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:
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.
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help.
You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe.
To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey.
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have grantedautopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry22:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Abend. Ich wollte auf ein Problem hinweisen, alle diese Karten fangen mit "B / Bundesarchiv Bild" somit landen sie bei der Kategorisierung automatisch ganz vorne. Für bestimmte Kategoriegruppen wie z.B : "Category:Aerial photographs of Pomeranian Voivodeship" oder "Category:Aerial photographs of West Pomeranian Voivodeship" oder "category:Beispielhafter Ort in Polen" (wie z.B. "Category:Krynica Morska") landen die als "B" ganz vorne bei der Auflistung und das ist eben nicht in Ordnung. Bei den polnischen Orten bemühen wir uns seit Jahren ganz vorne folgende Medien zuplatzieren: Wappen, Flagge, Polish pronunciation, Aktuelle Karte/Stadtplan. Im Endergebnis bei der Editierung sollte das ferige Produkt so aussehen wie hier "category:Puck". Deswegen benutzen wir in diesem Fall sowas wie das: "Beispielhafter Ort in Polen| Coat of arms", "Beispielhafter Ort in Polen| Flag", "Beispielhafter Ort in Polen| Polish pronunciation", "Beispielhafter Ort in Polen| Aktuelle Karte/Stadtplan". Die zugeordneten alten Karten aus der Nazizeit sollten ganz am Ende der relevanten für Polen Kategorien landen, und deswegen habe ich bei "Krynica Morska" und anderen Orten das "Z" am Ende gesetzt. Das selbe Problem tritt bei den Kategorien "Category:Aerial photographs of Pomeranian Voivodeship", "Category:Aerial photographs of West Pomeranian Voivodeship" und anderen Woiwodschaften da benutzen wir das Muster "Spitzenqualität ganz vorne" und sonst alphabethisch ... und hier ist eben der Hund begraben alle diese Medien fangen mit "Bundesarchiv Bild" und deswegen habe ich die mit "Beispielhafter Bundesarchiv Bild|z" ans Ende relevanten für Polen Kategorie geschickt. Die Qualität und Auflösung der "Bundesarchiv Bild - karten" ist sehr schlecht und lässt sehr viel zu wünschen deswegen sollten Sie das Verständniss haben das diese Medien in den relevanten für Polen Kategorien automatisch die "B - nach Alphabet Position" nicht annehmen sollten. Manche Kategorien der polnichen Orte besitzen bereits Unterkategorie "History of beispielhafter Ort in Polen" in diesem Fall ordne ich die "Bundesarchiv Bild" dahin. Zu der Kategorie "Luftbildplanwerk des Deutschen Reiches (Poland)" äussere ich mich nicht, da sie ausserhalb meines Interessengebiets liegt. Gruß 80.171.106.1419:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo, ich verstehe Deine Motivation, die Nazi-Sachen ans Ende zu stellen, sehe aber im Falle der Kategorien keinen Nutzen sondern im Gegenteil eine Erschwernis der Arbeit bei commons in dem „Sortieren“ der Dateien. Kategorien sind keine Galerien. Kategorien sollen das Auffinden von Medien vereinfachen, nicht eine bestimmte persönliche Sortierreihenfolge darstellen.
Deswegen habe ich gestern aber nicht revertiert, der Grund war, daß Du den Archiv-Text verändert hast. Für Wiki-Kommentar steht eine extra Zeile zur Verfügung. Es geht auch hier ums Wiederfinden der Dateien, nicht um persönliche Ansichten. Schöne Grüße -- Mapmarks (talk) 22:03, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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:
Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
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.
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.
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
Your edit deleted the existing categories. Please restore them and find out why Hotcat is replacing instead of augmenting categories. Thank you. Strebe (talk) 06:31, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What is your distinction between an image of a map projection and a map, and why? That image was created specifically to illustrate the Wikipedia article on the Werner projection. It is one of about 75 images created in a uniform way specifically to illustrate Wikipedias articles on diverse map projections, both singly and in the List of map projections article. It has no labels. What is the benefit to being highly conservative in classification? Strebe (talk) 16:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Strebe, the title “images of map projections” suggests for me, that this category is provided for images that show how certain projections are made – but maps are the resulting images of their projections, that is indeed a difference. It is not necessary to explain why a precise categorization is helpful and wanted. Maps are images, but not every image is a (cartographic) map.
I like this set of world maps with different projections and in similar design. I think they are good work and of great value for every wiki – and of course should be placed in a category together. So the title was irritating for me. It would be nice to have a short explaining text at the top of the category page with a sample map-image from the set. The same here and there, nice work but misleading category names without explanation. Thanks for Your notice, regards -- Mapmarks (talk) 02:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of categories is to help people find things. Your definition of an image of a map projection is not the one most people use. Therefore your definition is unhelpful. If you have Commons look up images of map projections, you will discover that the common theme amongst them is that they show large enough regions of the earth to usefully portray characteristics of a map projection, and they have no labels for place names. If you want a category for “Images of map projection construction” then by all means make one, but if you imagine that your definition of images of map projections is normal, then I have no idea what you would make of this whole book on map projections with images that are not of map projections, by your definition.
I am happy you like the images and happy you think they should have their own category, but that does not preclude putting them in other categories as well—as you have done with other categories of the images, of course, and for which I thank you. The important thing is that people can find them. Categorizations so restrictive that people can’t find what they’re looking for don’t achieve that. Strebe (talk) 06:49, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. First, I did not make a definition, I wrote about the impression the title made on me. Second, I did not say that I want to establish a category like the one proposed by You. Third, the quoted publication is named An Album of Map Projections instead of An Album of Images of Map Projections. For the rest I agree with You and in fact You were faster than me yesterday in adding the category to the Werner-file. Thank You -- Mapmarks (talk) 01:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just a question: I sent author affirm email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org about your concerns. So my question is who will clear those images warnings that you raised ?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Isparetime (talk • contribs) 2013-05-24 00:53 (UTC)
in Kürze ist es wieder soweit. Der nun schon traditionelle Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments wird im September zum vierten Mal stattfinden. In ähnlicher Form hatte unlängst der Wettbewerb "Wiki Loves Earth" eine erfolgreiche Premiere. Zu allen bisherigen vier Wettbewerben haben seit 2011 gut 3000 unterschiedliche Teilnehmer (User) ihren Beitrag geleistet. Du warst dabei, und bist auch herzlich eingeladen, am bevorstehenden WLM-Wettbewerb wieder dabei zu sein.
Allein in Deutschland wurden in den letzten drei Jahren im Rahmen von WLM rund 100.000 Fotos zu den insgesamt ca. 850.000 Kulturdenkmalen bundesweit hochgeladen. Jährlich haben sich mehrere Hundert Wiki-Fotographen daran beteiligt. Auch im kommenden Denkmalmonat wird dies gewiss wieder der Fall sein. Der Tag des offenen Denkmals am 14. September bietet bundesweit vielfältige Möglichkeiten, Denkmale nicht nur von außen, sondern auch von innen zu fotografieren. Denkmallisten sind dabei ein wichtiger Orientierungspunkt und zugleich auch Ziel der Einbindung der Fotos. Auch in diesem Jahr sind wieder neue Denkmallisten hinzugekommen, die hilfreich bei der Planung von individuellen oder Gruppen-Fototouren sind und auf eine Bebilderung warten, wie z.B. zu Görlitz oder Zittau. Unter den Landeshauptstädten fehlt nur noch Stuttgart. Aber auch hier ist Licht in Sicht.
In der Mitte Deutschlands hat die Denkmallandschaft der thüringischen Landeshauptstadt Erfurt nun das Licht der Wikipedia-Welt entdeckt. Mehr als 50 Tabellen enthalten 3.700 Denkmale. Allein die wunderschön restaurierte Altstadt umfasst 1.800 Denkmale. Eine von WMDE geförderte WLM-Fototour nach Erfurt am Wochenende vom 29. – 31. August lädt herzlich ein, diese einzigartige Kulturlandschaft zu dokumentieren. Mehr Informationen findest Du auf der Projektseite.
Wir freuen uns auf Deine weiteren Beiträge für Wikimedia-Projekte.
Viel Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia wünscht Dir das Orga-Team.
nun ist es wieder soweit. Vom 1. bis zum 30. September findet zum fünften Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Im Mittelpunkt steht bekanntlich das Fotografieren von Kulturdenkmalen. Du hast an einem der letzten Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen und wir freuen uns auf weitere Bildbeiträge von Dir.
Viele interessante Motive, nicht nur Burgen und Schlösser, sondern auch Fachwerkhäuser, Brücken und Brunnen, technische und Industriedenkmale und vieles mehr gibt es noch zu fotografieren, damit sie in der Wikipedia dokumentiert werden können. Nützliche Tipps findest du auf unserer WLM-Projektseite. Du kannst gerne individuell Fototouren durchführen oder aber Dich auch Gruppentouren anschließen. Besonders freuen wir uns auf Fotos, die Lücken in den Denkmallisten der Wikipedia ausfüllen.
Darüber hinaus kannst Du auch an der Arbeit der Jury teilnehmen, die Mitte Oktober die Fotos bewerten und die Gewinner ermitteln wird. Bis zum 15. August kannst du hier Deine Bewerbung einreichen.
Viel Erfolg und Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia in den bevorstehenden Wettbewerbswochen wünscht Dir das Orga-Team. Wir freuen uns auf Deine Fotos.
Hello Mapmarks,
I saw your amazing work on vectorizing the Sawley Map.
Did you use the notes I added to File:Imago Mundi de Honorius of Autum (editado por Henry of Mainz) 1190.PNG or is it as completely independent work ?
GAllegre (talk) 16:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello GAllegre, thank you for writing. It was about 3 years ago when started working on the Sawley map. My attempt was to write an article for German WP about it. Therefore I wanted an image for referencing all those place names and other items, so I redraw the map in Inkscape. Unfortunately I didn’t made it so far, at least the SVG files were sleeping in my drawer since then. So when I saw your edits last weekend, I remembered the map and I decided to share the drawing. I’m interested in comparing your results later. You might be interested in some literature I have used:
In fact, I find that your deciphering of map labels is more accurate than mine, and I have fixed and updated my notes thanks to your works. I wonder how much time it took to you?
BTW, a fellow contributor, Poulpy, used his bot to translate my notes into Wikidata statements (P180 depicts). Maybe it could be useful for you : it's the Sawley Map entry on Wikidata.
I also used some piece of litterature to help my work, which was
Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) William Smith, LLD, Ed. [1]
It’s good to hear that my work was useful for your. Yes, it took some time … I’m still looking for that mysterious river in Spain. Thanks for sharing your knowledge :) --Mapmarks (talk) 20:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, that was the first time I traced such an old map. For my work on the Sawley map I compared it with the Hereford map. I downloaded the Facsimile made by Havergal, found at Nat. Libr. of Australia. That image is about 8800×10200 px, so I didn’t upload it yet. It would be nice to have a vector version of the original. Of course, I think it would be about ten times of work than with the Sawley map. Anyway please do so if you want, I would appreciate it. Unfortunately I don’t have the time and can’t do it myself. Greetings --Mapmarks (talk) 23:27, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Maps with unidentified projection 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!
I noticed today that you'd reverted the changes made to File:Meyers b11 s0476a.jpg. Assuming that your reason for reverting was the substantive changes made by 일성강 ("fixed Ainu on Hokkaido") I have repeated my edit, straightening the map and removing the crease, but with the original colours. I hope this meets with your approval. If you'd like me to make any edits feel free to drop a request on my talk page on the English Wikipedia. nagualdesign21:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading. Unfortunately it seems that they are from a different source than the old versions, though the differences seem very few. The files with names like “Meyers b… s… jpg” belong to a project on German Wikisource, where they are used for proofreading. So we need exactly the right edition and year of publication.
Therefore I would like you to upload those maps with a different name please.
Hallo Mapmarks, als Nachtrag zur Änderung Deiner Dateien (Allgemeine Bauzeitung), hier ein Hinweis, wenn Du wieder einmal etwas von den ANNO-Seiten hochladen willst: Auf jeder dieser Seiten gibt es ganz rechts oben sechs rötliche Symbole: i | PDF | 90° | ORIG | TEXT | < (so ähnlich halt)
Wenn Du das dritte Symbol von rechts „ORIG“ anklickst, erhälst Du die Seite im Originalformat und kannst so höhere Auflösungen erreichen. („TEXT“ ist ein mehr oder weniger gut funktionierendes Hilfsmittel für die Transkription der Frakturschrift.) Also, nichts für ungut, und – niemand arbeitet fehlerfrei – danke für die PD-Korrektur, mfG Walter Anton (talk) 23:13, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I’m trying to understand the guidelines you added for drawing number 29 so that I can recreate it according to your specifications. Can you please clarify how to do it? Many thanks! Laughran (talk) 16:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Laughran, sorry that it took that long. Had to find the file and then tried to understand what I had drawn 9 years ago. Managed to find an early version of the construction and today I made a new sketch, this time with FreeCAD instead of Inkscape (see screenshot). Hope that it clarifies the whole thing. I started with the equilateral triangle (the two outer arcs), then came the square over the left half. That gives the point where the arc ends, that has a radius of 3/4 of the width … and so on. Greetings --Mapmarks (talk) 20:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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!
