User talk:Reykholt

FINDING IMAGES:

I am looking for photos of Iceland, f.ex. I loaded some myself these last weeks (Skorradalsvatn_2004, Borgarfjörður_2004), but I can't find these by using the search engine.

On the other hand, I could create links to them from the German, English and French Wikipedias.

Reykholt 16:20, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Found it. Ok.

Reykholt 22:56, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Copyright Tags

Hello Reykholt, welcome on the commons. Could you please add copyright tags to all the images you uploaded? You wrote: no other copyrights involved - does it mean public domain? If there are no clear tags, the image may have to be deleted. Thanks -- :Bdk: 04:44, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Myndir

Þar sem commons er fjöltyngd svæði hefur verið ákveðið að nota upprunalegu nöfn hluta hér, til dæmis Leifr Eiríksson ekki Leif Ericsson eða Leifur Eiríksson, Reykjavík ekki Reykjavik osf. þannig betra er að skrifa Þingvellir en Tingvellir. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 20:33, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Request for deletion of Image:Thingvellir 4 Herbst 2004.jpg

Why do you want to delete this image just because you want to publish it in a book. If you are the copyright holder you can publish the image at several places ... Andreas Tille 09:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, since you granted anyone the right to do whatever with the image, anyone can publish it anywhere, including books or the commons. If you do not like that, you whould not have published it here. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 09:55, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Photos in die Wikimedia setzen

Hi Reykholt,

have you notived that I replied to your request on my discussion page? Andreas Tille 12:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:Berufjörður01.jpg

Das kann nicht stimmen. Laut Karte kann man Vestrahorn von der Ringstaße so nicht sehen, denn er liegt hinter Fjarðarfjall und Brunnhorn. File:Berufjörður02.jpg habe ich nach File:Hvalnesskriður.jpg verschoben. Fingalo (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Du hast völlig recht mit der geographischen Einordnung.

Allerdings stammt das Foto nicht von mir. Ich verwendete es nur im Artikel um den (erloschenen) Álftafjörðurvulkan, zu dem die Þvottáskríður gehören.Reykholt (talk) 16:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Úlfarsfell 2.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot

Kategorien

Jetzt herrscht hier ein ziemliches Kategorien-Chaos. Es gibt die Kategorie Category:Geography of Iceland mit den Unterkategorien rund um Island. Siehe Category talk:Geography of Iceland. Und jetzt auf einnmal dasselbe in Category:Regions of Iceland mit ähnlichen Unterkategorien, bei denen aber im Gegensatz zu Category:Geography of Iceland unklar ist, wie sie abgegrenzt sind. Wie soll das nun weitergehen? Also, ich kategorisiere in diese neuen Kategorien nix ein! Fingalo (talk) 18:04, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Die Kritik verstehe ich schon. Ich habe diese Kategorien gebildet, bevor ich die Geography of Iceland entdeckt hatte. Vielleicht kann man ja die Regionen mal wieder rauslöschen. Das ist wirklich doppelt gemoppelt.Reykholt (talk) 18:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Ich wollte das nicht ohne Rückfrage machen. Fingalo (talk) 19:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sag mal, wann hast Du mit den neuen Kategorien begonnen? Fingalo (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weiß ich nicht mehr. Kann man das nicht irgendwo sehen? Letztes Jahr irgendwann, glaub ich.Reykholt (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Danke!

Hallo Reykholt, besten Dank für Deine aufwändige Arbeit mit der weiteren Kategoriesierung meiner Bilder! Du machst Dir ja eine Riesenmühe, was aber letztlich ja der ganzen Community zu Nutzen kommen! -- Simisa (talk) 11:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Simisa, ich hab einfach rausgefunden, dass die Suchmaschine immer nach den Kategorien, nicht aber nach den Bildtiteln sucht. Da ich besonders viel mit Island arbeite, v.a. in der deutschen Wikipedia, erleichtere ich mir auf diese Weise auch selber die weitere Arbeit.

Und außerdem hab ich gerade Sommerferien, da hab ich Zeit.Reykholt (talk) 11:30, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Und zudem finde ich die Aufnahmen, die du hier reinsetzt, ausgesprochen gut, es macht daher Freude sie zu verwenden.Reykholt (talk) 11:35, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons has a specific scope

Thank you for your contributions. Your image or other content, Strandarvegur, was recently deleted, or will soon be deleted, in accordance with our process and policies, because it was not, or is not, within our scope. Please review our project scope, but in short, Commons is targeted at educational media files including photographs, diagrams, animations, music, spoken text and video clips. The expression “educational” is to be understood according to its broad meaning of “providing knowledge; instructional or informative”. Wikimedia Commons does not contain text articles like encyclopedia articles, textbooks, news, word definitions and such. Each of these other kinds of content have their own projects: Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikinews, Wiktionary and Wikiquote. If the content seems to fit the scope of one of those other projects, please consider contributing it there. Otherwise, consider an alternative outlet. If you think that the deletion was in error because the contribution really was in scope, you can appeal it at Commons:Undeletion requests, giving a reason why it fits our scope to help others evaluate the matter. Thank you for your understanding.

Otourly (talk) 18:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, some time, since I looked last into my talk. I strangely don't remember having set in here in Wikimedia a picture named "Strandarvegur". ??? Reykholt (talk) 07:39, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 19:01, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Reykholt (talk) 19:03, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vigdis Finnbogadottir

Hello Reykholt, the image is in the category Category:Vigdís Finnbogadóttir, and that category is in the category Category:Presidents of Iceland. If you add the image to that category it is there twice. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but this is the same with the other presidents of Iceland like Ólafur Ragnar or Kristján Eldjárn. I just would like to have also an overview over all of them in the Category: Presidents of Iceland.Reykholt (talk) 21:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Verschiedene Flüsse namens Reykjadalsá

Hallo Reykholt; mir ist gerade aufgefallen, dass du mein Foto File:Reykjadalsa djupagil.jpg in Category:Reykjadalsá eingeordnet hast. "Meine" Reykjadalsá ist allerdings die Reykjadalsá in der Gemeinde Ölfus, die bei Hveragerði in die Varmá mündet (und man kann hinten im Reykjadalur ganz toll in ihr baden :-) ). Sie sollte nicht mit der Reykjadalsá, die in die Hvítá mündet (oder einer der anderen), verwechselt werden. In der deutschen Wikipedia gibt es ja auch die Begriffsklärungsseite de:Reykjadalsá, um die verschiedenen gleichnamigen Flüsse auseinanderzuhalten. Eigentlich ist Category:Reykjadalsá schon unpassend benannt, da nicht eindeutig. Da die anderen Fotos, soviel ich sehe, wohl alle von der Reykjadalsá (Hvitá) sind, werde ich die Kategorie nach Category:Reykjadalsá (Hvitá) verschieben und für die in die Varmá mündende Reykjadalsá Category:Reykjadalsá (Varmá) anlegen, dann sollte es passen :-) Gestumblindi (talk) 00:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gut, mach mal. Ich dachte gar nicht an die andere, kenne aber auch das Reykjadalur. Das gibts ja öfter, dass da so eine Namensdoppelung vorhanden ist.Reykholt (talk) 09:31, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sea rescues

Isn't this redundant with Category:Rescues at sea? Shouldn't they be merged? Rmhermen (talk) 23:14, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could be an idea, when I think about it...Reykholt (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get "language select" mode into e.g. my pages "Katla" or "Tuyas"? Reykholt (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Profile through the Pyrenees ES.svg

Hi, Reykholt, I deleted the Category:Diagrams of volcanoes of France that you put in the image, because in this scheme there is none (red masses are plutonic rocks, not volcanic). Take this opportunity to thank you for your work in Commons. Regards, --PePeEfe (talk) 17:19, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok., was not really sure about that one.Reykholt (talk) 17:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:New_Zealand_in_art

New Zealand in 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 ∙ +/−

Alan Liefting (talk) 05:57, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed to discuss this generally and indicated my definition on the relative discussion page. - And: I would never take something like this personally, no problem!Reykholt (talk) 09:41, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Islands_of_the_Pacific_Ocean_in_art

Islands of the Pacific Ocean in 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 ∙ +/−

Alan Liefting (talk) 05:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)#[reply]

See my entry re. New Zealand and also my entry on the discussion page there.09:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Taxons by location

Hi. Categories like Persicaria amphibia consist specimens from different countries, so its messy to categorize all of them under "Nature of <county>" and e.g. "Flora of <county>" of a specific country when some or many images don't depict nature or flora of a specific country. Therefore only certain specimens (images) should be categorized by location or there should be "<taxon> in <country" categories here. See also the latter part of this talk. 90.190.114.172 08:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I understand what the problem is. Could then be an idea, to have the ones found eg. in Germany in an undercategory: Persicaria amphibia in Germany. I think we did something like that with species in Iceland. And so have a category "by country".Reykholt (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding Flora of Iceland to plant categories that aren't specific/exclusive to a Iceland. Commons is not the place for a comprehensive list of species per country, please use Wikipedia for that and create a list article, not a category. --Pitke (talk) 08:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gran queyron da rocca bianca.jpg

Hi. I saw you added some cats to the File:Gran queyron da rocca bianca.jpg; I've some doubts about two of them (Cirques in France and Hanging valleys of France): the peak lies on the fr/it border, so bot the summit and the ridge can be considered both italian and french, but the slopes represented in the pic (and so the cirque and the suspended valley) are on the italian side of the mountain. Good evening, --F Ceragioli (talk) 19:07, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not really sure about that one neither. I'll "neutralize" them.Reykholt (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's on the border so I "duplicated" the cat (France & Italy). If you don't agree please undo the edit, for me it's not a problem.--F Ceragioli (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is fine with me.Reykholt (talk) 21:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Catégorisation des ruisseaux

Bonjour Reykolt. Je viens d'annuler plusieurs modifications que tu avais effectuées concernant des catégories de cours d'eau. En effet, j'avais classé dans la category:Streams in Corrèze les ruisseaux situés en Corrèze et dans la category:Streams in Dordogne, ceux situés en Dordogne, après avoir vérifié qu'il s'agit bien de ruisseaux, et pas de rivières. À l'inverse, la Dordogne n'est absolument pas un ruisseau, aussi bien en Corrèze qu'en Dordogne. Cordialement. --Père Igor (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oui, d'accord, je comprends. Je crois aussi que j'ai confondu ici le mot allemand "Strom" qui indique un grand fleuve et le mot anglais "stream" qui en effet indique plutôt un ruisseau. Sorry. J'avais moi-même l'intention de corriger cela, mais j'ai oublié.Reykholt (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merci. Bonne continuation. Père Igor (talk) 10:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categories fyki

Hi, as being tagged {categorize} respectively already have been categorized p.e. that edit has been fixed, thx Roland zh (talk) 18:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Universal login

Hi administrators, as I am rather often working with different languages (English, German, French and Iceland esp.), I would like to ask, if I could have a login valuable for all of these in Wikipedia and Wikimedia.Reykholt (talk) 18:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator, but I think do-it-yourself instructions can be found at meta:Help:Unified login. Davidwr (talk) 15:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Reykholt (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categorizing images

I undid your recent edit to File:Closeup view of Turner Falls, Oklahoma.jpg because the category you added does not exist and (so far) it was only used for this image.

If you have multiple images that are suitable for a category called Category:Outcrops in Oklahoma, please add at least 3 or 4 at the same time then "create" a page for the category by clicking on the link above. Be sure to add it to suitable parent categories.

Also, the image above is part of Category:Turner Falls. If Turner Falls Park itself is considered an outcropping rather than just the parts of the park that are shown in the images, then it is best to add Category:Turner Falls to any future category called Category:Outcrops in Oklahoma rather than adding the individual images in it. Notice that the individual images in Category:Turner Falls are NOT in the categories Category:Murray County, Oklahoma, Category:Waterfalls in Oklahoma, or Category:Parks in Oklahoma, but the "parent category," Category:Turner Falls, is. Davidwr (talk) 15:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the images in Category:Outcrops in the United States may be suitable for a new category called Category:Outcrops in Oklahoma. If you create and populate the category, consider using one of the other per-state sub-categories of Category:Outcrops in the United States by state as a model. Davidwr (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I put some images in categories which are not yet existing, but which I intend to create later. I am going through the states of the United States mostly systematically, but sometimes, I just put images in a category which I'll create soon when I come to this state.Reykholt (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

	The Geography Barnstar
	For the hard work. Ray Garraty (talk) 14:40, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!Thank you.Reykholt (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Three_Sisters

Three Sisters 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 ∙ +/−

Mjrmtg (talk) 23:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Étang de Bellefontaine

Hi, just to let you know that I have removed the categs that you added to most of the pics in that categ. Not that I am against my pics being added to, quite the contrary I appreciate your interest, thanks. It's only that the ditch you put into categs to do wth erosion, has nothing to do with erosion. It was dug by hand in the 12th century at the latest and regularly maintained so since then (otherwise the pond overflows and floods all the woods and fields around, up to the Bellefontaine house and farm, and easily cuts off the old track from Saint-Maurice to Melleroy; hence the regularity of the ditch's maintenance). In fact this is what these pics are about: floodings. But to see that we have to wait til the summer, when I'll go back there and take pics showing the way the pond dries up then. Anyway, please don't feel offended by my removing your stuff. Cdlly, Basicdesign (talk) 22:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC) (sorry for the link, can't remember how to link internally to categs)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	This barnstar is awarded to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikimedia Commons, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated. Allforrous 15:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!Reykholt (talk) 17:01, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Du erhältst einen Orden!

	Der Fleißorden
	Thanks for your almost endless contributions in categoryzing my and other pictures! Simisa (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Reykholt (talk) 07:50, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ich besorge Dir wieder etwas Arbeit; ich bin die nächsten zwei Wochen in Island in den Ferien :-)

Da komm ich auch bald hin, dann werd ich aber vermutlich weniger Zeit für die Wikimedia haben!Reykholt (talk) 16:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Geneva/Genève

Hello,

Per COM:CAT, the categories are named in english, and the city name in english is Geneva. I've rollbackd your modifications on the main categories, please do so on the rest of your contributions.

Pleclown (talk) 14:15, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of the categories re. Switzerland are named in English, e.g. "Solothurn", "Aargau", "Interlaken" are not English, but German. In the categories of France, there is eg. "Haute-Normandie". This is French, not English.

I think this will only lead to a strange mixture of categories, because categories often can't be in English, as for a lot of names, no English translation is existing. How would you eg. name in English "Appenzell Innerrhoden" (another of the cantons of Switzerland)? (See also my comment on the page "Geneva"/ Genève.) And yes, I saw the old discussion there, but this does not change the fact that there are often no English versions of place names in not-English-speaking countries.

Rules which are impossible to follow are not helpful, I'd say.

And in my opinion, Wikimedia as a mulitinational internet community, should try to have place names in the language of the country, as far as possible. If there is one, English translations of names can always accompany the title of a category.

Reykholt (talk) 15:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, are you aware that the city is named Genf in german and that german is the first (in term of speakers) langage of Switzerland ? Should we name the category Genf ? I don't think so. Yes, Commons is a multilingual place, but, since the software is not allowing multilangage category name, we have settled for the lingua franca of the modern world, english. We do have redirections to help french speakers looking for Genève.

For the no English versions of place names, this is also described in the COM:CAT page.

Please try to understand that we are trying to build a repository of knowledge usable for everybody. Pushing your reflexion a little bit further, should we rename Category:Beijing in Category:北京 ? This would not really help anyone, and would make difficult to navigate or even search for many people.

The current consensus is to name categories in English, please abide by this consensus, or raise your concerns on the COM:VP, but do not try to enforce your idea without discussion.

Furthermore, the renaming of (big) categories should be discussed on Commons:Categories_for_discussion beforehand, whatever change is planified (langage, rewording, ...)

Thank you for your understanding.

Pleclown (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was also initially for naming this category "Genève", but there is quite a consensus for "Geneva". And yes, any change of this envergure should be discussed first. There is a future plan to use WikiData for multilingual categories. Hopefully this will solve this issue. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:44, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization

Hi Reykholt. Please see COM:OVERCAT regarding how categorization works on Commons. For example if "an image needing to be categorized shows a yellow circle. This image should be placed in Category:Yellow circles. If it is also placed in Category:Circles, it is over-categorized. We already know that it's a circle, because all yellow circles are circles. Therefore, Category:Circles is redundant." For this reason I had to revert some of your edits where images of national parks were placed already in the category of the particular national park, yet you added the generic Category:national parks. (Examples: [1], [2], [3].) Hope is all clear now. Happy editing. --Cheers --ELEKHH^T 11:04, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes set a picture not only in the eg. category "cliffs of France", but if I think it is a really interesting picture for the general category / information, I set it also in the category "cliffs", to have some typical examples there. But mostly I try specializing. BTW: Has somebody of the administrators looked at the category "Dunes" (Category:Dunes)? There are a lot of car pictures there. What is the reason for that? Advertising? Reykholt (talk) 11:12, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commons is far from perfect. There is quite a lot of miss-categorization and over-categorization. But that is no reason to do more of that. There is no consensus for placing images you like in the root category. If you like some images very much nominate them for QI, VI or FP. There are separate tools that help sorting out category intersection or high quality images. In any category you can click on the tool in the upper right corner to highlight images the community considered worthy to be featured. --ELEKHH^T 11:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should there then in yr. opinion be no pictures at all in categories like "cliffs", but all of them in the "featured pictures of cliffs" or "cliffs of (a certain country)" etc.?Reykholt (talk) 11:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that is not my opinion, that is the current consensus opinion on Commons. For highlighting images that best illustrate the subject of a category, besides the above mentioned tool (wait few seconds to load), you also have galleries such as Cliff. --ELEKHH^T 11:37, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I thought about the picture galleries, too. So that in the category "Cliffs", there would stay undercategories and pictures which can't be undercategorized, eg. because there is no information about the country etc.Reykholt (talk) 13:44, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Bodies of water" categories

I have been working with various United States geography categories, and I noticed that you added "landforms" categories to "bodies of water" categories. For example, with this edit, you added Category:Landforms of Georgia (U.S. state) to Category:Bodies of water in Georgia (U.S. state). I am removing those, because a body of water is not a landform: it is water, not land. Please don't do any more of that kind of change. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:20, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you mean. I just found the "Bodies of water" somewhere in Wikimedia under the category "Landforms" and took this over. But it could be a good idea to separate it, just have both in "Geomorphology" , "Geography" and "Geology". And in my opinion, this would also relate to glaciers. Reykholt (talk) 06:44, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What would you propose re. the glaciers? They are bodies of water in an aggregated form, but there are eg. the rock glaciers, a mixture of rock and ice. Shall we have the glaciers in "Bodies of water" and "rock glaciers" at the same time in "landforms"?

Outcrops

Hey, I found something else. I saw that you added "outcrops" categories to a lot of "tunnels" categories. Those two things are completely unrelated. Outcrops are rock formations. Tunnels are structures built to allow something to travel through them. I suppose some tunnels go through outcrops, but certainly not all of them, and tunnels don't belong in outcrop categories. I'm removing the ones I see, but since I don't know everywhere you did this, it would be great if you could check all the ones you added and remove some, too. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:47, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add a lot of these to tunnels. But I know that an outcrop is a part of a rock formation which can be seen and approached, so raw tunnels would open up rock formations and make them attainable to scientists eg. - which is of course not the case when concrete is used or some other material which comes in between the rock formation and people who would like to have a closer look at it.Reykholt (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And that's only true if the tunnel is going through rock. Some tunnels go through water, or underground (through soil as opposed to rock), and some go through man-made structures (like subway tunnels). Even if all of them did go through rock, though, these are still two different things. Also, that's not the whole definition of an outcrop. I don't believe that it counts as an outcrop if human beings expose it -- it needs to have been exposed naturally. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Road cuts are made by humans and though often referred to as outcrops. Eg. here " Small normal faults are exposed along the outcrop in the road cut. " in:http://geology.uprm.edu/Morelock/71MrbFl.htm - I also remember having read this in the Geology Blog "Mountain Beltway" by geologist Callan Bentley. So sometimes there seems to be made a difference between "exposure" (by man's actions) and "outcrop" (natural) like you say (eg. in about.com), but sometimes also not. Reykholt (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Native_American_Sacred_Site

Native American Sacred Site 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 ∙ +/−

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:25, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I never take discussions personally. - On the other hand, I didn't know a very similar category existed. I think, this is more for experts on Native Americans to decide which one to prefer or both.Reykholt (talk) 10:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kategorien

Hi, ich sehe, Du sprichst deutsch. Ich hatte bemerkt, dass Du gerne auch mal nicht existierende Kategorien vergibst. Daraufhin hatte ich Deine Beträge der letzen Tage durchgesehen und solche jeweils erst einmal als "unkategorisiert" markiert. Schau doch mal in die Category:Uncategorized categories. Da sind viele von Dir dabei, versuch doch bitte diese sinnvoll zu kategorisieren. Wenn möglich schau och auch mal deine älteren Beiträge nach Rotlinks durch un korregiere diese ebenfalls. Vielen Dank. --Ju Ta 09:48, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Schon erledigt.Reykholt (talk) 10:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Page History of Thingvellir

As you can see, I made a new page re. the a.m. subject. Should I include citations here like in Wikipedia?Reykholt (talk) 15:42, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with QIC nominations

Here we go again, you've to mention the USER who photographed; not their real name or so. The bot must notify the right person. Read nomination guidelines. --A.Savin 11:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Reykholt, I just want to thank you that you nominated one of my image to QI. It was nice surprise to see that somebody else like my photos. Also, thanks for all of your work associated with categorization of geological photos. Best regards --Chmee2 (talk) 18:02, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Are you a geologist or you are interested in this topic just by coincidence that you now live on Iceland? :)

No, I am not a geologist, but very interested in the matter. - And I like a lot of your Iceland photos, Chmee, as certainly also do a lot of other people!Reykholt (talk) 07:56, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geographic_regions_of_Canada

Category:Geographic_regions_of_Canada has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 21:17, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Forests vs. landforms

And another one... I saw that you added "landforms" categories to "forests" categories. Forests are not landforms. They grow on various kinds of landforms (mountains, hills, etc.), but the forests themselves are not landforms. I've removed the landforms categories from all the forest categories I could find that had them. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found that somewhere and took it over, but was also thinking about that it was kind of strange. Thank you for removing it.Reykholt (talk) 07:34, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Frostastadavatn panorama.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 13:44, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Na, das freut mich ja :-) - danke für die überraschende (und erfolgreiche) Nominierung, Reykholt! Schön, dass das Bild gefällt. Gestumblindi (talk) 00:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ecology_by_country

Ecology by country has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Alan Liefting (talk) 07:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please use sub-categories

When categorising files, please avoid placing them into several categories that are directly linked within the same tree (e.g. a parent category and a child category – like Category:United Kingdom and Category:London), to prevent over-categorization of files and over-population of categories. Usually, only the most specific category should be used. See Commons:Categories for more details. Thank you.

For example: Category:Craters by country is a sub-category of Category:Landforms by country which is a sub-category of Category:Geology by country. Thus, Category:Impact craters on Earth by country should be placed in Category:Craters by country, but not in Category:Landforms by country or Category:Geology by country. Best regards, ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 11:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maps_of_Hudson_Bay

Maps of Hudson Bay 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 ∙ +/−

Revent (talk) 11:13, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bárðarbunga_in_2014

Bárðarbunga in 2014 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) 16:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arnisee

Sind Sie eigentlich sicher, dass es sich beim Arnisee im Kanton Uri um einen künstlichen See (Stausee) handelt. Im englischen Artikel steht nämlich "Lake". --Friedo (talk) 16:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

---Gemäß dieser Website, ist es ein Stausee (engl. reservoir): http://www.arnisee.ch/geschichte.html Reykholt (talk) 14:26, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Der Link funktioniert nicht mehr. Konnte auf der übergeordneten Website diesebezüglich nichts finden. --Friedo (talk) 13:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Global account

Hi Reykholt! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shopping_centers_in_Iceland

Shopping centers in Iceland 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 ∙ +/−

195.50.31.213 22:21, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geomorphology

Hi, i'am starting reorganizing the whole category following some more academic principles (i.e. debris flow it's clearly a subcategory of mass movements). I noted you done a lot of work in this category, so if you want to purpose some criteria for a more useful classification let's discuss of them. Thanks a lot for your work. Sincerely. --Ciaurlec (talk) 10:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. I am just a layman in this.Reykholt (talk) 18:48, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bots

You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

The simple solution is to simply include the "rawcontinue" parameter with your request to continue receiving the raw continuation data (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&rawcontinue=1>). No other code changes should be necessary.
Or you could update your code to use the simplified continuation documented at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Query#Continuing_queries (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&continue=>), which is much easier for clients to implement correctly.

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks your categories changes.

Hej

Could you help putting pictures in categories like Category:August 2015 in Iceland, other mounth and years. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Seals (animals) of Iceland

It isn't finished, yet. Wieralee (talk) 23:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lookout points

I feel it is the same as Category:Viewpoints (landscape) (+all the subs), isn't it? --A.Savin 20:47, 21 September 2015 (UTC) Yes, saw that, too. And there is also the category "Scenic overviews". Best would perhaps be to have them all together under this one, I think.Reykholt (talk) 21:34, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

meta categories

Hi Reykhold. Thank you very much for your work on volcanic categories. Please, when you create a category by something (by type, by continent, etc.) add the MetaCat template at the top of the category. It's important for the maintenance of these categories, because this template add the category automatically in the specific flat list. It's very simple: you write on the top {{metacat|''something''}} (e.g. {{metacat|type}}, {{metacat|continent}}, etc.). All the flat lists of Commons are [here]. I correct all the categories that I found; please look at all categories by something that you have create if there are some other that needs this template, and add it. Thank you very much, and best regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:40, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for indicating this.Reykholt (talk) 06:41, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Steam

Hello Reykholt,

why did you re-create Category:Steam? What is the difference between it and Category:Steam (pure water vapor) to which it redirected? Ariadacapo (talk) 06:19, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I set a remark about that into the Discussion page of the newly recreated "Steam"-Category. Steam is per definition not only water vapour (H2O etc.), but also a hot mixture of different gases which you can find eg. at volcanoes. See eg. Hanna Kaasalaine, etal.: The chemistry of surface waters and steam, Iceland. (2012).] In this context, there are analysed eg. the percentages of chemical elements in the steam of volcanic vents. It says eg. in this scientific paper: "The steam discharged by the steam vents was found to carry trace elements including B, As, C and Cu in the ppt to ppb concentration range." (Abstract, p.1) Which means, that in the steam you can find chemical elements like arsen, carbon and copper, not just H (hydrogene) and O (oxygene) which would be water. The authors are talking here about high temperature geothermal fields at active volcanoes in Iceland. And they call the mixture of gases escaping the hydrothermal vents eg. at Category:Námafjall-Fumaroles) "steam". They say that the steam consisted in big portions of H2O, but there were other gases mixed into it (pdf, p.11): "The steam consisted of >99% of H2O, with CO2, H2S and sometimes H2 being the most important gases." So it is not "pure" water vapour. Reykholt (talk) 08:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer, and apologies for not noticing the category talk page you opened. I think there has to be a better naming system that distinguishes between steam and water vapor without using the term "pure". It was obvious to me that "pure" is not meant in a chemical sense (steam is of course never pure, nor is water…) but it may not be an appropriate term. I have no time right now, but I will try to work on this when I do. Ariadacapo (talk) 10:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

deletion requests

Hi, do you know the template {{Speedy}}? --Ju Ta 08:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't. Thank you for the information.Reykholt (talk) 13:37, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Videos_of_volcanoes

Videos of volcanoes 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 ∙ +/−

MOUAD2001 (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid overcategorization

Hello, Reykholt. I notice you've been categorizing items in a way that contradicts the overcategorization guideline. For example, you categorized the Stratovolcano gallery page into Category:Volcanoes, when it was already categorized in Category:Stratovolcanoes, which is a child of Category:Types of volcanoes, which is a child of Category:Volcanoes.

I've been cleaning up such overcategorization when I find it, so I have been cleaning up or reverting a number of edits that you've been making to volcano images, galleries, and categories. It would probably be less work for everyone if you incorporated the guideline into your editing work.

Thanks! — hike395 (talk) 02:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just think that pages are a different matter, more to show off. People will probably not look into all the undercategories, but to have pages about them also in a superior category could lead to people using the pages more.Reykholt (talk) 09:04, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you're acting in good faith, putting these extra categories to help readers. But, the consensus is that these extra categories are harmful because they result in crowded high-level categories. COM:OVERCAT explains the reasoning.

Many editors clean up overcategorization when they find it. If you add these extra categories, they will eventually be removed by someone. It's much easier to avoid the problem in the first place, rather than creating extra work for other editors. I spent 30 minutes cleaning up sub-categories of Category:Cascade Range volcanoes by year.

If you want to try to change the policy, you can start a discussion at Commons Talk:Categories. — hike395 (talk) 12:07, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I understand.Reykholt (talk) 15:39, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for understanding! — hike395 (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fisheye

May I ask why you recategorized File:Mount Rainier - Narada Falls pano 01.jpg, which I took, from "panorama" to "fisheye"? It's a pretty extreme warp, but it's not true fisheye. It is, as is obvious, stitched with Hugin from a large number of photos; it was take with a normal lens, not a fisheye lens. - Jmabel ! talk 19:05, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Just change it again.Reykholt (talk) 19:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Orogenic_belts

Orogenic belts 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 ∙ +/−

W like wiki (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rock glaciers of Wetterstein

Hallo Reykholt, du hast die Cat Rock glaciers of Wetterstein angelegt und auch einige Bilder darunter eingeordnet. Rein von den Bildern her kann ich überall nur Schuttreisen aber keine Blockgletscher erkennen. Bist du sicher, dass es sich da wirklich überall um Blockgletscher handelt? Ehrlich gesagt, fände ich Blockgletscher-Cats bei den zentralalpinen Gebirgsgruppen sinnvoller, wo es Blockgletscher gibt, die auch auf Bildern als solche eindeutig identifizierbar sind. Über Blockgletscher im Wettersteingebirge habe ich im Internet fast nichts gefunden, wenngleich es natürlich auch hier welche gibt, wie ein Tiroler Blockgletscher-Inventar (PDF-File) zeigt. Viele Grüße, --Haneburger (talk) 09:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, kam nicht früher dazu zu antworten. - Ich bin bzgl. der Wetterstein-Blockgletscher bzw. rock glaciers von der zweiten englischen Definition derselben ausgegangen als "mit Talus bedeckte Gletscher" (debris covered glaciers), welche ich in der englischen Wikipedia im Rock glacier-Artikel gefunden habe. Diese (erweiterte) Definition gibt es auch in (anderer) wissenschaftlicher Literatur, siehe z.B. Ivo Berthling, Beyond confusion: Rock glaciers as cryo-conditioned landforms. (2011) Anscheinend herrscht bzgl. der Definition dieser Landformen generell in der Wissenschaft eine gewisse Uneinigkeit. - An Literatur zu den Blockgletschern im Wettersteingebirge fand ich auch nur den von Dir genannten Artikel.Reykholt (talk) 08:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Craters_of_the_moon

Craters of the moon 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 ∙ +/−

ProfessorX (talk) 18:56, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Geography: Additional material

I would propose to indicate additional material re. geography by a "+ sign". This concerns material like maps, diagrams, special views (satellite photography, arial views) etc.Reykholt (talk) 11:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Reykholt, few people will see this if you only post on your own talk page. Maybe you would like to post it at the Village pump. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:32, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Good idea.Reykholt (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello Reykholt! Thank you very much for your numerous category amendments to my pictures. Maybe unlucky for you: Just returned yesterday with another more than 2000 pics, which might cause a lot of additional work to you :-)! Best regards, Simisa (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

creating metacategories

Hi, Reykholt. When you use the {{Metacat}} template, would you please include a parameter to indicate what the category is grouped by? That will put the category into a more specific category in addition to Category:Meta categories. Instructions on how to determine what to use for parameters are in the documentation for the template. Feel free to ask if you have any questions. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 20:56, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok.Reykholt (talk) 08:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. For example, the categories of Icelsnd by region that you just added the metacat template to need to specify region. The template should look like this: {{metacat|region}}. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Grassland

Grassland 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 ∙ +/−

ProfessorX (talk) 16:17, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for mountains of certain heights by country

Hello, Reykholt. I noticed that you have created quite a few of this type of category (for example, Category:2400s mountains by country), but at least some of them are empty. Do you plan to populate them? If they are not populated, they can be deleted. When you create a category, please be sure to populate it. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I intend to populate the categories.Reykholt (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reykholt, just as a remark against the unresistable torrents of the ever same refinements of categories: I do not like the idea of putting these by 1o meters categories to by country subcategories. It does not add value to the reader and makes it much more difficult to deal with for tools like petscan. We have Category:Mountains by country and we have Category:Mountains by height. Using Petscan you can do an easy intersection. BTW. When we have WD (containing mountain heights), it can be done automatically. I did a lot of work adding those 10 meter categories, but I will stop to do so as long as everything is put to the depth of such a category tree. Please keep an eye on new mountain categories.

Do you know Category:Mountain puzzle, which needs knowledgable and intelligent support? regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 17:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Herzi Pinki here. Consider Category:1660s mountains of Iceland. Will there ever be any subcategory other than Category:Eyjafjallajökull‎? It doesn't help our users to make a category that will only ever have 1 item in it -- it causes users to click through one more level of categorization. Another example is Category:1970s mountains of New Zealand.

I think you should stop making categories like Category:XXXXs mountains of Location -- there isn't a consensus that it is a good idea. Cleaning up these categories would be helpful. — hike395 (talk) 13:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Types_of_glaciers

Types of glaciers has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Icebergs_off_Chile

Icebergs off Chile 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 ∙ +/−

Geo Swan (talk) 02:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Major_rivers

Category:Major_rivers has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 04:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anthropogenic landforms

Hi, Reykholt. I noticed the anthropogenic landform categories you worked with. I don't think things like canals and reservoirs belong here, because they are not landforms. They are structures, and they are bodies of water, but not landforms. Similar issues exist with some other types of things, including dikes (unless they are made of earth), gardens and parks, some grottoes, and maybe others. What do you think? --Auntof6 (talk) 18:32, 31 October 2016 (UTC

Hi, Auntof. I noticed a contradiction re. the canals and reservoirs, but as bodies of water they not manmade as the water is not. On the other hand, the dams confining them are. So, I took them into the category.Reykholt (talk) 18:45, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think manmade dams are landforms, because they aren't land. Other things like buildings are built into or on the land, but those aren't considered landforms. I think only things that humans build using land/dirt as the building material should be considered a landform. That could include things like earthworks, barrows, etc.

I see your point about reservoirs. I see them categorized under lakes, which are, of course, bodies of water. However, I guess that could depend on the form of the reservoir. There are reservoirs that are essentially manmade lakes, but there are others that are structures that sit above ground.

One other question: I wonder if it would be good to call these categories "manmade" instead of "anthropogenic". I think more people would understand what it means. What do you think? --Auntof6 (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this would be such a good idea, as this is about geologic criteria and I think we should first and foremost use a scientific terminology. But in the end it is always possible here to integrate "anthropogenic landforms" etc. into a category called "manmade objects".Reykholt (talk) 19:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Categories by Volcanic Explosivity Index

Hi, Reykholt. I noticed that there are some categories named "by Volcanic Explosivity Index" in their names (for example, Category:Volcanoes by Volcanic Explosivity Index), and others named "by VEI" (for example, Category:Volcanoes of Indonesia by VEI). I think it would be good to use the same term in all of them. In general, I think it's better to spell things out, so would you mind if I change them all to "by Volcanic Explosivity Index"? I would change only the ones with "by" in the name, not others like Category:VEI-7 volcanoes of Indonesia. This would help the management of metacategories. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. Just change it into "by Volcanic Explosivity Index".Reykholt (talk) 11:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it's done. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Turner Falls

Thanks for improving the categories for Category:Turner Falls and at least one image in it (I didn't check them all).

I removed some redundant categories. Davidwr (talk) 03:19, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.^{[survey 1]} The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.^{[survey 2]} The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

↑ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
↑ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Categorisation in Wikimedia

Please read COM:OVERCAT for why over-categorisation is not encouraged in Wikimedia Commons. Thank you. - Takeaway (talk) 00:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think, I understand what you mean.Reykholt (talk) 19:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alberta waters

Hello, Reykholt! I noticed you created both Bodies of water in Alberta and Bodies of water of Alberta, which I find rather redundant. The “in” wording is much more common among the corresponding cats from other Canadian provinces, so I’m inclined to empty & get rid of the latter, even though it’s the elder and has a few more members at the moment. Would you have any objections?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, this was just an error.Reykholt (talk) 14:53, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/03/Category:Floodplain

Please feel free to give your opinion on this proposal. Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:13, 7 March 2017 (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:Landakotskirkja.jpg

Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 19:00, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Steam_vents_(volcanism)

Steam vents (volcanism) 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) 22:10, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rivers_of_Asia_by_country_or_stretches_of_rivers_by_type

Rivers of Asia by country or stretches of rivers by type has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 04:27, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just beginning to change these category names. Will take some time.Reykholt (talk) 14:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rivers

Something went wrong? look here, please. Wieralee (talk) 17:57, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, what you mean actually, see discussion above (Rivers of Asia ... etc.). I just changed them all acc. to the proposal in this discussion.Reykholt (talk) 18:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There was a proposal to make a redirection to non-existing category? Wieralee (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, and I don't intend to redirect this again. Perhaps a mistake.Reykholt (talk) 18:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some misunderstanding here. There are now both categories, Rivers of South Dakota or stretches of rivers by type and Rivers or stretches of rivers of South Dakota by type, which is one too many. In agreement with the proposal in above discussion (Rivers of Asia ... ) and all the other changes assisted by one of the administrators, I'll transfer all of South Dakote-categories re. river related cats to the second one.Reykholt (talk) 18:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just thinking about how this came to be: I sometimes just started a transfer (redirection) yesterday re. these categories, because I found someone (or a program) in most cases helped me with transferring the rest, eg. in many cases with U.S. categories, also re. Iceland or Japan. Perhaps this one was forgotten.Reykholt (talk) 18:20, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Transferred it all now. Thank you for your help.Reykholt (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

question

Hi Reykholt,

at Wikidata "stone run" is linked with "Blockhalde". Is this right?--Tolomm (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a type of "Blockhalde", a channelized one, whereas "Blockhalde" in the whole indicates a "boulder scree". "Halde" is a German word for "slope". But there are also two German words indicating exactly "stone run": "Feldsteinstrom" (generalized) and "Findlingsstrom" (in relation to glacial erratics). (Source: http://dict.leo.org/german-english/stone%20run ). Reykholt (talk) 11:34, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Red_ice_and_snow

Red ice and snow 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) 07:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Black Shank (Ben Tirran)

Just a note: Brackets should only be used for disambiguation by type (i.e. "is a"), and the preferred way of disambiguating by a location is a comma (i.e. "is at"). Rodhullandemu (talk) 13:45, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought, commas were just used with populated places, wheras brackets were used with landforms etc. E.g. like in Category:Davenport, Iowa.Reykholt (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I compared now to the other categories re. Scotland and saw that you do it there differently from the U.S. categories. I'll just redirect this, no problem.Reykholt (talk) 13:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geography of the Vatican City

Hello, you have moved the Category Geography of the Vatican City to Geography of Vatican City, but the Countries of Europe template still lists the Vatican City as country name. I'm not sure, if the article is really necessary in this case. However, it would be good to first discuss this question in an appropriate place and only then move the category. Thank you! BTW: There are several country names starting with an article: the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, the Republic of Macedonia.-- Gürbetaler (talk) 09:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could be that we both had it wrong: See http://www.vaticanstate.va/content/vaticanstate/en.html Acc. to this website, which seems to me to be the official one, it should be Vatican City State. Do you have different informations?Reykholt (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable to me. I didn't say that the article is absolutely correct, I just asked for a discussion before any change is made.-- Gürbetaler (talk) 19:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely fine with me, esp. as nationalities/ names of countries have always also political implications.Reykholt (talk) 19:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Reykholt and @Gürbetaler: I think it should be "the Vatican City" (usual name; article included) and not "Vatican City State", despite the last one is the official name. That's the way countries are called in Commons: we say "geography of Spain" and not "geography of the Kingdom of Spain", "geography of the United Kingdom" and not "geography of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

Regarding Category:Tiber in Vatican City... I think it should be deleted. The Tiber is not under Vatican territory. --Grabado (talk) 12:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems this was an error, just delete the category.Reykholt (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Peaks_in_Pakistan

Peaks in Pakistan 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 ∙ +/−

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 22:27, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Volcanic_landforms_in_Tenerife

Volcanic landforms in Tenerife 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 ∙ +/−

El Grafo (talk) 13:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious categorization

Hi! Please pay attention to edits comments. For instance, here and here some of your categorization actions were revised, and later you re-introduced the same dubious categorization without discussing. If you don't agree with the edit comment then please do discuss. 62.65.58.38 08:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rivers_or_stretches_of_rivers_by_type

Rivers or stretches of rivers by type 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 ∙ +/−

62.65.58.38 09:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Views_of_mountains_in_Nepal

Category:Views_of_mountains_in_Nepal 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 ∙ +/−

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 21:37, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Conference project

Hello Ingeborg,

I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around. But since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year. If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.

Cheers,

--MB-one (talk) 19:38, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:River_islands_in_Serbia

River islands in Serbia 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 ∙ +/−

Zoupan (talk) 21:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Glacial_geology

Category:Glacial_geology 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 ∙ +/−

Ciaurlec (talk) 17:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Photographers User Group Meeting 2018

Hi Ingeborg,

wir planen da was... Die Idee entstand auf der Wikimania in Montreal. Island ist für Amerika und Europa recht einfach und vergleichsweise "billig" erreichbar. Und die Insel ist fotografisch einfach phantastisch... Momentan ist die Finanzierung die offene Frage. Wenn es klappen sollte, könntest du dich da einbringen? Ich war nur auf der Durchreise nach Canada für 2 Tage auf Island, habe also nur mal dran geschnuppert. Die Organisation vor Ort (Hotel, Exkursionen, Workshops...) mache ich. Bisher sind das aber nur Ideen, es steht und fällt mit der Finanzierung. Wenn es klappt, werden Fotografen aus allen Ecken der Welt teilnehmen. --Ralf Roleček 21:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Klingt an sich schon schön. Kommt bei mir aber auf den Termin etc. an.- Bin halt im "wirklichen Leben" auch noch beschäftig....Reykholt (talk) 14:51, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gibt es eine Community auf Island? Laut https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters ist ein Chapter bislang nur geplant. --Ralf Roleček 14:04, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Das weiß ich leider nicht.Reykholt (talk) 14:06, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eine Bitte... Könntest du dich hier unter "Organizing team" eintragen? Keine Angst, da rollt jetzt kein Berg an Arbeit heran. Es geht vielmehr darum, daß wir Tips bekommen, was sich auf der Insel lohnt und was man getrost lassen kann. Nicht mehr ;) Insiderwissen ist unbezahlbar. --Ralf Roleček 19:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Klar unterstütze ich Euch (ich spreche übrigens auch fließend Isländisch). Weiß nur noch nicht, von wo aus. Das kommt darauf an, wann Ihr nach Island fahren wollt, und ob ich dann dort bin. Hängt auch davon ab, ob ich zu der Zeit gerade in Deutschland oder in Island arbeite.Reykholt (talk) 19:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Danke! Termin ist 21.-27. August. Was wir auf der Insel besuchen werden, wird sich DerSpatz ausdenken, vielleicht könnt ihr euch ja mal kurzschließen? Es ist wenig sinnvoll, wenn ich mit meinen 1,5 Tagen Erfahrung auf Island da was raussuche... --Ralf Roleček 23:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Irgendwie finde ich die Talk-Page von DerSpatz so nicht. Am besten wäre es ohnehin, wenn er/sie mich unter meiner email-Adresse kontaktieren würde. 08:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Steam vents (volcanism)

As THEMIGHTYQUILL has removed 2 x the Category:Volcanic degassing from the Category:Steam vents (volcanism), I would like to know his/her reasons.

These steam vents are not only emitting water vapour (=steam), but a mixture of steam and a lot of other gasses esp. sulfur compounds. They are actually heavier working fumaroles and part of the volcanic degassing system of a volcano (see eg. Category:Námafjall.

The sounds of normal fumaroles and the quantity of volcanic gasses emitted by them are considerably different résp. less than from these steam vents. Reykholt (talk) 21:17, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Erta Ale

Hallo. Du hattest Category:Erta Ale eruptions by year und Unterkategorien erstellt. Ich bin mir aber nicht sicher, ob das so richtig ist. Ich stelle mir einen Ausbruch so vor, dass dieser Lava-See überläuft, dass Asche in der Luft ist und Ähnliches. Nichts von alledem ist auf den Fotos zu sehen. Es ist halt ein permamenter Lava-See und Lava ist dort immer sichtbar. Bin allerdings kein Experte. Jetzt im Januar war da alles total verraucht, so dass man den vollen See nicht sehen konnte. Ist das dann eher als Ausbruch zu werten? Jedenfalls, nach meinem Empfinden sollten die Kategorien "Erta Ale in 2008" etc. heißen. Die WP-Artikel erwähnen denn auch nur 2010 und Januar 2017 als letzte Ausbrüche. Was meinst du? --A.Savin 20:05, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ich nehme diese Seite jetzt von der Beobachtungsliste, da du keine Aktivität zeigst. Solltest du mal zurückkommen und antworten wollen, bitte ich um ein Ping oder Benachrichtigung. --A.Savin 11:28, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ich habe schon mal mit jemandem hier über dieses Thema diskutiert. Wissenschaftler sehen aktive Lavaseen einfach als langdauernde Eruption, weil da ja Magma durch Konvektion an die Erdoberfläche bzw. Luft gelangt. Es gilt schon als Ausbruch, selbst wenn der Lavasee nicht überkocht oder Lavafontänen bildet.Reykholt (talk) 11:47, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant category

Hi:

I had to remove Category:Meteorological institutions from categories Islandic Meteorological Institute as it is already in the Category:Weather services by country, a sub-category of the former.

Pierre cb (talk) 04:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eruption fissures vs Fissure eruptions

Hi, I noticed you created both Category:Fissure eruptions in Hawaii and Category:Eruption fissures in Hawaii, and not being a geologist or volcanologist, it's a bit confusing. My assumption is that "Fissure eruptions" should include media of eruptions that come from fissures, and "Eruption fissures" should contain media of the fissures themselves, not necessarily in the process of erupting. Is my understanding correct? Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 16:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eruption fissures could also be in the modus of eruption. The fissures are the volcanic landform which forms during eruption.Reykholt (talk) 11:43, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rivers_of_the_United_States_by_name_by_state

Rivers of the United States by name by state has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 23:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Road_cuts

Road cuts has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 11:35, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Icelandic_horses_in_other_countries

Icelandic horses in other countries 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 ∙ +/−

Fallen Sheep (talk) 17:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lava flow category on Gulfoss picture

Hey @Reykholt: , I'm not totally sure about this category addition Special:Diff/258865878, I wanted your opinion before doing anything. Sincerely,--PierreSelim (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Subduction_zones_in_North_America

Subduction zones in North America 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 ∙ +/−

2601:602:9701:EE30:3D69:588D:29D9:78E4 21:59, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stampar

Category:Stampar 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) 22:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rock_formations_of_Cap_Canaille

Category:Rock_formations_of_Cap_Canaille 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 ∙ +/−

Fr.Latreille (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Banshee Peak

Many years ago, you added this category to Category:Summits of Mount Rainier. However, this peak doesn't appear to be one of the three summits of Mount Rainier, but its own mountain nearby. I believe it should be moved to Category:Mountains of Mount Rainier National Park. Does this seem correct to you? – BMacZero (🗩) 03:00, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorizing

Hallo Reykholt, please avoid overcategorizing, if you already put tectonic landforms in France, you shouldn't put tectonic landforms, no escarpments in France if there is escarpments in Savoie usw. Vielen Dank. --Birdie (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Coasts_of_the_United_States_by_state

Coasts of the United States by state 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 ∙ +/−

– BMacZero (🗩) 16:12, 16 October 2020 (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:Hallsteinsgarður-Stöng 15.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:37, 27 January 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:Hallsteinsgarður-Stöng 08.jpg

And also:

File:Hallsteinsgarður-Stöng 09.jpg

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bays of the Americas

Bays of the Americas has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

--Auntof6 (talk) 10:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Helgafell: Húsfell

Hi, just wanted to mention that your pic that says Helgafell in the description is really Húsfell north of Helgafell.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kaldarsel_-_Helgafell_27.jpg Berserkur (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Crater_Lake_Geology

Crater Lake Geology 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 ∙ +/−

Jsayre64 (talk) 04:04, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Relations_of_Iceland_and_Finland

Relations of Iceland and 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 ∙ +/−

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Suðurlandsvegur, Hellisheiði, Aug. 16 (2) - 7.jpg

File:Suðurlandsvegur, Hellisheiði, Aug. 16 (2) - 7.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） ∙ +/−

Steinn inn ♨ 21:44, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Volcanology_by_country

Volcanology by country has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Josh (talk) 06:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Low_spring_tides

Category:Low_spring_tides 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 ∙ +/−

Jmabel ! talk 00:50, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reykjanesbrautin 07.jpg

File:Reykjanesbrautin 07.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） ∙ +/−

Steinn inn ♨ 05:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reykjanesbrautin 11.jpg

File:Reykjanesbrautin 11.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） ∙ +/−

Steinn inn ♨ 05:03, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kjalarnesvolcano

Kjalarnesvolcano 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 ∙ +/−

Snævar (talk) 19:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hrappsey_volcano

Hrappsey volcano 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 ∙ +/−

Snævar (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Intrusions_from_Hrappsey_volcano

Category:Intrusions_from_Hrappsey_volcano 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 ∙ +/−

Snævar (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Húsafell_volcano

Húsafell volcano 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 ∙ +/−

Snævar (talk) 01:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lónvolcano

Lónvolcano 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 ∙ +/−

Snævar (talk) 01:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stardalsvolcano

Stardalsvolcano 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 ∙ +/−

Snævar (talk) 01:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Inland_dunes_of_Chile

Inland dunes of Chile 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 ∙ +/−

186.173.68.234 13:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dunes_in_South_America_by_country

Dunes in South America by country has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

186.173.68.234 13:36, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Location of photo

Hi. Can you tell me approximatly where this photo is taken File:14 Blick auf Breiðafjörður und Klakseyjar.jpg. GPS would be great. I would like to add description in the Icelandic Wikipedia of where it is taken, more then just "Fellsströnd". Thank you. Danke. Takk. Steinn inn ♨ 16:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Steinninn: Did you notice that Reykholt was last active in 2018 (last edits here as well as in Wikipedia)? So it doesn't seem likely that you will receive an answer, though it would be great, of course! Gestumblindi (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gestumblindi: I was also not active for 5 years but came back. I left the message knowing that it could take years to get an answere. There is no rush. But thank you for the heads up. --Steinn inn ♨ 19:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Basalt_dikes

Basalt dikes 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) 11:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Monoliths_(geology)

Monoliths (geology) 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 ∙ +/−

Sinigh (talk) 09:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Channelised_rivers_and_streams

Channelised rivers and streams 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) 14:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.

[2] Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

[survey 1]

[survey 2]

User talk:Reykholt

Copyright Tags

Myndir

Request for deletion of Image:Thingvellir 4 Herbst 2004.jpg

Photos in die Wikimedia setzen

Kategorien

Danke!

Wikimedia Commons has a specific scope

Autopatrol given

Vigdis Finnbogadottir

Verschiedene Flüsse namens Reykjadalsá

Category:Sea rescues

Category:Language select

Taxons by location

Gran queyron da rocca bianca.jpg

Catégorisation des ruisseaux

Categories fyki

Universal login

Categorizing images

Barnstar

A barnstar for you!

Du erhältst einen Orden!

Geneva/Genève

Overcategorization

"Bodies of water" categories

Outcrops

Kategorien

Page History of Thingvellir

Problems with QIC nominations

Thanks

Forests vs. landforms

Quality Image Promotion

Please use sub-categories

Arnisee

Global account

Category:Geomorphology

Bots

Thanks your categories changes.

meta categories

deletion requests

Please avoid overcategorization

Fisheye

Rock glaciers of Wetterstein

Geography: Additional material

Thank you

creating metacategories

Categories for mountains of certain heights by country

Anthropogenic landforms

Categories by Volcanic Explosivity Index

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Categorisation in Wikimedia

Alberta waters

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Notification about possible deletion

Rivers

question

Dubious categorization

Steam vents (volcanism)

Erta Ale

Redundant category

Eruption fissures vs Fissure eruptions

Lava flow category on Gulfoss picture

Overcategorizing

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Helgafell: Húsfell

Location of photo

Navigation menu

Search