans - In the Gynaeceum - 1885.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Jacqueline Comerre-Paton - Mistletoe.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 14:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Jan de Beijer - View of Bloemendaal Bleaching Fields with Haarlem in the Distance.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Jan de Beijer - View of Bloemendaal Bleaching Fields with Haarlem in the Distance.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
JuTa 23:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Romeyn de Hooghe - Harlemum.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Romeyn de Hooghe - Harlemum.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
JuTa 23:31, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Blekerij aan de duinrand met Haarlem in de verte.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Blekerij aan de duinrand met Haarlem in de verte.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
JuTa 08:20, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Nelly Bodenheim - silhouette of a fall.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. |
Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Nelly Bodenheim - silhouette of pulling on a boot.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. |
Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Nelly Bodenheim - silhouette with family.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. |
Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Nelly Bodenheim - silhouette.png 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. |
Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 16:34, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Picture of the Day 4 januari 2016
Hallo Jane023, Hé kijk eens, vandaag een Haarlemse Picture of the Day. Is dat een foto of een schilderij? --Michielverbeek (talk) 05:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- Wow - prachtig! Dank voor de link. Ik zal kijken of ik het kan gebruiken op Wikipedia. --Jane023 (talk) 16:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost/2016-01-06/In the media
@Jane023: your page caught my eye for the above reason as well as for your cultural interests. It is clear Wiki is not succeeding as well as it might in certain Arab countries, so I suggest in view that the Lord Mayor of London is to visit UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain next week qv. http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-the-city/the-lord-mayor/Pages/overseas-business-visits.aspx that Wiki provides a quick résumé on ويكيبيديا العربية of the Lord Mayor of London before he arrives. This can do no harm since he is to be an honoured guest, but it would serve the function of seeing what reach Wiki has in those countries.
I say this only because many other topics seem to cause controversy in one way or another, so a description of his name, function etc in Arabic presumably along even briefer lines than the Anne Hidalgo article surely could not go amiss before Lord Mountevans arrives in the Middle East next week? RSVP! M Mabelina (talk) 08:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Hillary Clinton speaking at Manchester Community College NH.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Hillary Clinton speaking at Manchester Community College NH.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:57, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
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. |
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely Darwin Ahoy! 12:20, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Charles van Beveren - Harpspeelster - SA 1820.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Charles van Beveren - Harpspeelster - SA 1820.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
And also:
- File:Emile Eisman-Semenowsky - Het Rustende Model - SA 188 (cropped).jpg
- File:Emile Eisman-Semenowsky - Het Rustende Model - SA 188.jpg
- File:Florent Willems - Een zittende page met een hondje - SA 1916.jpg
- File:Frederik Hendrik Kaemmerer - Fluitspeler met schapen - SA 231.jpg
No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 13:16, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
File:Elisabeth Terroux - Self-portrait wearing a hat.jpg
un grand MERCI.--LaMèreVeille (talk) 21:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Paintings of the Elisabeth van Thuringen Fonds, Haarlem 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! |
Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Lorentz bust
Dear Jane023, You probably already know, but your photograph of the Lorentz statue in Haarlem is used in the book Nobel op de kaart (Calmthout/Reumer), p.99, with due ref. to Wikimedia Commons in the photo credits. Vysotsky (talk) 19:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- Cool! I had no idea, so thanks for letting me know. Jane023 (talk) 05:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
List of TED Speakers 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 gallery, 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. |
odder (talk) 18:57, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Diversity Conference 2013 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! |
--Gamaliel (talk) 06:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Glam help
Hey Jane,
I'm a Brazilian volunteer here, and some BRs are starting some GLAM projects, I made a request to enter in mailing outreach:GLAM/Mailing lists, however I think you could help me, nowadays, how you are doing massive uploads here ? Some bot? GLAM toolset? Thanks for the attention. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 22:08, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dear Rodrigo, Pattypan might be one of the options. Vysotsky (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes I agree with Vysotsky, Rodrigo -- I used to use a little tool called commonist for my own photographs too, but haven't done so in years. Today I have a little "basic upload" button that I use a lot for paintings that is in my commons.js file. I took a GLAM toolset course once but never successfully got the permission to use it. You can sign up to the open mailing list "GLAM" on Outreach and the closed one as a Wikimedian-GLAMista of course, so I approved your request on the signup page outreach:GLAM/Mailing lists. Good luck and it's too bad you are blocked on the Brazilian Wikipedia - if you have any knowledge of Listeria then please try to push the Portuguese bot access request through for ListeriaBot here: pt:Wikipédia:Robôs/Pedidos de aprovação/ListeriaBot. It's been stuck in limbo for months now. Thx Jane023 (talk) 05:53, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Memorietafel van Jacob Beier en Thomas Romstock.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Memorietafel van Jacob Beier en Thomas Romstock.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Christ's Entry Into Brussels in 1889
hi, if commons will not host images, maybe wikisource will, since it is a book. we are talking about it here [1]. here is an IA text with the image stripped out.[2] and with [3] (hope it is the same) regrettably in French so wikilivres home? [4] Slowking4 § Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 15:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello!
Thank you for uploading File:MemorialPark Salem Massachusetts.jpg to the Wikimedia Commons. I noticed that when you uploaded from another Wikimedia project, you left out some important information, or copied it incorrectly. In the future, please consider using CommonsHelper, a tool which automates the process of moving files over. Thank you,
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
McKinsey & Co. 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! |
Blythwood (talk) 21:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Thérèse Schwartze catalog raisonné, 1998
Hi jane023, I saw you added the Thérèse Schwartze catalog raisonné, 1998 some time ago. I have uploaded some drawings by Thérèse Schwartze from the Rijksmuseum collection and I was wondering how/where I could see if the ones I uploaded could be added to the Thérèse Schwartze catalog raisonné, 1998. Or do you simply get a message when new photos of her work are uploaded and do you then check if they need to be added to the catalog? (I am not sure I understand how it all works yet ....) Ecritures (talk) 17:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- I just borrowed the book from the library and filled in the ones I could find and gave them the catalog numbers from the book. If your drawings are in the book feel free to add them. You can also make items for the drawings if you want (I don't think I did this for all the paintings). As I recall I did make a list of paintings, but of course drawings are not paintings, so they couldn't go in there. Feel free to start a new list of drawings. Some of her drawings are wonderful. Thanks for uploading them! Jane023 (talk) 18:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Is that in the Haarlem library? I will see if I can find it also. I didn't make wikidata items for them yet. But I did that for some images of Fenna Mastenbroek (Frisian writer/poet) that I uploaded as well. I made a list of 19th century female writers and after finding out what streets were named after them, i amnow finding out where they have been portrayed ... Thanks for all the inspiration btw :) I have this idea that I would want to create an overview of all the art works that were shown at certain exhibitions or salons in the 19th century in Paris. I got the idea from your article on the Flemish primitives Ecritures (talk) 19:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Cool - looking at paintings and matching them up to the articles about what the painting is about is a lot of fun. Here is the library link and it looks like they have at least two more books on her now. Jane023 (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Is that in the Haarlem library? I will see if I can find it also. I didn't make wikidata items for them yet. But I did that for some images of Fenna Mastenbroek (Frisian writer/poet) that I uploaded as well. I made a list of 19th century female writers and after finding out what streets were named after them, i amnow finding out where they have been portrayed ... Thanks for all the inspiration btw :) I have this idea that I would want to create an overview of all the art works that were shown at certain exhibitions or salons in the 19th century in Paris. I got the idea from your article on the Flemish primitives Ecritures (talk) 19:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Pendant paintings in Commons
Hi Jane,
Question: do you know how to link images of artworks that are connected, for example pendant portraits? I tried looking at Rembrandt's Marten & Oopjen but could not figure it out. Thanks! Mtmlan84 (talk) 07:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Hm not sure what you mean? You can connect pendant portraits in many ways - on Wikipedia, on Wikidata, and on Commons here. Since you are asking here I assume you mean here. They are connected by category and also by a combi-image. You can also state in the description that they are pendants of each other (but as I recall for these specific paintings I was waiting for the formal images, which I now see are available on the website). Jane023 (talk) 08:14, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- That was exactly what I ment, thank you so much for this! Mtmlan84 (talk) 12:28, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
b/c overwrite violation
Wat betekent "b/c overwrite violation", Jane? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Well it's OK to overwrite a file with a larger resolution if the source is the same, but in this case, the source was not the same, and this is a violation of overwrite policy on Commons. I re-uploaded it into a new file by the way and put all of them into a category. You didn't include the source, but when I re-uploaded it, the source reappeared in the properties of the file (which are otherwise also not visible when you overwrite). Thanks for uploading the Steens from the UK Royal collection, btw. I added them to their wikidata items. Jane023 (talk) 19:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- My overwrite was definitely an improvement, though. And I did include the source in the metadata. B.t.w., we don't have an overwrite police so the word violation is inappropriate. We do have a guideline, though, but that is not the same. But I still don't know what b/c means. Thanks for re-uploading the file. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry. When I write "b/c" it is just shorthand for "because". I agree the file is better, which is why it deserves its own file metadata and not the file metadata of the file you chose to overwrite. That metadata is shared between the detail photo and its larger version. Image quality has nothing to do my reasoning in this case. I chose to re-upload the file into its own file because the image should be in line with its metadata, which was not the case. User Sailko was not the photographer of the file you uploaded over his photo. Jane023 (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, with metadata I mean the data that is shown below the header Metadata. I feel you are talking about the description. I agree user Sailko was not the uploader, and I don't know what he really thought about his crop of reflections, but I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't mind it being replaced with something better. Anyway, violation is a too harsh word, I think. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry if my edit summary sounded harsh. I was just doing some cleanup (which I also do with user Sailko's files btw). I understand that everyone has their own way of doing things, but it is a pain when I can't link files properly to Wikidata because there isn't even an artwork template (which is why I bothered opening this one in the first place, and then i saw the mixup. Bad metadata is one thing without having different files uploaded someone else's photos.You are probably right that Sailko doesn't care. Considering his production and some of the comments on his userpage I have given up trying to get him to add the artwork template to his uploads. Jane023 (talk) 20:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, with metadata I mean the data that is shown below the header Metadata. I feel you are talking about the description. I agree user Sailko was not the uploader, and I don't know what he really thought about his crop of reflections, but I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't mind it being replaced with something better. Anyway, violation is a too harsh word, I think. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry. When I write "b/c" it is just shorthand for "because". I agree the file is better, which is why it deserves its own file metadata and not the file metadata of the file you chose to overwrite. That metadata is shared between the detail photo and its larger version. Image quality has nothing to do my reasoning in this case. I chose to re-upload the file into its own file because the image should be in line with its metadata, which was not the case. User Sailko was not the photographer of the file you uploaded over his photo. Jane023 (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- My overwrite was definitely an improvement, though. And I did include the source in the metadata. B.t.w., we don't have an overwrite police so the word violation is inappropriate. We do have a guideline, though, but that is not the same. But I still don't know what b/c means. Thanks for re-uploading the file. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2017 (UTC)