User talk:Pitke

I am taking a part-time wikibreak from the following topics:
1) Princess Meridia uploads (including uploading -wm versions)
2) deleting any files (listing for future RfD is ok).

I am allowed to edit five Princess Meridia files per day.

If found violating this break I should be slapped firmly in the head with Roger's sizely salmon.

This user is an administrator on Wikimedia Commons. (verify)

fi

Tämä käyttäjä puhuu suomea äidinkielenään.

en-4

This user speaks English at a near-native level.

sv-2

Denna användare har kunskaper på mellannivå i svenska.

Archived user talk -2011 2012-2013

TUSC token

344b18b6314b57c5011343f5908efa36

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Burmese_(horse)&diff=next&oldid=59354031

Hi Pitke, I was wondering wat cateogry-bot does. Thank you for your time.Lotje (talk) 13:46, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category-bot used to imagine categories such as "1982 animal births" were for humans, ~~resulting in all kinds of miscategorisations.~~ It's been a while though. --Pitke (talk) 15:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it adamantly added "people by name" categories to animal categories with animal birth/death year cats. See here. --Pitke (talk) 15:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maps of fictional Earth

Unfortunately, this name is somewhat equivocal or ambiguous in wording... AnonMoos (talk) 00:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted roses

I added all rose cultivar articles missing a picture I noticed on your list - hope that's fine with you...
just thinking... perhaps I/we should create a 'puplic' subpage of Rosa cultivars, where people could add rose pictures they are looking for - and hopefully also see which ones we'd really like pictures of... what do you think?
All the best, Anna reg (talk) 10:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for expanding the page, that really saved me a lot of work :3 As for a public list, I suppose we should just use the existing alphabetical galleries and add an noinclude section for links to missing cultivar galleries with breeder + year info as available. --Pitke (talk) 12:00, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Amber_Shadai

Category:Amber_Shadai 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 ∙ +/−

FDMS 4 12:39, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:A Close-Up of Sunny Lane's Ass at AEE.jpg

How do you explain this out of process deletion? This image is in scope of Sunny Lane, Red clothing, Close-ups of female human buttocks and Adult Entertainment Expo, was posted by joanna8555 at http://flickr.com/photos/36162362@N03/4412280199. It was uploaded by Electroguv to Commons in 18:28, 30 May 2011 and reviewed on 30 May 2011 by the FlickreviewR robot and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-sa-2.0. So undelete this file and if you think this file is out of scope nominate it to DR as out of scope is not a reason to speedy deletion. Tm (talk) 23:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a low-quality buttocks-only close-up of a person of whom we have a better quality, wider shot in the exact same clothing (and pose, even) to take up whatever use (none) it was doing in any of its scopes, I liken it to similarly low-quality close-ups of any other highly sexualised body parts. If you don't find this reason satisfactory, please let me know and I'll restore the file to DR it properly. --Pitke (talk) 00:55, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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） ∙ +/−

Geagea (talk) 00:58, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Before you get slapped with

another salmon: Could you have a look at File:Icon agouti.gif and such in Category:Dog icons? Seems the source got lost in transit and now your icons show up in Category:Images without source. Thanks a bunch! :-)) --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 01:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Thanks for the heads-up. --Pitke (talk) 11:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Sorry to disturb you, I found a few more here: [1], starting with a horse. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 00:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cavies

Hallo Pitke,

you created Category:Tortoiseshell cavies and Category:Tortoiseshell variant cavies. Is the last one really necessary?

To get an overview over American and European breeds I recently created:

Maybe you can help with a riddle: Teddy cavies. The EE knows the "US Teddy" and the "Swiss Teddy". The ACBA the "Teddy" and the "Teddy Satin". Category:Teddy cavies could be a disambiguation, but there are 3 to 4 breeds... How'd you handle that?

{{disambig}}
'''Teddy cavies''' might refer to:
* [[:Category:Teddy (US cavy)]], US "Teddy" breed in Europe
** [[:Category:Teddy (cavy)]], US "Teddy" breed
** [[:Category:Teddy Satin]], US "Teddy" breed
* [[:Category:Swiss (cavy)]], Swiss "Teddy" breed

For others I planed this scheme: European: Category:Peruvian cavies with {{cat see also|Peruvian (cavy)|Peruvian Satin}} --PigeonIP (talk) 13:17, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well the other issues are more complicated and I'll need to think about them more, but as for the tortoiseshell variant cat, yes I think it is necessary or at least user-friendly. AFAIK the only cavies that are "actually" tortoiseshell (i.e. get to be called that) are those with pure red and black pigments. Any others, although genetically variants of the tortoiseshell, are called simply "bicolor" or "tricolor" depending on whether they have white or not, and sorted by whatever colours their patches are. (We really have quite a small collection of cavy photos, I might go Flickr-mining today.) --Pitke (talk) 09:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

Bicolor and Tricolor may be Category:Bi-colour cavies and Category:Tricolour cavies.

I asked the EE per mail, if they donate some photos. It got forwarded to Evelyne van Vliet. p.14–95 --PigeonIP (talk) 10:32, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bicolor and tricolor cats should follow the form and spelling that are used for virtually every other cat with those words. Here's hoping the EE greenlight some nice piggy pics! -Pitke (talk) 17:35, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

gallery mode

Hallo Pitke,
I saw that you are changing the gallery mode of some rose cultivar offspring galleries. I think that it's better if all galleries on a page have the same mode (but not necessarily the same size). What do you think of 'Ophelia' and 'Condesa de Sástago'? In the latter I made a separate gallery for upright pictures to have them as prominently featured as the ones in landscape format. Anna reg (talk) 10:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My only qualm about having the same mode for all galleries on the same page is that when browsing short (1-3 images) with a larger screen, the centered alignment of the otherwise superior packed mode looks weird. -Pitke (talk) 17:31, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean - the smaller === headlines === look especially weird. And I just tried, align="left" doesn't work. Another thing I really don't like, is that to have the pictures reach both borders without changing the gap width (much), the rows have a different height, making it difficult to choose a good height, as the results will vary - and you get a strange effect, if you narrow or broaden your browser window. Anna reg (talk) 22:35, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Luokittelu

Moi, ja kiitos erittäin ahkerasta luokittelusta. Lisäsit Halikonlahden luokkaan Birdwatching in Finland. Halikonlahti on varsin laaja alue ja pääasiassa vain sen perukka, Viurilanlahti, on alue jossa käy lintuharrastajia ja siellä on lintutorneja. Suurin osa Halikonlahden luokastahan on aivan muita kuvia kuin lintuharrastukseen liittyviä. Täten en pidä tämänkaltaista luokittelua mielekkäänä, mutta ymmärrän kyllä pointtisi tässä. Tarkoituksenani on luoda tänne luokka Important Bird Areas (IBA) ja siitä edelleen maittain. Toinen erillinen luokitus on Finnish Important Bird Areas Suomen tärkeät lintualueet (FINIBA). Ne voisi ehkä lisätä sitten myös luokkaan Birdwatching in Finland. Lisäsin Birdwatching in Finland luokkaan Birdwatching towers in Finland. tässä tullut joku väärä koodi. –Makele-90 (talk) 19:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Joo monet näistä luokista on vielä "vaiheessa" koska sisältöä ei oikein ole tarpeeksi että tarkempi luokittelu olis järkevää tai siitä jaksaisi. Siksi "Birdwatching in Finland" käsittää lähinnä parin lintulahden luokat just nyt. Pitihän mun joskus tehä joku tommonen IBA-luokitusrakenne tänne mut jäi tekemäti. Katotaan jos tulis tehtyä tällä kertaa kun on nyt täälläkin tullut juttua aiheesta, saattais jopa muistaa. --Pitke (talk) 20:39, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lajit Suomessa

[Species in Finland categories]

Taidat olla luomassa kattavaa luokkapuuta Suomen lajeista. Jos projekti onnistuu, eli luokkiin saadaan edustavasti sisältöä, siitä on varmasti hyvinkin paljon hyötyä. Minua kuitenkin askarruttaa miten välivaihe toimii.

Olen monasti muissa yhteyksissä löytänyt tarvitsemani luokan Commonsissa, mutta vain vähän kuvia. Eihän kaikesta ole vielä kattavasti kuvia täällä. Mutta sitten, toisessa yhteydessä, löydän kuvan jota olin ollut etsimässä. Kuva on ehkä luokiteltu, mutta toisessa hierarkiassa (esim. toinen käsittelee talvea ja toinen lunta ja Suomesta sitten on "talviset maisemat" ja "lumiset maisemat", ilman kytköstä ja ilman järkevää työnjakoa). Kun kohtaan tällaisia, yritän luoda puuttuvat kytkökset, vähintään {{Cat see also}}-mallineella.

Luokka Kuuset Suomessa sisältää nyt kolme kuvaa, joista mikään ei ole kovin edustava. Suomea tuntematon ei välttämättä hoksaa, että sadoista muista luokista löytyy kuusia joka toisessa kuvassa (vastaava tilanne on Suomen puutalojen kohdalla: vain tusina taloa on luokiteltu puutaloksi).

Jos kestää ennen kuin luokka itsessään saa kattavasti sisältöä, mielestäni on kohtuullista antaa vinkki luokkaan törmäävälle siitä, mistä kuvia kannattaa etsiä. Meillä on huomattavasti paremmat edellitykset antaa vinkkejä kuin mitä ulkomaisella Commonsia tuntemattomalla käyttäjällä on etsiä kuvia omillaan. "Nature of Finland" on tietenkin turhan laaja luokka, mutta en äkkiseltään keksinyt parempaa - ja kuusia varmaankin löytyy suurimmasta osasta alaluokkia.

Onko muuten missään ohjeistusta siitä, miten näitä luomiasi luokkia pitäisi käyttää? Käyn melko usein läpi luontokuvia Suomesta ja lajiluokkien lisääminen kävisi sillöin tällöin luontevasti siinä sivussa. Yritätkö saada luokkiin rajoitetun määrän hyviä kuvia vai pitäisikö jokainen kuusimetsän (ja ehkä sekametsän?) kuva liittää kuusi-luokkaan? Miten mustikat, kanervat ja poronjäkälät?

--LPfi (talk) 17:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mjoo kyllä, näin on. Pyrin siihen että kaikkiin luomiini luokkiin tulee kohtalainen sisältö. Jotkin luokat ovat niin keskeisiä (esim. Picea abies in Finland) että uskallan luoda ne jo ennen kuin olen kerännyt "tarpeeksi" sisältöä mukaan koska sisältöä on ihan takuulla tulossa aikanaan. Muita luokkia seuloessani sitten valikoin en suinkaan kaikkia kuvia joissa kuusia vilahtaa, vaan hyvälaatuisia tai muuten edustavia esim. vaihtelevine kuusibiomeineen, -muotoineen, sellaisia joissa näkyy Suomelle tyypillistä ympäristöä tai muuta lajistoa, jne. Kuusikuvia kuitenkin on niin perhanasti. Samaan tapaan toimivat pitkälti muutkin lajiluokitukset. Kaikkien kuvien ei suinkaan tarvitse olla lähikuvia, joissa koko yksilö näkyy selkeästi. Esimerkiksi miljöökuva on ihan ok, jos esiintymispaikka on tyypillinen ja kuvassa kuitenkin esiintyy lajitunnistettu yksilö. Jos yksilön sijainti ei ole ihan selkeä, niin Note-toiminnolla voi osoittaa sen paikan.

Siihen, että luokka löytyy mutta sisältöä ei, en oikein voi sanoa muuta kuin että tervetuloa talkoisiin. Luokittelu on sellainen puuha, joka ei täällä lopu. Monet luokat syntyvät niin, että joku luo ne omaan tarpeeseen, muttei jää seulomaan ylempiä luokkatasoja erotellakseen sieltä loppuja aihepiirin tiedostoja tarkempaan luokitteluun. Esimerkki: siirrän luokasta "Trees of Finland" tiedostoja luokkaan "Tilia cordata in Finland". Piipahdan luokassa "Tilia cordata" siirtämässä suomeksi nimetyt tiedostot ja muut ilmiselvät tapaukset uuteen alaluokkaan. En kuitenkaan jää selaamaan kaikkia kuvia, joita luokassa on lajista riippuen kymmenistä satoihin. Tunnen omantunnonpistoksen, koska en saman tien kopioinut maakohtaiseen luokkaan siirtämiäni kuvia asianmukaisiin aiheluokkiin kuten "Tilia cordata - plants", "Tilia cordata - saplings". En edes viitsi aloittaa moista luokittelua, koska muista luokkanimikäytänteistä eroava tapa nimetä luokkia tyyliin "Laji - aihepiiri" turhauttaa ja hämmentää sisäistä insinööriäni.

"Katso myös" -linkit on hyvä idea, koetan muistaa lisäillä niitä milloin kytkös lähiaiheisiin ei ole luokan oma yläluokka tai alaluokka.

Lisäyksenä vielä tuohon mainitsemaasi tapaukseen Lumi Suomessa, Talvi Suomessa -- täydellisemmässä luokkarakenteessa ongelmaa ei olisi, koska suurin osa lumikuvista löytyisi molempien luokkien alla olevasta luokasta Lumi talvella Suomessa. Tai sitten ei-talviset lumet olisi erotettu omaansa ja lumiluokka olisi talviluokan alla koska lumi kuitenkin on ennen kaikkea talvi-ilmiö täällä. Luokittelusta on paljon näkemyksiä. --Pitke (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Juu, talkoita riittää. Luokkien luomisessa vain on se, että ne voivat lisätä työmäärää olematta hyödyllisiä ennen kuin joku on tehnyt työn. Ajatuksesi näistä luokista kuulostavat kuitenkin hyviltä, eikä minulle liene huomauttamista, kunhan aika tietyn luokan luomisesta edes jonkinlaisen sisällön varmistamiseen ei veny liikaa.

Minulla on ollut vastaavaa omantunnontutkiskelua, kun olen joitakin luokkia yrittänyt selventää. Oman haasteensa tuo kieli (mitkä reet, kelkat, ahkiot tai pulkat ovat sledgejä ja mitkä sleightejä?) ja ennestään sekavat hierarkiat (eläinjälkien suhteen luovutin, en uskaltanut ryhtyä suursiivoukseen ilman keskustelua, enkä keksinyt missä keskustella).

Lumi ja talvi Suomessa ovat ongelma, koska emme elä täydellisessä maailmassa. Kahden luokan lisääminen melkein jokaiseen Suomen talvikuvaan on työlästä ja jäisi useimmilta tekemättä. Siksi luokat pitäisi jotenkin yhdistää (ehkä ehdottomallasi tavalla), mutta se taas tuo ongelmia kansainväliseen symmetriaan. Helpoin tapa on tuo "katso myös", jonka avulla kuvat löytyvät vaikka luokkarakenne olisi hiukan sekava ja kuvat vain osassa luokkia.

Kuusille kannattaisi varmaankin luoda galleria (Picea abies in Finland tms.). Hyvä lajitelma hukkuu nopeasti, kun muut alkavat käyttää luokkaa, mutta galleriassa se säilyy ainakin kohtalaisesti, koska siihen ei lisätä kuvia sattumanvaraisesti. Toki luokastakin pitää huolehtia, mutta ainakin galleriaan "pelastetut" kuvat löytyvät helposti.

--LPfi (talk) 09:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geochelone_carbonaria_in_zoos

Geochelone carbonaria in zoos 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 ∙ +/−

FakirNL (talk) 16:38, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Happy new yeaaar, a 2015 of good things, wishes happy holidays --Pava (talk) 14:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:MY VISIT TO DALHOUSIE KHAJIAR CHAMBA DHARAMSHALA MCLEODGANJ HIMACHAL PRADESH INDIA (27).jpg

Martin H. (talk) 13:24, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your updated colors on {{By color}}

Thanks for your updated colors on {{By color}}, Pitke. They do look better than the standard web colors. If it isn't too much to ask, though, would you mind updating the colors in {{Bicolor}} and {{Tricolor}} accordingly? It would be great to keep the colors consistent across all three universal templates. Thanks for considering it, at least. Michael Barera (talk) 01:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. --Pitke (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your quick response and color-related improvements. The templates all look much better, thanks to you. All the best! Michael Barera (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^__^ --Pitke (talk) 10:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

wanting to help, but...?

Hi Pitke, got your message at en.wiki that a lot of the files I uploaded from Flickr didn't transfer over with the best tags (I used the default flickr tagging, mostly) I'd like to help, but I'm having trouble figuring out how to refine a search here to, for example, "files uploaded by Montanabw in category "horse"" If you can help with that, I have recently figured out how to use cat-a-lot and would be glad to fix. Can you ping me at my talk page here on commons with any advice or suggestions? Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 01:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

INeverCry Blocked - Serious or Joking?

I noticed that the account of User:INeverCry has been blocked for "abuse of admin tools, baseless accusations, disruptive editing." If I'm not mistaken, this admin has already announced his/her retirement from Wikipedia, although that may be a joke in itself. Perhaps you are participating in some sort of inside joke by blocking the user? Please help me understand what's going on here! Thanks, --BDS2006 (talk) 07:49, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would never block a user as a joke. One block reason I did not remember to enter while blocking was pointiness: admins mustn't block users for sockpuppetry based on no disclosed proof. The block I issued is temporary and rather short, unlike the infinite block INC had placed on themselves on grounds of "Intimidation/harassment". In light of recent discussion on Russavia's sockpuppets and so on, I think this indefinite self-block was not a genuine "leaving forever" autoblock (AFAIK, Commons does not grant users blocks on their own request even if they want to abandon an account forever). Rather, it seems to me the autoblock was a part of a pointy demonstration that went something like this: 1) "these users are Russavia's sockpuppets or cronies, no one else is going to block them so I will" 2) "and here's the block the Secret Cabal will give me when they catch me so I'll save them the trouble and block myself". The edit summary ICN left as they deleted their user page supports this assumption rather heftily. I hope that in a month's time they will have calmed down and will be able to discuss the situation in a constructive way. However my experience on Wikipedia is that users who start acting out or being pointy due to beliefs of a Secret Cabal do not have a favourable prognosis.

I personally view my block action not only as a block but as an amendment of an overly long block made based on wrong reasons. I'll copy this comment on their talk page for clarity. --Pitke (talk) 12:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Poistetun kuvan palautus

Moi, voitko palauttaa kuvan File:pauli_vahtera_wikipedia.jpg. Olen käsitellyt kyseisen kuvan OTRS-luvan. –Makele-90 (talk) 14:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tehty. --Pitke (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hienoa, kiitos! –Makele-90 (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

I only meant to revert the bot's archiving of the AN/U regarding Magog the Ogre. The other one is still on the archive page. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay. I didn't see a corresponding edit in your history or an edit summary so I hastily assumed. --Pitke (talk) 07:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please complete template

Hiya Pitke: If you're going to keep an image, like Commons:Deletion requests/File:(north) Ballachulish Church 1829.JPG, please be sure that you provide a source for the image, otherwise it ends right back up in image without a source and the problem is not solved. I'd point out there is no proof to any of the following "Photo taken circa 1890. Photographer unknown. We don't know when the creator of this image died." If we do not know the photographer or the source, we cannot confirm and 1890 photograph. This looks in much too good quality to be pre 1900. Would you please take another look at this totally unused file and see if you can complete the information, else perhaps consider reclosing this "not kept". Thanks! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:23, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your vigilance. That was a serious oversight by me. --Pitke (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the change. Cheers!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Must these files be deleted?

Hi Pitke, I'm just sending you this message cause you just archived this DR. Could you say me, from your if the following files are in the scope of Commons : Paula (2).jpg and Beba (5).png? I'm in doubt, and think, especially, the second file may be deleted, because of it is an explicit file. Thank you, regards --Hannah ma bestah (talk) 09:21, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well the film has articles in the Italian and Lithuanian wikis so it would seem the screenshots are within the project scope even if explicit. The film is erotic after all so erotic stills are natural. --Pitke (talk) 11:02, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you <wiki>{{</wiki>:D<wiki>}}</wiki> --Hannah ma bestah (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning

العربية ∙ বাংলা ∙ čeština ∙ словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ македонски ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tok Pisin ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

You have vandalized the content of Wikimedia Commons. Please stop. If you continue making inappropriate edits you may be blocked from editing Commons. You may test freely in the sandbox.

Stop editwarring. In case of dispute, ask a third party. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC) Yann (talk) 20:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reminding me of my manners, but I feel compelled to mention that you could have simply typed your custom text with a "knock it off" and saved yourself from the entire template application hassle. yes I'm being a brat --Pitke (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Personal_defense

Personal defense 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 ∙ +/−

Sanandros (talk) 12:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:Thanks but

Hello.I am working on some Media needing categories.I want to empty and delete some sub-categories.The files are always located.And any shareholder can re-review it.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 07:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil

català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ Simple English ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

You are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars. If your behaviour is not moderated, you may be blocked from further editing.

-- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:12, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me but where have I been uncivil? --Pitke (talk) 09:45, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The editwarring. You has twice vandalized this file. You can ask me for more information, but not revert edits with my comments. B.t.w., all fungi identification was confirmed in dispute few years ago. You can find this dispute at QI promotion archive page with this picture (really huge page).

With best regards, very friendly and without any sarcasm -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:24, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Expressing valid concern (in this case, lack of labelling to pair specimen with species info) is not vandalism. --Pitke (talk) 18:53, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Just a passerby comment) Category:Unidentified organisms and its subcategories are maintenance categories to attract expert eyes so that they get identified. So if a work is already identified to the lowest level maximum possible by viewing a photo (can be a genus or family for small subjects), there is not much meaning in adding it to "unidentified ...". See similar expert opinions here. It is a pity we don't have a good mechanism to identify organisms so far. We're working on it. Any suggestion, help, and participation is highly appreciated. (BTW, I think this edit war is due to a small misunderstanding as many people here believe all organisms here need to identified to species level or added to "unidentified". It can be discussed. So I don't like the edit-war; nor the bold accuse like he vandalized. Personally I don't like admins fight for a small topic hurting each other. Be friendly and help to make a positive environment. Have a nice day to all.) J e e 02:18, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Girl's_dresses

Girl's dresses 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 ∙ +/−

BethNaught (talk) 07:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Girl's_dresses_in_the_Los_Angeles_County_Museum_of_Art

Girl's dresses in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art 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 ∙ +/−

BethNaught (talk) 07:46, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pink roses

Hi, look this correction[2].--6AND5 (talk) 11:37, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		Boooo !!!! We miss you!! We wish you were more active, please log in soon and help us with the backlog!!
		Hope to see you around soon! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:25, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Black-eyed_dogs

Black-eyed dogs 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 ∙ +/−

Plot Spoiler (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks by INeverCry

Hi Pitke,

You may have noticed INeverCry has retired and there are some personal attacks which have been revdelled on his talk page:

It is plain to see that he has "retired" to avoid the consequences of this disgraceful behaviour. I would suggest that you take it to COM:AN/U to have it dealt with it so that he can't simply return as if nothing happened.

On a sidenote, you might like to contact WMFOffice as well given that calling an editor a "cunt" is now grounds for being globally banned by the WMF. 101.186.144.122 18:23, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies Pitke. My behavior a few days ago certainly was crappy and embarrassing to say the least. It won't happen again. I ask you to give me one last chance to put this behind me and get back to doing helpful work. I agree that a block would definitely be warranted as a preventative measure if I run my mouth again, but I really don't think that will be a problem going forward.
I'd also like to address Russavia: Scott, I don't know why I've been such a hardass toward you. I think I took the whole "sock-hunter" idea of adminship and carried it way too far. We never had any problems and got along fine. I wish it was 2014 again, and you and me were still fellow admins. As I say at my talk, I won't be interfering with you or your activity here in any way going forward. I wish you both a Merry Xmas and Happy New Year. INeverCry 21:22, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete

These are all linked to from other editor's userpages. Move them if need be, but they should be undeleted please. Sr71a2015 (talk) 00:32, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Erect_equine_penis

Erect equine penis 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 ∙ +/−

Jarble (talk) 08:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Erect_horse_penis

Erect horse penis 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 ∙ +/−

Jarble (talk) 09:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kuvan poistopyyntö

Pystytkö poistamaan File:Samsung Xcover 2 back open.JPG kuvan aiemmat versiot, koska niissä näkyy sarjanumero? --Zunter (talk) 10:44, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Piilotin ne. --Pitke (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kiitän. --Zunter (talk) 21:02, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Types of Red?

I see you added Category:Types of red to File:Great tit side-on.jpg on 21 January 2015‎. I see no reason why that image should be in that category. Sure, it has a reddish background but that seems super tenuous. Was it a mistake or is there a reason I'm not realizing. Have you added more images of birds to categories of color? Jason Quinn (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was for the curious shade of red in the background. It's not my habit to add images like these but for a few I've done it for the same reason. --Pitke (talk) 13:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Translation needed:

Hi! Could you please translate this watchlist notice into FI? Thanks in advance! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 03:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[[Commons:Photo challenge]]''': Time to vote for [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - January - Diagonals/Voting|'''Diagonals''' (January)]] and [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - January - Wheels/Voting|'''Wheels''' (January)]]. Submit your entries for [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - February - Mailboxes|'''Mailboxes''' (February)]] and [[Commons:Photo challenge/2016 - February - Reflections|'''Reflections''' (February)]]

Chaperones

Hi, Pitke, I created the category:Chaperones an now I come across the category:Chaperons (people). Sorry for that. What to you suggest? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 13:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the thing to do is figure out which is the dominantly used form and move the media from the other name under that name, and make the other name a category redirect. It's not an easy question, but I think we could go with the Oxford English Dictionary, which says that "chaperone" is a common misspelling. Chaperons (people) is also clearer for people who aren't fluent in English. If you agree we can merge these categories without further ado. --Pitke (talk) 15:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me. Thank you.

Lotje (talk) 05:46, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Cavendish and chaperone, this says it all... Lotje (talk) 05:49, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite follow.... --Pitke (talk) 20:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Me again, why can't I just explain in a proper whay what I want to say

, I mean: if I would have paid more attention to that image before creating the category Chaperone , I would have known, it clearly says: "chaperon" Lotje (talk) 08:48, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

De-adminship warning

This talk page in other languages:

Dear Pitke, I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2016 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you, odder (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self and to anyone it may concern; I have dealt with this. --Pitke (talk) 09:06, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are these colours correct?

Hello,

As you are specialized into animal colours, I wanted to ask you whether these colour categories are correct (especially in black&tan dogs there are some that are not completely black in their "black" region): Suomenlapinkoira --Canarian (talk) 15:02, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up, I'll take a look. --Pitke (talk) 23:32, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Koltonmommy

Yes 🐇🌷🥀🌊🥖🥨🥯🚜🚤🎆🎇 2603:6010:94F0:8380:10BF:6FFD:6078:1009 12:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hoar_frost_on_trees

Hoar frost on trees 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 ∙ +/−

Carnby (talk) 23:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Pitke!

Happy New Year!

Pitke, a new year is like a blank book, the pen is in your hands. It is your chance to write a beautiful story for yourself! Happy New Year 2017. Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 18:28, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Plants damaged by pests

Terve Pitke,

we should define a clear border between Category:Insect damage and Category:Plants damaged by pests. I'm not sure, how to categorize damages from insects to plants in the moment.--Kémite (talk) 19:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, plants have pests that are not insects, and insect damage can occur on things that are not plants, also plants can be damaged by insects that are not pests; it would be good to have a common subcategory of Plants damaged by pest insects (or similar) for these. --Pitke (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata Commonsissa

Käypä neuvomassa fiwikiläistä tässä jutussa. --Pxos (talk) 11:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

De-adminship warning

This talk page in other languages:

Dear {{subst:PAGENAME}}. I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2017 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you--B dash (talk) 08:09, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Low_quality_images_of_plants

Low quality images of plants 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 ∙ +/−

Steinsplitter (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apua ryhmäviestiin

Moi!

Koordinoin WLM:ää Suomessa Wikimedia Suomen kautta ja lähestyin Romainea jotta voitaisiin lähettää osallistujille viesti palkintojenjakotilaisuudesta. Tämä ei ole vielä edistynyt, oletettavasti koska hänellä on kiire, joten minulle ehdotettiin että lähestyisin sinua :). Pystyisitkö laittamaan viestin eteenpäin? Täällä on aiempi viestini.

Kiitos! Tiakangaspunta (talk) 08:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Groups_by_size

Groups by size 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 ∙ +/−

Josh (talk) 23:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Robbing the dead

Hello.
You had to supply some explanation with Revision of File:Quarter_Horse(REFON).jpg, far beyond an automatic HotCat’s summary. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:07, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Idk 'bout robbing or the silent majority, but thanks for catching that. I have uploaded an edited version and confused this one for that. --Pitke (talk) 16:12, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Cracked shoed hoof.png

Copyright status: File:Cracked shoed hoof.png

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Cracked shoed hoof.png. 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.

Jcb (talk) 00:08, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

Hi! Please rename this file.--Neriman2003 (talk) 10:19, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Pitke (talk) 10:23, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Damaged automobiles by type of damage

Hello, thanks for the new categories. Could you make a note on Category:Automobiles with major crash damage, Category:Automobiles with moderate crash damage, and Category:Automobiles with minor crash damage, so that the average person would know how to categorize an image of an automobile with crash damage? I am not sure what criteria to use in this type of category. Thanks for your help Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 06:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Pitke (talk) 21:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fiakers

@Pitke: Hi Pitke. I know from reading something you wrote some long time ago that you too are interested in untangling the images of horse-drawn vehicles. Just over seven years ago you placed this note (below) on category Fiakers. I don't think it is correct. Do you know the source of your information? Please can we talk this through properly seeing we share the interest.

Fiaker is the German name for the category name known as fiacre in French and Victoria in English. For carriages of this type other than those used in Vienna for taxi, see: Victorias.

Regards, Eddaido (talk) 01:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddaido: I'm sorry to say, but even though I'm interested in keeping all equestrian categories sorted, in some subareas my expertise falls very short, and fine driving is one of those. It's been a very long time, but it's most likely I looked at either the English WP article or the interwiki links. --Pitke (talk) 07:43, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but I really do need to discuss these things with somebody and even if you just checked from time to time that you agreed / disagreed with amendments (which I will continue to make for, I am afraid, a long time still to come) I'd be grateful. Not entirely comfortable with your link to fiacres or the see also Victorias. Eddaido (talk) 10:47, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2017 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2017 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in R2.

Dear Pitke,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2017 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the twelfth 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 (2017) 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 2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2017.

Round 2 will end on 22 July 2018, 23:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 11:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Cultivars_by_genera

Cultivars by genera 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 ∙ +/−

Themightyquill (talk) 11:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Filter

Hi Pitke! The filter error was my mistake. Frankly, I have no idea why you weren't excluded. Anyway, sorry for the mess! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 07:41, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) There were multiple reports about stupid filter, such as here. Is Hedwig in Washington qualified enough to make live changes to a software serving thousands regulars? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:14, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 23:38, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Or as GAndy just put it: "Не ошибается тот, кто ничего не делает." --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 23:49, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Categories "Caricatures of fashion" and "Cartoons about fashion"

The word "cartoon" had a very different meaning before the mid 19th-century, and is not always applied to things before that time. In particular, classic caricatures -- such as stand-alone single-sheet humorous images, each printed from a metal plate engraved by people like George Cruikshank and James Gillray, then hand-watercolored after printing -- are rarely called "cartoons" by knowledgeable people. Churchh (talk) 07:47, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very open to hearing your suggestion for "humorous illustration, with or without visual exaggerations". --Pitke (talk) 16:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you consulted an abridged pocket dictionary which only gives one definition of caricature, then that can't override the terminology used by scholars who study people like Thomas Rowlandson and James Gillray. It would have been better if you had consulted someone or something other than an abridged pocket dictionary, since you've now created inconsistencies in category names (such as "Caricatures of crinolines", as well as others). Churchh (talk) 22:23, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have made an incorrect assumption about the reason behind my previous category naming, and repeated your suggestion of having some expertise in the topic at hand. This does not increase my understanding of the terms of art, or propose a solution or an approach to the problem of inconsistent category naming. How do you find my suggestion of "humorous illustrations"? Luckily, the category structure here on Commons only has to serve a largely international, English-non-native-speaking crowd of widely different levels of education--one can only imagine the hassle if the user base extended across history as well. --Pitke (talk) 04:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a professional scholar in this area, but I have a certain amount of practical experience (as you could see from my upload and edit history going back to about 2006) and am very familiar with the terminology used by professional scholars. You should have consulted a suitable area-specific reference work, since whatever one you did consult was obviously inadequate. It would also be a good if you could display a little less arrogance in laying down the law about a language which you are not a native speaker. I don't tell you what correct Finnish is, so maybe things will go more smoothly if you refrain from trying to tutor me in correct English. Churchh (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plié category in Squats one?

Hello!
If I'm not mistaken, your addition of "Squats" as parent category for the "Plié" one is just an error / a mistyping? Can it be cancelled without problem?
Regards. -- BarnCas (talk) 21:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ps: maybe did you mean the exercise? But the corresponding WP page talks about "strength training and fitness" and doesn't mention ballet steps. Should the Plié then be really classified in this category? -- BarnCas (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @BarnCas: , you're quite correct. I'm not a native English speaker, and was under the impression that "squat" is the generic term for a position where a person stands, while deeply bending at the knees. I've fixed the Plié categorising. --Pitke (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your intervention. To be honest, as non-native speaker too, I didn't even know this sportive meaning of squat until I saw it thanks to your categorization. So I thank you also for your contribution to my vocabulary improvement

Regards -- BarnCas (talk) 19:29, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Girls of Mexico

Any basis for [3] referring to these as "girls of Mexico"? I agree that presumably their heritage includes Mexican ancestry, but unless you know them personally (I don't) I would not presume that two young people in a parade in Seattle are not from the United States. - Jmabel ! talk 22:07, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, this was a Fiestas Patrias celebration in a majority Spanish-speaking neighborhood, but I'd be pretty comfortable asserting that the majority of young people there are U.S.-born. I don't think we would presume a 7-year-old redhead at the St. Patrick's Day parade in NYC was from Ireland. - Jmabel ! talk 22:10, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was tagging a lot and thought this was an event in northern Mexico. --Pitke (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

People have said that about South Park, part of why I like the place, but we're about 200km from Canada! - Jmabel ! talk 16:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot recognise US locations from photos beyond the rusty hills of California, the swamps of Florida, the Great Plains, and the southwestern desert. --Pitke (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, pretty near impossible to know by "the look of it" unless you just plain know the place. E.g. all of the following are in the smallish city of Tacoma, Washington, and I don't think any of them are even obviously America:

Jmabel ! talk 01:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2018 is open!

Dear Pitke,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in R1 of the 2018 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2018) 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 the final (and current) round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2018.

Round 2 will end 17 March 2019, 23:59:59.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 18:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Pitke,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Pitke,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Pitke,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ill-fitting_clothing

Category:Ill-fitting_clothing 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 ∙ +/−

Themightyquill (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Clothing_details

Clothing details 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 ∙ +/−

Themightyquill (talk) 20:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image Name Removal

Hei, @Pitke: , you helped me a while back with removing my full legal name from an image I had uploaded to Commons about 10 years ago...you did it with this file — I tried to do it with another file (Piusxtomb.jpg), but as you can see, I botched the attempt and my full legal name is still in the file history. I am not sure how you did this originally; could you outline the steps you used in that first image for me? 🇫🇮Kiitos!🇫🇮 --MosheA (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have now hidden the original file version and early page revisions to hide your private name. Sorry for the outrageous delay! For future reference, only admins are able to hide file/page revisions and edit summaries, so if you have other cases in mind, just ask an admin or on the admin notice board. --Pitke (talk) 18:59, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mon_shaped_like_paulownia

Mon shaped like paulownia 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 ∙ +/−

Josh (talk) 21:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

De-adminship warning (Feb 2020)

This talk page in other languages:

Dear Pitke. I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2020 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship. 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I was almost certain I'd removed some unneeded redirects/misnamed cats fairly recently. --Pitke (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:"Breaking News" during the Five Gaited Stake class (3008085680).jpg

File:"Breaking News" during the Five Gaited Stake class (3008085680).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） ∙ +/−

Túrelio (talk) 07:35, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Birds_nesting

Birds nesting 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 ∙ +/−

Reseletti (talk) 14:09, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with marco verch

Hi! You have deleted the files but you have not written your rationale. Could you have a look? --MGA73 (talk) 19:55, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also made a notice on Category:Images by Marco Verch about the ban of the Flickr user. Feel free to add a better reason for the ban. --MGA73 (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And here too Category:Flickr images from bad authors. No spamming from me today :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. The DR is a principal one so I think it is important that you write down your rationale. --MGA73 (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but where? Edit summaries are uneditable AFAIK. --Pitke (talk) 21:13, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took so long. You can close this DR Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with marco verch and add the rationale there. --MGA73 (talk) 14:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Turns out I encountered these files via the category and was not aware there were open DRs concerning them at the time. --Pitke (talk) 10:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dogs_rolling

Dogs rolling 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 ∙ +/−

Estopedist1 (talk) 05:33, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Unidentified_Protista_in_Finland

Unidentified Protista in Finland 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 ∙ +/−

Estopedist1 (talk) 12:12, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tack

Hello, thanks to your corrections to among other files, File:COA family sv Gedda.png, I have now started a renovation of my uploaded files, where I will collect the corrected versions I changed with Commons:AWB in Category:CoA_Lab-sv, which is presently my end station for corrected files, both considering recommended tincture hexadecimal colors, as well as proper descriptions. All further input from you very much appreciated. I think the Heraldry project pages should be updated, and more informative, so active contributors save time, and I think it could be a very active section, if taken care of better. Again, thanks, and if you have time to check how I work, please considerate giving more advice. It seems many people worked a lot to improve heraldry on commons before, lately I have not seen many... Talar du svenska? Dan Koehl (talk) 13:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

W12 founder

Hi, I saw you mentioned Painting The Sky as a potential founder for W12. I'm wondering, what did you base that off of? I've heard from here that the founder was a colt, and from here that he was born in 2010 and died in 2010. Were they related maybe? Iamnotabunny (talk) 18:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Iamnotabunny: Thanks for the heads-up on this, it must have been a brainfart on my part. --Pitke (talk) 19:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks Pitke for cleaning up Categories concerning some of my files. And also glad you removed "Category:Indigenous animals of Namibia". I actually wanted to ask for it a long time ago ;-) Regards --Olga Ernst (talk) 09:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Finskhesten Viri.jpg

Hi there, and a Happy New Year! I noticed that you deleted this image and listed it for undeletion in 2021. I have, however, removed it from the undeletion list because it was published some time after 1970 with a copyright notice attached to it. So while it is now out of copyright in Finland, it is still copyrighted in the US, and we can't host it. De728631 (talk) 13:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Coats of arms by artist

Hi - last September you moved this cat from "artist" to "designer". As reason you stated: "Misleading name; coats of arms are designed as blazons (descriptions)." But what we have here is that the images are created by heraldists over the centuries in various versions following the identical blazon. The main issue of this cat is the painter/artist, not the designer/texter. Please revert your move. -- MaxxL - talk 19:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Wikimedia Commons!

Dear Pitke

Thank you for your hard work to create the sum of all knowledge that is freely sharable to every single human being across the world. As our diverse community grows, we need a guideline that will help all of our work collectively and constructively where everyone feels safe, welcomed, and part of a team. That is why the Wikimedia movement is working on establishing a global guideline called the Universal Code of Conduct, often referred to as UCoC.

After the months-long policy consultation, we have prepared a policy (available in many languages) that has been ratified by the Board of Trustees. We’re currently in the second phase of the process. During this round of consultation, we want to discuss the implementation of this policy. As a member of the functionary team of Wikimedia Commons, your opinion on enforcement is of great value. We want to hear from you on how this policy can be enforced on the Wikimedia Commons community and what might be needed to do so. There are a few enforcement questions so you can easily outline your answers based on them. Please do not hesitate to bring any more questions/challenges you think are not yet discussed.

The discussion is taking place on Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation. You can also share your thoughts by replying to this message (Please ping me so I get notified), posting your message on my talk page. I am aware that some thoughts cannot be expressed publicly, so you can always share your opinion by emailing me as well.

As a valued member of the Commons community, please share your thoughts, ideas, and experiences that relate to UCoC. Let us know what needs to be improved so we can build a more friendly and cooperative space to increase editor engagement and retention of new users.

Wikimedia projects are governed by you. So, it is you who needs to step up to ensure a safe, comfortable, and pleasant working environment.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you! Wikitanvir (WMF) (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a short survey regarding UCoC

Hello Pitke,

I would like to inform you that we now have a survey in place to take part in the UCoC consultation. It is not a long one and should take less than 10 minutes to complete. You can take the survey even if you have already participated in the on-wiki consultation. It has a different set of questions and allows you to participate anonymously and privately.

As a member of the Commons functionaries, your opinion is especially essential. Please click here to participate in the survey.

You are still welcome to participate in the on-wiki discussions. If you prefer you can have your say by sending me an email. You can also drop me an email if you want to have a one-to-one chat.

Thank you for your participation! Wikitanvir (WMF) 13:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dog_breeds_recognized_by_United_Kennel_Club

Dog breeds recognized by United Kennel Club 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 ∙ +/−

Cavalryman (talk) 01:48, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pitke, I am unsure if the ping worked, but I have replied to your comment at the above discussion. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 05:02, 4 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah I saw it, I'm just exhausted. --Pitke (talk) 11:51, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Helsinki ilmakuva kallionkirkko blacked out.png

File:Helsinki ilmakuva kallionkirkko blacked out.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.

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） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:24, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report

Hello, please take a look at this report: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Files named with meaningless/disruptive names (motivated renaming was reverted without any valid reason) as these are serious everyday violations of the Commons rules and protection of meaningless names (in this case, Kalumny which translates as Columns). User Kazimier Lachnovič with filemover rights constantly performs violations of the Commons rules, creates instability issues and protects meaningless names, thus creates confusion. His Commons admin rights previously were lifted, but it is clear that it is not enough. -- Pofka (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

De-adminship warning

This talk page in other languages:

Dear Pitke. I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your admin rights and also additional permissions (bureaucrat/oversighter/checkuser/interface-admin), if any, on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2021 before 13th September, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose their rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you! -- CptViraj (talk) 10:51, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you so much Pitke!!!!! I'm so grateful for the help :)

-Heather Moreton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abounaderphoto (talk • contribs) 14:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:Uraneo Bay Andalusian (Half brother to Alborozo) (2690237479).jpg

Yours sincerely, Pitke (talk) 20:31, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:CowDefecating.jpg

File:CowDefecating.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） ∙ +/−

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:51, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blue_sky_background

Blue sky background 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 ∙ +/−

P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Domesticated_chickens_in_zoos

Category:Domesticated_chickens_in_zoos 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 ∙ +/−

Spizaetus (talk) 01:42, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Sound Logo

Hello,

I am messaging you because a contest for a sound logo for Wikimedia is being developed and your opinion as a Wikimedia Commons admin is appreciated. My team would like to know if it is possible for the top finalist sound logos in the contest to have attribution temporarily hidden from public view until all the votes are final? The idea is to let the public judge the sound logo contestants based on the merit of the logo, not the person or people who made it. Again, any feedback is appreciated.

Thank you,

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

De-adminship warning

Dear Pitke. I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your admin rights on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2022 before 13 September, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose their rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you! -- CptViraj (talk) 18:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People_photographing

People photographing 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 ∙ +/−

JopkeB (talk) 13:47, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gray_impressions

Gray impressions 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 ∙ +/−

JopkeB (talk) 05:36, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories "by faculty"

Why is this category called "Tigers by faculty?" I don't think the physical characteristics in this category (color, gender, etc.) are "faculties." Jarble (talk) 20:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women_doing_textile_work

Women doing textile work 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 ∙ +/−

186.172.16.70 23:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iridescent Feathers vs Plumage

Hello,

I'm adding photographs of iridescent Mexican Feather Mosaics. Per your note on the Category:Iridescent plumage page, you want the subcategory of Category:Iridescent feathers to be used "for specimens consisting of individual feathers". Would the feather mosaics in question, which are "paintings" composed of tens of thousands of separate feathers, go into the former or the latter?

It's not plumage on a bird, so the latter arguably fits better, but obviously, it is not a demonstration of a "individual" feather in each image (though, other users don't seem to be following your guidelines exactly either).

In the meantime, I'm putting them into the "feathers" category, but feel free to let me know if you'd rather I do the inverse.

Thank you!

MajoraZ (talk) 11:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, "plumage" is the natural feathercoat of a bird. Once feathers are removed from the skin, they stop being plumage, unless they are reapplied with great taxidermist care to the original natural arrangement. Just because the art pieces use hundreds of feathers doesn't disqualify them from the category. If iridescent feathers are always or almost always used in these mosaics, the entire category of the artform could be classed under "iridescent feathers". Thanks for letting me know, the technique is super neat. --Pitke (talk) 13:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pit bulls killed by the city of Denver, CO due to BSL.jpg

File:Pit bulls killed by the city of Denver, CO due to BSL.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） ∙ +/−

2600:1702:3AE0:5E90:4B0B:3AB6:2DA1:DEF 13:32, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Standing_animals

Standing animals 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 ∙ +/−

Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 15:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Pitke

TUSC token

Notification about possible deletion

Before you get slapped with

Cavies

gallery mode

Luokittelu

Lajit Suomessa

Happy New Year

Notification about possible deletion

Thanks for your updated colors on {{By color}}

wanting to help, but...?

INeverCry Blocked - Serious or Joking?

Poistetun kuvan palautus

Revert

Please complete template

Must these files be deleted?

Vandalism warning

Reply:Thanks but

Please be civil

Category:Pink roses

A barnstar for you!

Personal attacks by INeverCry

Please undelete

Kuvan poistopyyntö

Types of Red?

Translation needed:

Chaperones

De-adminship warning

Are these colours correct?

Happy New Year, Pitke!

Category:Plants damaged by pests

Metadata Commonsissa

De-adminship warning

Apua ryhmäviestiin

Robbing the dead

Copyright status: File:Cracked shoed hoof.png

Rename

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2017 is open!

Filter

Categories "Caricatures of fashion" and "Cartoons about fashion"

Plié category in Squats one?

Girls of Mexico

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2018 is open!

Community Insights Survey

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Image Name Removal

De-adminship warning (Feb 2020)

Tack

W12 founder

Thanks

Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Wikimedia Commons!

Please take a short survey regarding UCoC

Report

De-adminship warning

Thank you!

Notification about possible deletion

How we will see unregistered users

Sound Logo

De-adminship warning

Categories "by faculty"

Iridescent Feathers vs Plumage

Navigation menu

Search