User talk:Krok6kola

• Archive*2016*2017*2018*2020*2021*
  **

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Krok6kola!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 14:12, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Mosque decorations by country

Well, all categories you've mentioned are generic, not necessarily mosque or Islamic related. I know that now the vast majority of mosque decorations are outside, but the same situation is with equivalent category Category:Church decorations. I've found specific category named "decorations of X mosque" and therefore I created it. --Orijentolog (talk) 00:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I think they're all fine, it should be in because many similar cats follow that model. Regarding that issue, recently I used Italian model for "art...Iran by city" case, there are three different categories: of, in and from. Now that's a mess, but there's no better solution... --Orijentolog (talk) 00:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: Well, someone keeps moving my "in"s to "of"s! Does Category:Prayer halls in Pakistan go into Category:Architectural elements of mosques? Krok6kola (talk) 00:25, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Nope, prayer halls should be also used for non-Muslim prayer halls. --Orijentolog (talk) 00:28, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: Ok, I did not know. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 00:33, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Not sure at the moment, but I'll search later. --Orijentolog (talk) 09:17, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I found its "younger brother" here. :) --Orijentolog (talk) 16:29, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: But what is its architectural name? Krok6kola (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Still don't know. :/ --Orijentolog (talk) 17:11, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Filemover rights?

Have you considered asking for filemover rights? You seem to be making a lot of move requests and as far as I can tell, your requests are generally reliable and well founded, so I would assume it would be simpler for you to just move the files yourself. TommyG (talk) 08:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

---

Hi Krok6kola, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Minorax^talk 09:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hyderabad Tombs of Talpur Mirs renames

Should you continue abusing your recently gained file rename right, I will remove it. PK Hyderabad asv2020-02 img12 Talpur Tombs.jpg (and others) are in no event a meaningless file name and do not qualify for the 2nd criterion. Thanks. --A.Savin 19:49, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: I use Criterion 4 which I believe is useful for presenting images to users in a coherent manner i.e. in a way that they can understand what the different images present. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

So do I. My pictures are all have a meaningful name, and are part of a set that should not loose its naming scheme just because you don't like it. --A.Savin 19:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: Shall we ask a neutral party? Your naming scheme does not fit in with the Category:Tombs of Talpur Mirs, Hyderabad. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 20:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

There is no guideline stating that a file shall be named just like the other files in a particular category. There is only a guideline that files should not have meaningless or misleading names. My files of the Talpur mausoleums are none of that. --A.Savin 20:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Uch Sharif shrines

Hi, you'll probably notice anyway, but please see Category:Temporary cleanup category - Uch Sharif. For me, it would be helpful if you could refrain from moving these specific images, or changing/adding categories while I'm working on them. I'll try to fix things systematically there (including wrong image usages on enwiki etc.) and would lose overview otherwise :) Thanks --2003:E5:3708:200:2855:B345:6A1A:FF3E 07:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

File:US Post Office-Winnemucca - Now used as Winnemucca City Hall.jpg

I responded to your question at the help desk (and I've re-added the categories that you separated). However, I have to comment to you that I don't think that this file qualified for renaming, specifically criterion 2: To change from a meaningless or ambiguous name. Although the title was outdated, it was neither meaningless or ambiguous. The Main Post Office was the actual name of the building; the file was in correct English; and it wasn't an overly generic name. Please don't be too eager to rename files like this in the future. kennethaw88 • talk 18:38, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

@Kennethaw88: , I am very sorry. Should I rename the file back to the original? Mostly I copy whatever the uploader has used as a description, but in this case I was in a quandary. Thank you for the advice. I will follow it. Krok6kola (talk) 18:52, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth renaming, just be a bit more careful. The renaming criteria are designed to be fairly specific in their usage. kennethaw88 • talk 19:09, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

regarding file:Mora

File:Mora (502573291).jpg I am not sure what you saw. I see that someone else reverted your edit so it is back to how I finished with it. Are we missing something here? I can also do without your insults along the way. Hmains (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Re: Sorry!

Aaah, no problem! :) It happens always, to everyone. Only recently I started to open "architectural elements" category, because I still didn't fix even cities and buildings. For example, not even 920 heritage monuments are completely fixed, and there are over 40,000 registered monuments in total. As well as 70,000 mosques, over a million historical sites (for comparison, three times more than China). Loooong way to go... :) --Orijentolog (talk) 13:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

---

 

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

A.Savin 15:07, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• @A.Savin: What exactly do you have in mind here? If you are accusing a longstanding and generally good editor of vandalism, you might at least indicate what edit you are objecting to. - Jmabel ! talk 01:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

  @Jmabel: This may help you. --A.Savin 03:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

  @A.Savin: Do I understand that you are saying that asserting that a protest march is a "parade" rather than the more general "event" constitutes vandalism? Sorry, but no. It may even be an incorrect edit, but it is not vandalism. You are an admin. Unless I missed something going on on the page you pointed to (since you didn't specify what edit there you considered vandalism): you should know better than this. - Jmabel ! talk 05:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

  If the user continues to do this obviously incorrect edit in editwar modus without any explanation, despite the fact I actually explained it to them, this is of course vandalism -- I'm sorry if I couldn't help you here. --A.Savin 14:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

  P.S. Might be interesting for E4024 to know. --A.Savin 14:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

The categorization mistakes I see everyday surprise me, but what surprises me more is the fact that although one or the other of us try to show the correct classification/categorization to some people, they insist in their edits... This year tired us all. I hope we may see less or none of this attitude in 2021. Happy New year to all. E4024 (talk) 14:29, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Can you provide an example, where I reverted a correct edit by Krok6kola and insisted on it? Thanks. --A.Savin 14:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

No, I cannot. --E4024 (talk) 14:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Again: it may have been a wrong edit, it may even have been dumb edit-warring, but it was not vandalism. - Jmabel ! talk 18:13, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

You are both right; even the three of you. Shall we please close this chapter and enter a New Year in peace? Please. --E4024 (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

• Hi, "can we hope one entire year without a dispute that include a threat of block from A.Savin within a conflict in which he is widely involved"? the answer is no (although I had no real doubts about the answer). Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:17, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

@Christian Ferrer: Very enlightening, as is following the links like this one.[1] It helps me put the whole issue into perspective and seeing how others respond I can feel that it isn't only me that is appalled. Thank you very much! Krok6kola (talk) 01:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

These were enlightening to me also: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 87 which contains [2] and [3] (in the latter I was wrong although I was advised to move it there from the Help Desk) but I learned a great deal from that mistake. I would value any advice/suggestions you can give me. Best wishes, Krok6kola (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Saint_Jo,_Texas

Saint Jo, Texas 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 12:15, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Are you interested in the subject? Krok6kola (talk) 16:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

• No, I'm not. E4024 (talk) 17:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Category:Ampang_Jaya,_Selangor

Ampang Jaya, Selangor 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 09:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

NARA TIF files

Just an FYI re your categorization of this file: for files from NARA that have identical JPG (for article use) and TIF (lossless version for editing), only the JPG needs to be categorized. (See Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs). Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:13, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Pi.1415926535: Thanks, but it is rather confusing. That category you suggested is "under discussion". I think I will just skip the whole issue and avoid NARA files. Krok6kola (talk) 16:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:All_other_remains_at_Mohenjo-daro

All other remains at Mohenjo-daro 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 20:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Pano_Aqil

Category:Pano_Aqil 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Mubarik_village

Mubarik village 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 21:10, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Removing hidden user categories

Hi! Please don't remove hidden user categories from photos, if you just don't understading purpose of these! (You may be ask from others before) This is about 'Victor Albert Grigas' collection. These is needed for more clarifing and attribution these photos. This is longtime project, and not finished yet. Please revert all your deletions and please stop it in future. Very thanks in advance! Kaganer (talk) 09:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry! I figured it out. You fixed an incorrectly added category by NearEMPTiness. Thanks! But you have mistakenly deleted from the category and some of the files that were there by right (which depicts Victor Albert Grigas himself). --Kaganer (talk) 03:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kaganer: I was careful not to do that, so please show me where I did. Thanks! Krok6kola (talk) 18:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Revision #615385694, as example. --Kaganer (talk) 00:14, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kaganer: I am very sorry! Thanks for letting me know. (My excuse: I didn't know about the long term project.) Krok6kola (talk) 00:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Malot_Temple

Malot Temple 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 09:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Khanspur

Khanspur 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 11:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Cropping

IMO thece crops of Ja Fryta photos are againt COM:CROP. It's not minor crop, but substantial. Matlin (talk) 17:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

@Matlin: Who is that guy that is in the photographs you upload? If he deserves a category, then give him a name. Best wishes, Krok6kola (talk) 17:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Categories

Why are you deleting the categories of the persons shown in the pictures? Are you doubting that they are shown? Then why are you cropping these pictures and add the cats in your crops? Mirer (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: If you look at the pictures and in the categories, you will see why. The photos that come from this source would mean that this one figure would appear in multiple categories. (The Commons is not a personal website.)

Also, I looked at what editors have done in the past regarding these photos. They cropped them and put them in the appropriate categories but did not put the source photo there. I do not think that photos where this one figure dominates the intended subject, such as a Polish actress, writer, etc. should be put in the categories meant to showcase these famous people and not this person. Krok6kola (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Further, the editor that uploads these photos is this one: Category:Uploads by Matlin, to give you a sense of perspective. Krok6kola (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Got all that, but I don't think it's smart to not put the pictures in the "famous persons" cat. There could be a lot of good crops be done from them. If you put just your crops in there nobody knows, that there are good source pictures from which other (better) crops could be done. As you can see with Anna Nowak my imagination of a crop for a persons article is quite different from yours. Mirer (talk) 23:49, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: None of the other editors who cropped those pictures did. And it does say "extracted from" in the cropped files. I do not know how the Commons handles this situation. But if you want to put them in the subject's category, then do so. Do take a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Uploads by Matlin/temp. I am tired of the whole thing as I am trying to clean up a mess I inadvertently made. Krok6kola (talk) 23:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I understand - maybe we should bring it to the village pump and hear other voices on how to deal with these pictures?! I understand that there is the "extracted from" hint, but this only helps me if I open the one file, which shows a better source image, which is not in the cat. In most ocassions I wouldn't find it. ;-) Mirer (talk) 00:06, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: yes, that would be a good idea. I have thought of asking someone. Krok6kola (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: Going through those categories, I found many times where editors had overwritten or replaced the original file uploaded by Matlin with the "crop". Also, some editors made their own "crop" of an image from the website that Matlin downloaded. Krok6kola (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen both or all ways too. I still think it would be best to discuss this with more people involved and hear what they think about it. Either way hast it's up and downs.

Would you like to start a discussion based on this users pictures (which become even more problematic since they're uploading without adding proper information as categories etc.) at the village pump? I think this is a quite generic/exemplaric case to be presented and the responses should be interesting/helpful. Mirer (talk) 19:59, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: When it has been "extracted" the information is there in the file, unless the file has been overwritten, or a user had gotten the same photo from the Flicker stream and done an independent crop. The files plus crops are in Category:Photographs by Ja Fryta, most of them also in Category:Uploads by Matlin since he uploads Ja Fryta's photos. Matlin has been blocked three times (twice for a day by Yann, and once for a week by A.Savin) but continues to upload massively. I think the Commons lets him continue for the few that can be useful. Krok6kola (talk) 21:43, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I've categorized countless pictures from him (and way to much from other mass-uploaders, which make even worse mass-uploads (in the sense that they don't even import easy descriptions/tags or similiar)) and will never understand why "we" allow them to do so without a minimum of effort to really integrate the files in our system.

Commons is a mess and it seems their admins and way to much users love it that way. If I keep categorizing files here for the rest of my life, I may end up (assuming a long, healthy and time-rich life) making good for two weeks of mass uploads by the likes of Matlin and Fae. And the mess get's bigger (almost) everyday. --Mirer (talk) 02:52, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: Agree! Agree! Agree! Add Thingofme, and some others I can't remember right now. Fæ no longer uploads, but I think until an image is categorized it keeps appearing again in dates needing categories. I am not categorizing any of Matlin's anymore, as it just encourages him! For example Category:Media needing categories as of 19 November 2021 is full of his uploads. Krok6kola (talk) 14:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

File:FIRST SHIFT OF MINERS AT THE VIRGINIA-POCAHONTAS COAL COMPANY MINE ^4 NEAR RICHLANDS, VIRGINIA, LEAVING THE ELEVATOR.... - NARA - 556393.tif

Please explain you revert of my edit to File:FIRST SHIFT OF MINERS AT THE VIRGINIA-POCAHONTAS COAL COMPANY MINE ^4 NEAR RICHLANDS, VIRGINIA, LEAVING THE ELEVATOR.... - NARA - 556393.tif in which you removed Category:Photographs by Jack Corn. The file is clearly attributed to Corn, and other versions of this photograph are in this category. Verbcatcher (talk) 10:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Verbcatcher: It is complicated! I received a message from User:Pi.1415926535 regarding this issue and decided to follow their advice: that most TIFF files (if the jpg version is properly caterorized) be put in Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs. The reasoning is that some editors crop TIFF files even though they are not of better quality than jpgs and their presence clogs up categories. (See discussion on User talk:Pi.1415926535.) Since there is no policy on this issue, if you disagree you may do as you prefer. Kindest regards, Krok6kola (talk) 15:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation and the link. This appears to be a scheme promoted by one user without establishing a consensus – I can see mention of it at Commons:Categories. Verbcatcher (talk) 15:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Bozeman Pass.JPG

File:Bozeman Pass.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!

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Reminder

Hi again Krok6kola. I noticed that you've made a malformed deletion request. Here, {{Delete}} is not for speedy deletion, please see COM:DP. When you want to delete a page by manually using the {{Delete}} template (rather than the automatic Nominate for deletion tool in the Tools menu on the sidebar per COM:DR#Starting requests), you must follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion (or Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually policy), otherwise you will create a lot of work for other people.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 00:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

• @Jeff G.: I'm very sorry. That request was over three months ago. As I said to you on your talk page after you brought up this issue before, I am handicapped when it comes to reading. Best I just let spelling mistakes and such go and let someone else do the deletion requests. Thanks for letting me know again. Kind regards, Krok6kola (talk) 00:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

  You're welcome. I accept your apology.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 13:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 is on!

You are humbly invited to participate in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk creative activities and many more. It is held every year from the 1st till the 28th of February.

You can help in enriching the folklore documentation on Commons from your region by taking photos, audios, videos, and submitting them in this commons contest.

Kind regards,

Wiki loves Folklore International Team

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Photographs by Russell Lee

Hi there. I'm writing regarding your addition of Category:Photographs by Russell Lee (photographer) to a number of images already categorized within Category:Coal Mines Administration Medical Survey, 1946–1947. All of the nearly 1,300 images in the Coal Mines Administration Survey are already categorized as being photographs by Russell Lee, and this redundant category should be removed from each image. Thank you. — WFinch (talk) 21:01, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@WFinch: Thanks for letting me know. Krok6kola (talk) 21:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Please check other images you've recently categorized as photographs by Russell Lee, as well; most if not all are already part of subcategories. I've reverted two. — WFinch (talk) 21:09, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@WFinch: OK, I reverted them all. Krok6kola (talk) 21:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I know from past experience how confusing those subcategories can be. — WFinch (talk) 23:34, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Category change Victoria to Toronto?

Do you remember what was your rationale for this edit [4]? Ymblanter (talk) 19:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Although that was many months ago, I think I was trying to make the category name of this gallery consistent with the names of the other galleries in this museum. I am very sorry if that was wrong of me. Krok6kola (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I am pretty sure I have taken the photograph in Victoria BC, and the Royal Museum of Ontario is in Toronto ON.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

(Edit conflict):@Ymblanter: Although that was many months ago, I think I was trying to make the category name of this gallery consistent with the names of the other galleries in the museum. I am very sorry that I made a great mistake and inadvertently changed the name of the museum. Krok6kola (talk) 20:18, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

No problem, I though may be the gallery moved or smth else I did not know about.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:24, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

It looks like you have actually merged the categories, and the old one is a redirect. You are probably in a better position than me to unmerge them. Ymblanter (talk) 20:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: OK. I will try to figure it out and correct it. It looks like at least some of my edits were reverted. Krok6kola (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 20:33, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Museum of Modern Art - Interior

Hello. I'm not sure, that MoMA and Category:Hong_Kong_Heritage_Museum share their exhibits in CC licence. FoP doesn't work interior in the USA. Matlin (talk) 15:20, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Matlin: I don't know. You are probably right. Krok6kola (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Glacial_streams

Glacial 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!

{{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Huntington Reservation

Hi. You just completely emptied this category, and I can't figure out why. Was that intentional? - Eureka Lott 17:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@EurekaLott: At first it wasn't intentional, but as I went through each image, none of them made sense in that category and I couldn't find any evidence on Google that there was a "Huntington Reservation". I am sorry if that was a category you made. Some NARA images were in there, and that is how I found it and got started. I think "Huntington beach" in Ohio might be a better category. "Reservation" is a word associated in my mind with places Native Americans (or Native people of North America) reside. Please forgive me and do what you think best. Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 17:24, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Huntington Reservation is the park's name (see also Cleveland Metroparks). I think the category should be repopulated. Please consider reverting your edits. - Eureka Lott 17:29, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I can't in good conscious restore the category without good evidence. NARA images shouldn't be there, for example, like photos by Category:Frank John Aleksandrowicz, which is how I found the category to begin with. Otherwise, I wouldn't care. And most of the images were general photos of Lake Erie. Maybe they were "views from" Cleveland Metroparks. The enwiki article does not mention Huntington Reservation as far as I can tell. Krok6kola (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry you're having difficulty with your reading comprehension and search engine skills. The Cleveland Metroparks article has a table that lists all of their reservations, including the Huntington Reservation. I can guarantee that the park exists, but please don't take my word for it—you can look to the state department of natural resources, the local tourism board, TV news, or historians. - Eureka Lott 17:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit.

Hello, Krok6kola, just wondering who this is. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Lotje, he is a wonderful photographer on the Commons. On his user page he give a good account of himself. Krok6kola (talk) 14:26, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:Alam_Bridge_inscriptions,_Gilgit

Category:Alam_Bridge_inscriptions,_Gilgit 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!

TrangaBellam (talk) 18:48, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

*.tif files of NARA

I noted that you object to *.tif files of NARA being categorized anywhere else than in [[NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs]], as shown in File:"SUPER" FLUSHES LITTER FROM 172ND STREET WITH FIRE HYDRANT WATER - NARA - 549838.tif. Thus, I propose that you ask Steinsplitter bot (@Steinsplitter: ) to remove the mark {{Uncategorized}} from similar files. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 02:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@NearEMPTiness: I have asked Steinsplitter; however I notice that Steinsplitter does not edit frequently on the Commons, so it may take some time to get a response. Krok6kola (talk) 16:53, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• As a side note, could we prevent people from adding new categories to the images already in the aforementioned cat technically? At least with a warning at edit saving that they are adding the categories in the wrong place where no one will see them. Ain92 (talk)

Misplaced images from the Library of Congress in a NARA category

I noticed that we both occasionally misplace LC images as NARA images while looking for images with an LCCN in the Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs and created Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs, let's fill it together! Ain92 (talk) 07:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ain92: Interesting idea!. I was originally notified by Pi.1415926535 about the issue of Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs, at the time a hidden category (no longer so). And it does make sense since the files are identical visually. And if you look further down in the file, you will see both versions are accessible. It was Fæ who designated this category, something I have learned from looking at the file history. So unless the file history contains this designation in its history, (e.g. File:ASPEN LEAVES FLUTTER ALONG THE EAST RIFLE CREEK - NARA - 552693.tif, I do not use this category (except in a couple of cases where it seems a mistake has been made. I was not aware I was making the mistake you note above.

Fæ does not do this with LCCN files. I do not know the reasoning behind this. So I would like to know the reasoning behind all this before going ahead with this project. Perhaps we could ask someone who knows more? Krok6kola (talk) 18:49, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• May we ping them? On a related topic I would also note that colleague @Broichmore: recently created Category:TIFF images with categorized JPGs, in which I have added a few other American, British/Canadian and Swiss photos recently. Ain92 (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Ain92: Fæ has not edited since last year, a great loss to the Commons. Please ping anyone you want to shed light on this issue.

  The problem with this new category, as I see it, is that it does not connect the images so that you can make sure the warning for Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs, is followed:

  "This category exists to prevent visual duplication in other categories. It provides lossless versions suitable as a source for edited versions for display. Images should be placed in this category ONLY if there is an exact JPG replica file which is fully categorized, and the two files cross-reference each other. Any further categorization should be done on the .jpg version of the image."

  The files in the new category do not appear to be cross-referenced, as in the example above: File:ASPEN LEAVES FLUTTER ALONG THE EAST RIFLE CREEK - NARA - 552693.tif. It could work if you connected them so that each image referenced the other. Krok6kola (talk) 22:08, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oh wow, I missed their leave, very sad, indeed( Unfortunately, I don't understand, how are aspen leaves not cross-referenced if a gallery is provided in "Other versions"? I never put such a category without some kind of a cross-reference, be it either {{SupersededJPG}}, or a gallery/thumbnail in "Other versions". Ain92 (talk) 10:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Ain92: The aspen leaves ARE cross-referenced, as shown. Unfortunately, I do not understand the {{SupersededJPG}} part, but that is OK since there is a lot I do not understand! Krok6kola (talk) 13:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Which "files in the new category do not appear to be cross-referenced" then? For the template please look up here. Ain92 (talk) 14:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Ain92: In case you have not noticed, I have added some files to Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs. I finally figured out what you meant! Krok6kola (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
  • I noticed you have misplaced certain NYPL images in that category (NYPL is a very different library from LoC). About half a hundred of those files could be find with looking „"LC TIF images" NYPL“, could you please move them either to TIFF images with categorized JPGs or maybe to a new one like NYPL TIF images with categorized JPGs if you plan finding more NYPL tiffs of this kind? Ain92 (talk) 13:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:Ellison's_Bluff_County_Park

Ellison's Bluff County Park 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!

Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:59, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Redundant categorization

Note that for example if a file is in category "August 1973 in Chicago", adding category "August 1973 in Illinois" is redundant and inappropriate, since "August 1973 in Chicago" is a subcategory of "August 1973 in Illinois". That's why I reverted this edit of yours. Likewise [5], in a category for specific event. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:09, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) @Infrogmation: , I do not agree with you, primarily because is inconsistent with categories in most other states and, for example, does not allow of a glimpse of weather conditions per month in Illinois. Also, except for images in Chicago not in "August 1973" or "April 1973", images in Chicago are not categorized by month at all and therefore are just left out completely. But I give up on Chicago, as it is a mess. Cheers, Krok6kola (talk) 15:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

• Yes, most images in "1973 in Chicago" are not categorized by month, as the month is not known. I was not talking about those, I was talking about the ones that were already in a month category like "August 1973 in Chicago"; adding "August 1973 in Illinois" is redundant in such cases. That's why I was pointing out those examples. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:57, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

@Infrogmation: Look at Category:1973 in Boston and Category:May 1973 in Massachusetts for example. Are you going to fix that also? Cheers, Krok6kola (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't see anything broken that needs fixing; and it was not on my list to get to. If there are lots of images from May 1973 in Boston, creating a category for that could be useful. (If you want to do that, if you're not sure how, you could just for example copy the May 1973 in Chicago category, and substitute "Boston" where it says "Chicago" and "Massachusetts" for "Illinois".) Just remember to avoid redundant categories. Thanks, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:57, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Kolomoki_Mounds_State_Park

Kolomoki Mounds State Park 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!

Mjrmtg (talk) 10:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Massachusetts car in Czech Příbram District?

Hi, why Příbram District? Plese, add some explanation in such unclear cases. --ŠJů (talk) 02:08, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@ŠJů: I don't know. That was over a year ago and on that date there were something like 45,000 uncategorized images. I am sorry for my mistake and glad that you caught it. Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: As I found, the file was moved by Cat-a-lot in the same second as a set of photos of minerals from Háje in Příbram mining area. It probably occurred near them and accidentally stuck to them. --ŠJů (talk) 14:58, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Your Geography was Off

Greetings: Photo File:This Yo Shit Dumpster.JPG was recategorized by you to a location 700 miles from Eureka, California where it is located. Not all of California is in San Bernadino and other southern Counties! Please do not change geography like this when the change is totally wrong. Thank you so much. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

NARA tiffs

Hi. I have been putting tifs and jpgs into the same category for years. Are you saying that in the case of NARA images only the jpg should be categorized? Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Gbawden: , Yes, according to Pi.1415926535: see note from Pi.1415926535 further up on my talk page. I have been doing penance for all the mistakes I made in the past regarding the issue. Fæ is the one who made the category, if you look in each file history. Also, I notice that most editors abide by this, if you look through the different categories. I was skeptical at first but now agree. Krok6kola (talk) 10:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

However not in cases like this, where a JPEG equivalent filepafe does exist, yes, but it’s a redirect back to the TIFF file. Please make sure there are not other cases like this. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: Yes, that was a mistake. I realized it after and thought I had fixed it. Thanks for doing so! Krok6kola (talk) 00:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I hope you have a way to catch all such cases and avoid them futurely. That said, keeping categorization in only one item of these image pairs is a good idea. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Louisiana NARA DOCUMERICA photos: Many are not New Orleans

Hello. I notice you added "1973 in New Orleans" to many NARA Documerica photos which were not taken in New Orleans. I'll guess you were misled by the field saying "Depicted place: New Orleans" - certainly misleading! I'm not sure why it says that - I'll guess that New Orleans was either home-base for the DOCUMERICA photographers, or where the photos were processed. The actual locations - multiple other places in Louisiana - are in the text description. Some of the images you mistakenly added "1973 in New Orleans" to were already correctly categorized as to their location, others were not. As a South Louisiana local perhaps more familiar with the geography, I'll try to clean this up - but please be aware of this, and that there may be similar cases for other states. Don't take that strange "Depicted Place" field as literal if the image text describes the location as somewhere else! Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

@Infrogmation: I'm very sorry. Could you give me some examples, so that I know what you mean by "image text" vs "depicted place"? Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 17:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Sure, many, look at my recent edits... eg File:IN_THE_SPRING_OF 1973_THE_MISSISSIPPI_RIVER_REACHED_ITS HIGHEST_LEVEL_IN_MORE_THAN 150_YEARS._UNPRECEDENTED FLOODING..._-_NARA_-_552821.jpg was already correctly categorized for the location in Gibson, Louisiana. "Title" field includes text "FAMILY AT GIBSON COOK OUT ON ROAD". File:FREEPORT SULPHUR CO. ON LAKE GRANDE ECAILLE - NARA - 546087.jpg was already correctly categorized as in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana. "Title" says "FREEPORT SULPHUR CO. ON LAKE GRANDE ECAILLE" - may not be obvious to people not familiar with local geography, but a quick google of "Lake Grande Ecaille" will show the location. File:IN_THE_SPRING_OF_1973 THE_MISSISSIPPI_RIVER_REACHED ITS_HIGHEST_LEVEL IN_MORE THAN_150_YEARS._UNPRECEDENTED_FLOODING..._-_NARA -_552825.jpg "Title" text reads "IN THE SPRING OF 1973 THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER REACHED ITS HIGHEST LEVEL IN MORE THAN 150 YEARS. UNPRECEDENTED FLOODING OCCURRED THROUGHOUT THE RIVER BASIN. PARTICULARLY AFFECTED WERE THE MARSH AREA BELOW NEW ORLEANS AND THE ENTIRE ATCHAFALAYA RIVER BASIN FLOOD WATERS OF LAKE VERRET AT PIERRE PART. LAKE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO DRAIN NORMALLY INTO THE FLOOD-SWOLLEN ATCHAFALAYA". Pierre Part, Louisiana is the location. Follow? Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

@Infrogmation: , Thanks. I clearly wasn't thinking. Looking at the examples, I can see the images are not in New Orleans. Very, very sorry. Krok6kola (talk) 18:44, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Removing categories from TIFs when they are not on the jpg versions

When you remove categories from TIF files because they have jpg versions, PLEASE make sure that relevant categories and information is on the jpg versions, and if not put it there as part of the process. Thank you! -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:37, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

@Infrogmation: , I do try to do that. I'm sorry if I have failed at times. Sometimes the categories are inconsistent or missing. My thinking that is reducing clutter in categories is helpful. Krok6kola (talk) 00:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks

Thank you so much for your White House work yesterday - I've been trying to wade through them with hotcat, but have made errors. I'll also stop categorising TIFs after I've read your talk page! Really incredible photos though. So much history. No Swan So Fine (talk) 07:55, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

@No Swan So Fine: Thank you so much for your note. I know the frustration and difficulty in category work and have made mistakes also. Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 16:00, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

File:Pye Beaulieu 1910.jpeg

File:Pye Beaulieu 1910.jpeg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:57, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Please make sure that the tif-files are the same as the jpg-files

Hi, please make sure, that there is an exact copy of the file, before you delete the cats in the tif-files! Here File:McKELLAR, KENNETH DOUGLAS. REP. FROM TENNESSEE, 1911-1917; SENATOR, 1917-1929 LCCN2016866811.tif you deleted the cats, despite that the jpg is just a tiny crop of the tif (no one ever uploaded the full resolution file as a jpg).

I know that it is annoying, if 95% of the files are exact copies (with the exact categories set), but as you can see here an in other messages here on your talk page, there are some which are not exact copies.

I (and some others) still doubt the usefulness of the task of the deletion of the cats in the tif. But if you (and a few others) think this is the way this situation should get settled, then you have to make sure, that your process works. Otherwise, please let the cats in the tif-files. Mirer (talk) 00:05, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mirer: It does take a while to figure this out. One of the ways I check is in the file history. If Fæ has entered " Format gallery links LOC housekeeping", it means that it is a version of the same file. That is the case in the file you mention above. I am not "deleting" categories, as you can always connect the two files by looking at "other versions" of each file categorized. Sorry if this is confusing. Best, Krok6kola (talk) 00:19, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

There is nothing confusing (at least not me). There is no jpg-version (which is the exact same as the tif) uploaded to commons (or it is not properly linked to the tif). So I reverted your deletions.

As I said, you have to take care that your process works. I and others doubt the usefulness of these deletions. But if this little group here decides to do so (without any policy backing up these deltions!), then at least the process hast to be solid and guranteeing that I can find all different pictures in a cat. If you fail to to that, it will (have to) end. Mirer (talk) 17:12, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Category:Harper's_Weekly_(1884)

Category:Harper's_Weekly_(1884) 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!

CzarJobKhaya (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect categorization

Please be more careful with categorization. A photo from the city of Příbor doesn't belong to the category of the city of Nový Jičín. Thank You. ŠJů (talk) 21:43, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Category:Fort_William

Fort William 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!

Andy Dingley (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

File:...) of Ind. Bituminous Coal Commission LCCN2016871683.tif and others

Hi. My understanding is that tif images get put in LC TIF with categorised jpgs and the jpgs get put into actual cats? Gbawden (talk) 16:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

@Gbawden: Sorry! I was going to write you a note. Right! the jpgs have to be categorised before putting an image in LC TIF images with categorized JPGs‎‎. I fixed some, but some I couldn't figure out the category for the jpg for others. The risk otherwise is that they will become detached i.e. put in difference categories. That the TIF and the jpg are in different categories happens fairly frequently. Krok6kola (talk) 17:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

There is no harm in categorising the TIF's ahead of the JPGs. If anything it makes it easier searching and browsing big categories like All media needing categories as of 2021. It also sorts out the problem of tif's not being categorised and hanging around uncategorised Gbawden (talk) 07:29, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

@Gbawden: It has been gratifying seeing the LC TIF images cat fill up so quickly! However, if the jpg counterpart is not already in a cat then putting the TIF there is incorrect because it is for "categorised" jpgs only. Also, some LC TIF images do not have a jpg counterpart; if you look down and check, the jpg image is screwed up and/or doesn't exist at all. (I'll send you an example the next time I find one.) Some are in the wrong cat. But, hey, the world is not perfect and you do astonishing cat work. Krok6kola (talk) 15:33, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Category:Fire_Ball_(ride)

Fire Ball (ride) 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!

BirdCities (talk) 16:58, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Arang Kel.jpg

File:Arang Kel.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!

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 10:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Aircraft categories

Hi, please be aware that you are over-categorising some aircraft images. A category covering one example of a particular aircraft in a museum will be in the category 'Aircraft at X museum', none of the images in the aircraft type category should have 'Aircraft at X museum'. The guideline is COM:OVERCAT, thanks. Nimbus227 (talk) 17:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nimbus227: Sorry! I do try to move it to the correction category in the museum once I figure out how a particular museum categorizes a specific aircraft. Thanks for letting me know. Krok6kola (talk) 17:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

The structure is always Museum category > Aircraft at museum category > Aircraft example at museum category. You use cat-a-lot, if you select all the files in a category and run 'Check over-categorization' it will catch images that are over-categorized (amazingly!). Please ping me again if you need help with aircraft images. Cheers. Nimbus227 (talk) 17:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nimbus227: Thanks! I don't usually deal with aircraft images. I was going through uncategorized images and that's why I was so clumsy. Thanks for the tip on 'Check over-categorization'. Perhaps I wasn't using it correctly. Krok6kola (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2023 has started, Join us!

Hello Krok6kola,

Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore International Team!

Wiki Loves Folklore is an international photography contest hosted on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from around the world, such as folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folktales, folk games, folk religion, mythology, and many more.

The campaign invites participants to document photographs, videos, and audios linked to folk culture and fit within the contest's theme. Through this campaign, you may become a part of a community dedicated to preserving our intangible culture, which has been brought and passed down for thousands of years.

How to Contribute?

The dates for the submission in the photography contest on Wikimedia Commons are from 1 February to 31 March 2023. Probably you are wondering how you can take part. It’s simple: grab a camera, record an image, video or audio under the folklore theme and start uploading ! To learn more about the rules, check out our Project page on Wikimedia Common. Here are the exciting prizes which you can win internationally.

International Prizes

• 1st prize: 500 USD
• 2nd prize: 400 USD
• 3rd prize: 300 USD
• Top 10 consolation prizes: 40 USD Each
• Best Video prize and best Audio prize: 150 USD & 150 USD
• Top uploader prize for images: First Prize: 100 USD, Second prize: 50 USD
• Wiki Loves Folklore Postcards to top 100 Uploaders
• Certificates and postcards to Local Organizers.

(Disclaimer : The above prizes will only be disbursed in form of gift card or voucher format only)

You can win both International prizes and your local Prizes simultaneously !

If you are interested in participating in the photography campaign, start photographing and collecting media of your local culture and get ready for the photo campaign happening on Wikimedia Commons. For more information about rules and prizes of the contest, refer here. For any questions, email us or join our telegram group

Warm regards,

Rockpeterson

Wiki Loves Folklore International Team.

Zachary Taylor image

You removed Category:Albert Newsam from File:Zachary Taylor, 12th President of the United States LCCN2003673099.tif. The writing below the image is not so easy to read. But https://npg.si.edu/object/npg_NPG.85.53 is the same engraving, and gives Newsam as the artist in the metadata. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Charles Matthews: Yes, that is why Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs‎‎ exists to prevent image duplication, similar to Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs and hopefully clean up categories by removing duplicate images. Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 16:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Monitoring additions to cats

Hi. What tool do you use to monitor what files are adding to categories? Gbawden (talk) 09:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Gbawden: I have found that I must look at each files individually, rather than use Cat-a-lot. The problem with using Cat-a-lot is that I can't tell what other categories a file is in; therefore I have to do a lot of clean up. Krok6kola (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

ːSorry let me rephrase. You seem to know when I add files to LC Tif images for example - is there something you use to track a particular category or are all these files just on your watchlist? Gbawden (talk) 05:46, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Gbawden: My watch list is not used for this but rather to keep up with what is happening in the community. (By the way, you are a great administrator.) For the issue you mention, I look through lots and lots of files in lots and lots of categories. If I find a file that is in Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs‎ and its counterpart is not in a category I try to figure out a category to put it in. But if I can't figure it out, I remove it. Krok6kola (talk) 15:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I was hoping you had some secret tool I could use to monitor new additions to categories ː)
Thanks for the compliment too Gbawden (talk) 05:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Gbawden, your watchlist can do this. There is a filter setting in there to show category additions when you're watching that category. The filter is normally disabled. Elizium23 (talk) 00:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Awesome. That is extremely helpful. Thank you Gbawden (talk) 06:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

removing valid categories

hello Krok6kola,

I'm sorry, I do not understand why you are removing valid categories such as 1, 2, 3, 4 and many more. -- Geagea (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

• @Geagea: Because Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs‎‎ exists to prevent image duplication, similar to Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs and hopefully clean up categories by removing duplicate images. Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 19:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I still do not understand why to remove the category. we generally do not removing categories from files that going to be deleted as once they deleted the file will not appear in the category. I can understand logic such as coping categories from file X to Y. But in this way you are losing all the efforts made by users to add the categories. -- Geagea (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

• @Geagea: I don't understand what you mean. Per the explanation for each category: "This category exists to prevent visual duplication in other categories. It provides lossless versions suitable as a source for edited versions for display. Images should be placed in this category ONLY if there is an exact JPG replica file which is fully categorized, and the two files cross-reference each other. Any further categorization should be done on the .jpg version of the image." Each LOC Tiff file is linked to the LOC .jpg file by Fæ (who uploaded all these images), so why have both copies in the same category? It seems redundant and contributes to these huge categories. In any case, many times, editors just categorize the .jpg image. Other times they categorize both. Often the .jpg image is in a completely different category from the .TIFF or is not categorized at all, contributing to the large amount of images without categories. Krok6kola (talk) 20:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

ok, connecting between the tiff and jpg is good idea. but still it's need to be checked if 'till' file have a category/ies that the 'jpg' hasn't. -- Geagea (talk) 21:04, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:Barron_Falls,_Daintree_Rainforest

Category:Barron_Falls,_Daintree_Rainforest 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!

—  Junglenut | talk  10:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Alfred Waud

Hi Kr. You need to be careful with Waud drawings, American museums can make mistakes. Waud consecutively worked for at least three newspapers during the civil war. The drawings need to be linked with the published engravings, and preferably filed in date order as opposed. Too many sub divide cats make it difficult to match drawings with engravings. This picture has nothing to do with Slovenia. Broichmore (talk) 18:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Broichmore: Sorry, that was an error. I don't knowingly categorize anything to to with Slovenia. I must have been really tired! Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 19:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Blanking of Ben Gurion airport categories

Hello, why are blanking category after category of images related to Ben Gurion airport by year? I fail to see the logic of moving multiple images from these into the Aviation in the British Mandate of Palestine category or of removing the categories themselves from the Aviation in Palestine by year categories. Poliocretes (talk) 06:26, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Poliocretes: My reasoning is the following: Israel did not come into existence as a sovereign state until 1948 and David Ben-Gurion became its first Prime Minister in 1949. The airport was renamed after Ben-Gurion following his death in 1973. So to me it does not make sense to name airports in the British Mandate of Palestine, part of the British Empire, as Ben Gurion airport by year. You think otherwise? Krok6kola (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I do. To begin with, airports get renamed. JFK, Ronald Raegan, to name but a pair, had different names. Yet for simplicity and clarity's sake, their categories maintain their current names even before they bore them. Furthermore, I really don't see what the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 has anything whatsoever to do with the name of the airport currently known as Ben Gurion airport. We can discuss about what name to call the airport before Ben Gurion's death, but what does the identity of the governing entity have to do with anything? On the contrary, multiple locations changed names during the history, and their categories do not reflect that. There's no "1939 in Danzig", there's a "1939 in Gdansk", no "1945 in Bombay" but "1945 in Mumbai". Finally, you did not rename the categories, you did not suggest an alternative name, you just went ahead and blanketed them entirely. How is this in any way helpful or an improvement? All you've done is remove context from these photographs. I kindly ask you to revert. Poliocretes (talk) 21:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Krok6kola, Your logic is wrong. Airport is an airport. and it have history that can be sorted by year. Please do not do it again. -- Geagea (talk) 21:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

{(Edit conflict)@Poliocretes: Since the images are not clearly an "international airport", I thought the existing Category:Aviation in the British Mandate of Palestine was good enough. However, User:Geagea has already reverted me. (In the cases you mention above, those airports were already "international airports" and clearly existed as "airports", and they are not categorized "by year". Nor do they include images of the airports under their former names. The political location was not changed, e.g. New York or Washington, D.C. Changing location from the British Mandate of Palestine, part of the British Empire, is misleading in terms of its political location, and misleadingly categorized by year adds to the confusion.) Best, Krok6kola (talk) 22:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Removal of valid categories

@Krok6kola, I reverted your removal of valid categories here, here and here. Each had no edit summary reason.

These are all valid categories from the source images, such as the date of the completed artwork, the location of the fruit depicted and the name of the orchardist/ farmer/ landowner of that specific fruit tree. Please, fix any other similar edits. Thank you, -- Ooligan (talk) 23:33, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Okay. (We just have different views of categories of what is relevant to a specific category.) Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 23:37, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Krok6kola, In the above three files, what specific categories were not "relevant" and why? I want to understand your perspective. -- Ooligan (talk) 02:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Sorry to take so long to answer. I just have to figure out why I did what I did, and I will do that soon! Krok6kola (talk) 20:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to take so long to answer. I just have to figure out why I did what I did, and I will do that soon! Krok6kola (talk) 20:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: The problem from my point of view is in Category:Beach (surname), since the emphasis is on the paintings in Category:Watercolor paintings by Amanda Almira Newton and there is no "surname" involved, except the grower's name who seems not to be important. To me, the images look out of place in Category:West Palm Beach, Florida. Also, "originating in West Palm Beach, Plam Beach County, Florida (sic)" does not, to me, apply to the painting itself. If you look at the other similar paintings by Amanda Almira Newton, they are not categorized by place. If there were a category Category:Fruit of West Palm Beach County, or Category:Flora of West Palm Beach County, or Category:Agriculture of Palm Beach County, perhaps.

I suggest you look through the other paintings and see how they are categorized to get a view how other editors have dealt with these paintings. In any case, they are not from the city of West Palm Beach, Florida but rather the county. Thank you for asking. Best wishes, Krok6kola (talk) 20:55, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

You said, "In any case, they are not from the city of West Palm Beach, Florida but rather the county." You were incorrect

From the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Palm_Beach,_Florida,

"The city grew steadily during the 1890s and the first two decades of the 20th century, most residents were engaged in the tourist industry and related services or winter vegetable market and tropical fruit trade." (bold emphasis added)

From Wikidata, the size of West Palm Beach is 57.98 square miles (150.18 km2) So, there were many miles of farm and orchard lands within the "city" boundaries, before urbanization.

This mango variety was grown in 1912, but you can see here what the area looked like before all the buildings, like here circa 1880- File:WestPalmBeach1885.jpg

Also, you probably agree that Farmers are an important part of our society- including pioneering Orchardist Mr. J. B. Beach of West Palm Beach, Florida with his "Golo" and Indian cultivar "Amini" variety of mangoes (scientific name: Mangifera indica) even though you wrote "... the grower's name who seems not to be important." Respectfully, -- Ooligan (talk) 19:44, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Wow! You certainly did your research. That is what I really enjoy about the Commons, figuring out issues as you did here. Sorry about being really wrong. And thank you for correcting my error. Krok6kola (talk) 16:48, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, there are many people on Commons and the other WMF projects with great wisdom and knowledge. So please, keep an open mind when you don't have a deep knowledge of a particular subject and assume good faith.

Thank you for your contributions here. -- Ooligan (talk) 02:34, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Your added ping on Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/04/Category:Places to go, National Park Service

Hi. Just FYI, pings don't work if you don't save a signature in the same edit as the ping, so I doubt that JopkeB was notified. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Funny, I was here to tell you the same. - Jmabel ! talk 02:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Nagahara, the ancient Capital of the Jellalabad region

Hi Krok, Do you think I've got the location right for these two images?

here, and here Broichmore (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Broichmore: , I think that region is more likely to be in Afghanistan, rather than Pakistan. See Nagara (ancient city).Krok6kola (talk) 22:03, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Please stop adding overcat

I appreciate your effort to categorize uncategorized media, however adding Category:National Archives and Records Administration to files already in Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration is not helpful. It just bloats Category:National Archives and Records Administration. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Cryptic-waveform: It is not "overcat". How else do you suggest how to deal with the massive numbers of "uncategorized" images in, for example Category:Media needing categories as of 28 November 2021 (where those images were) before you removed the category? Such backlogs discourage user/editors from finding the more meaningful images. What is the solution? Krok6kola (talk) 21:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• Do you have any example of a file that is in Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration and is not also a conceptual member of Category:National Archives and Records Administration (other than where the explicit cat membership has been removed due to OVERCAT)? I cannot think of any such example.

The point there is that this is then a case when COM:OVERCAT does apply: all members of the child cat are implicitly members of the parent cat as well (that is not always true, which is a problem for the excessive application of OVERCAT). As a result, there is no need to place them in there individually, we can (for once) rely on the transitive membership.

For File:Field Artillery Training Center, Camp Bragg, North Carolina - Sheet 3 - NARA - 137929443 (page 1).jpg as an example, this new categorization is (as Cryptic says) quite pointless, if not even misleading. Membership in National Archives and Records Administration (where we explictlty state this) is for material about the NARA, not merely just that held by it. This is why we have Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration as a distinct cat. Nor is this change any justification for removing the {{Uncategorized}} marker – it's not as if its categorization has actually been improved!

I'm firmly with Cryptic over this one. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: Then why was it in Category:Media needing categories as of 28 November 2021? Please explain why I waste time trying to categorize images in these categories if the actually secretly categorized? Krok6kola (talk) 00:15, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: Besides the above (which you firmly agree with), you do realize that there are 466,944 images in that category? Is that helpful to Commons users? Please figure out a way to remove those images from "uncategorized". Krok6kola (talk) 00:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

• It's in that category because they need categorization. But moving it into a category of either 1/2 million others (Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration) or one of barely important significance to it (Category:National Archives and Records Administration) doesn't fix that. Neither of those could be said to have, "usefully categorized" this image, or would justify removing the uncategorized marker.

We should work to categorize images. But we should not fool ourselves that simply bulk-moving them all into a useless category would be adding any value there.

One possibility would be to replace a bland "uncategorized" with "uncategorized content of the USA, since 2019" since that's a bit more specific (and so might attract those with an interest and knowledge closer to that field) and it's also broad enough that it can be added automatically. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

This is very much a case of over-categorization. If you're unfamiliar with COM:OVERCAT, I invite you to (re-)read this page. No problem is being solved by moving a large amount of images (nearly 6,000 by the time I cleaned up Category:National Archives and Records Administration) from a maintenance category to a major category. You're asking for solutions and I have given this some thought. If the issue is that it is difficult for you to filter out NARA images from the uncategorized cats, a simple search with -incategory:"Images from the National Archives and Records Administration" should help. Another option would be to make Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration not hidden so that NARA images would not appear in the uncategorized cats. This would need to be discussed first via a CfD. Or a third option would be to create an "uncategorized" category specifically for NARA images. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 02:50, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

What part of "This would need to be discussed first via a CfD." don't you understand? Cryptic-waveform (talk) 03:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Take a break. This is not worth getting blocked over. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 03:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

FWIW: I wouldn't remove {{Uncategorized}} simply because a technical category was added. That or a similar template should stay there at least until a topical category is added that deals with the main subject matter of the file. - Jmabel ! talk 17:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I don't know what you mean. I was trying to categorize files that apparently were in a hidden category that has 466,944 images in it, all appearing as uncategorized. Thus I was accused of COM:OVERCAT. This seems crazy to me and hard work for those of us who like to find categories for the uncategorized images. When NARA images appeared uncategorized but really were in Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs, the category status was changed to visible to prevent this problem. Krok6kola (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

• I wasn't addressing that (and mostly don't intend to). What I'm saying is that in terms of dealing with "uncategorized," a category about the source of the photo, or who the photographer is, or what device it was taken with, etc. is absolutely irrelevant. It's still uncategorized for almost all useful purposes.
• To take it from another angle: don't think of "uncategorized" as a purely technical matter that can be fixed by technically adding a category. The relevant fact for our users is that the image needs useful categories. - Jmabel ! talk 18:50, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Jmabel: Well then this project fails miserably. I regularly find images for Wikipedia articles that are uncategorized, for example. I think the existing category methods are for the pleasure of those on the Commons only. Krok6kola (talk) 19:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

  • User:Hunster at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Krok6kola_edit-warring appears to be saying almost exactly what I'm saying here. - Jmabel ! talk 20:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

• It is not a problem if Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration contains 1/5M entries. It does not need to be fixed.

Categorization being needed on the files is a separate problem. As there are 1/5M of them, it will not be fixed easily and any "easy fix" for it is not likely to be a useful one. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:17, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Again, please stop doing this. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 15:44, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Krok6kola edit-warring. I'm sorry you felt the need to go there.

Cryptic-waveform (talk) 03:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at 18 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Tamara Arciuch, Bartek Kasprzykowski, Adam Fidusiewicz, Bartosz Opania (2018) (cropped).jpg

File:Tamara Arciuch, Bartek Kasprzykowski, Adam Fidusiewicz, Bartosz Opania (2018) (cropped).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!

Fryta73 (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect Ichneumonidae categorizations

Hi Krok6kola, I've run into a number of images that you've categorized under Category:Ichneumon. The problem is, none of them have actually been in the genus Ichneumon, and most haven't even been in the subfamily Ichneumoninae. Please be aware that the common name "ichneumon wasp" refers to any member of the family Ichneumonidae and should not be used to file images to genus. Lhikan634 (talk) 04:00, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Lhikan634: I'm very sorry for my errors. I find those as "uncategoryized" but I will stay away from those kind of images in the future and leave them be. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, Krok6kola (talk) 12:42, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

I just created the redirect Category:Ichneumon wasp. This should help prevent future miscategorizations. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 13:22, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Cryptic-waveform: Great idea! Those type of redirects are very helpful. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 13:27, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Mosque names

Hi Krok6kola, Can you explain to me the difference between these mosque names? Babri Masjid, and Badi Masjid, and Bari Masjid. Specifically what are the meanings of Babri, Badi and Bari, and does it make sense for them to be mosque names? Regards. Broichmore (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

@Broichmore: , to what are you referring? What country? Are these edits I've made recently? If so, I am following Wikipedia's lists for National Cultural Sites in Uganda. Does that help? Krok6kola (talk) 16:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

The sites are in India, I'm told these are Moslem names. Broichmore (talk) 16:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

@Broichmore: , "Masjid" is a mosque. It sounds they are names for different mosques, or maybe misspellings on someone's part. There is Babri Masjid, Musheerabad Mosque also known (also known as Musheerabad Badi Masjid), and Babri Masjid. Hope that helps. Krok6kola (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

For the "Badi Masjid, in jaunpur", do you prefer that spelling, or "Bari Masjid"? Broichmore (talk) 16:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

@Broichmore: There are Commons people who know much more about India than I do. (Can't think of their names right now.) I'm not from India so I don't have preferences. Krok6kola (talk) 17:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Uncategorized files with only 1 year-based category added

@Krok6kola, File:...)parison in incandescent lamps LCCN2016893231.jpg I just added some words from the file name to add a more specific and meaningful category than the less useful "1924 in the United States." Here [[6]] I just added "Butte, Montana" from the file name. Please, consider adding one additional specific category to media needing categorization files. Thank you, -- Ooligan (talk) 16:43, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: I am sorry. You are right. If I am going to categorize and image I should try to be complete. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 13:06, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with those 1,000's of uncategorized files waiting to meet the world. Cheers, -- Ooligan (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

NRHP

What is the NRHP connection here? - Jmabel ! talk 23:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I just refer all images with a NRHP number to Farragutful. He knows what to do. I just don't pay attention to such things anymore as I am somewhat tired. Sorry! Krok6kola (talk) 21:50, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

You added the category (which he has now removed). - Jmabel ! talk 22:05, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: That's why I refer images with NRHP numbers to him. Krok6kola (talk) 22:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Men wearing glasses (and others)

Hello again. Please stop adding uncategorized pictures to overly broad categories like this. It's exactly the same issue that has been previously discussed. The only effect of your changes is to hide files needing proper categorization. See File:Joe howard at yale.jpg. The file has a good description and a Wikipedia article is linked. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 21:14, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Cryptic-waveform: If you haven't already, see Commons:Village pump#Unidentified politicians: What is "unidentified"?. It's the same deal. I no longer have time for aggressively siloed micro-discussions about every minute thing, all the while avoiding addressing the bigger picture. That's certainly the case here. There's a pretty widespread problem of attaching a single category to a file and pretending it's properly categorized, or removing valid categories from files which have already been properly categorized. All these editors are doing is kicking the can down the road, because someone else will eventually have to come along and clean up their messes. The lack of warm bodies and the "quantity over quality" mentality of catering to mass uploaders makes the "have to" qualifier necessary, strongly suggesting that this work should happen eventually rather than will happen. I realized that this mess had grown beyond my ability to manage it back when Commons had a third as many files as it does today. There's also the fact that I ceased being self-employed in 2018 and therefore no longer have the stretches of free time I used to have.RadioKAOS (talk) 06:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@RadioKAOS: Thank you so much for posting here. I consider the Commons a community project in which others are free to remedy the occasional lapses of others. Together we can all contribute and work toward the greater good. Krok6kola (talk) 13:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Category:Kangso_Yaksu_Processing_Factory

Kangso Yaksu Processing Factory 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!

Leo Miregalitheo (talk) 16:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Category:Sitka_Fine_Arts_Campus_(Formerly_Sheldon_School)

Category:Sitka_Fine_Arts_Campus_(Formerly_Sheldon_School) 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!

Jmabel ! talk 18:58, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Orson Welles Dec 2009.jpg

File:Orson Welles Dec 2009.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!

✗plicit 06:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Lillian Gunter's Notebook 1.jpg

File:Lillian Gunter's Notebook 1.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!

✗plicit 02:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

FYI, wrong bridge

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ASeattle_30_%2832332789977%29.jpg&diff=800442232&oldid=568198281 Jmabel ! talk 22:48, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Category:Perth

Just to let you know, Category:Perth is actually a disambiguation category so, despite your valiant efforts, images like File:City of Perth (2437729887).jpg remain listed as uncategorised if placed in there. Calistemon (talk) 23:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

*@Calistemon:  Thanks for letting me know. Krok6kola (talk) 23:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I monitor and check the category from time to time so anything appearing there gets recategorised eventually by me anyway. Calistemon (talk) 23:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Category:Diego Moreno

Category:Diego Moreno is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD C2 (unuseful empty category) If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Doclys👨‍⚕️👩‍⚕️ ^{🩺 • 💉} 11:56, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs

You added category "NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs" to a TIF file without checking to see that the JPG file was on August 24 and is currently still uncategorized.

"Images should be placed in this category ONLY if there is an exact JPG replica file which is fully categorized, ..." quoted from- Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs

1. File:The West Virginia cigar - Wheeling Intelligencer Steam Job Press. LCCN2015651510.jpg ***This file is in Category:Media needing categories as of 3 June 2021

2. File:The West Virginia cigar - Wheeling Intelligencer Steam Job Press. LCCN2015651510.tif ***You added "Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs"

3. Diff here]

Please, fix this and check for other files with similar edits by you. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 21:43, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Thanks, it is fixed. I rarely find these so I don't think there are others. Krok6kola (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@Krok6kola, I'll repost this quotation from above: "Images should be placed in this category ONLY if there is an exact JPG replica file which is fully categorized, ..." Fully categorized is not adding just one category. I can see another five categories or more being possible for that file. -- Ooligan (talk) 22:04, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Ok, I added another category. How many are needed to be "fully categorized"? Krok6kola (talk) 22:07, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@Krok6kola, See: User talk:Krok6kola#Uncategorized files with only 1 year-based category added

In June you wrote,

"I am sorry. You are right. If I am going to categorize and image I should try to be complete. Thanks, Krok6kola"

I assumed good faith that you would try to add more that just one category to "uncategoried" files or as you wrote, "I should try to be complete."

As to your question about "fully categorized," it is certainly more than just one.

I suggest that you try to add at least 3 categories to any uncategorized file. The file name and description often provide useful categories. I have found this old poster helpful when thinking about what categories are related to a specific file- File:Where, When, Who, What, Why, How^ - NARA - 534144.jpg. I hope this helps. -- Ooligan (talk) 22:56, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage

Hi, could you say why you put this image and this image into that category? Maybe they could be part of that collection, but why do you think so? Thanks in advance for any reply, MartinPoulter (talk) 14:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: I can't remember. If you don't think it belongs there, feel free to remove. I might have used google translate. Probably it was uncategorized and I sought to put it somewhere, thinking that it at least it will bring it to someone's attention. But sometimes my judgment is bad. Krok6kola (talk) 14:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: The image next to the one mention above is equally suspect then. Krok6kola (talk) 14:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Turkish delight / Lokum

Good day. You might wish to take a look at Category talk:Turkish delight (confection) and possily share input there. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Category:Turkish delight (confection)

Turkish delight (confection) 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!

Thanks for your attention. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Bučina

The word "Bučina" can have different meanings in Czech (e.g. beech forest or local name) Gampe (talk) 08:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Revert?

Dear Krok6kola, You manually reverted this action, in which I added 10 or more categories and removed Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs. Could you tell me why? Vysotsky (talk) 14:07, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: There is a category:Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs to prevent duplicates of the many images upload by Fæ‎. Hope that helps. (I don't know how that image escaped our efforts.) Krok6kola (talk) 14:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Duplicates? I don't consider TIFFs as duplicates of JPGs (or the other way around). JPGs are better for usage in Wiki, but TIFFs are better for professional usage (as in printed books, so editors and publishers assure me). Archives also prefer TIFF over JPG. JPGs aren't lossless images, while TIFF is a lossless format. Was there any other reason you removed 12 useful categories from that file? Vysotsky (talk) 14:34, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: You are right! In that particular case there is no duplicate. I am so sorry and please revert my edit. (I should have checked before I reverted. Please forgive. Krok6kola (talk) 14:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Vysotsky: FWIW, a lot of TIFFs do have visually duplicate JPEGs, and when they do we usually categorize just the JPEG, which links ot the TIFF in its "other versions" field. - Jmabel ! talk 18:38, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

FWIW: it seems unnatural to not categorize images completely, as we don't know for which goal people will use images. If somebody wants to use an image for a paper publication, he or she would be pleased to see this image pop up in a category. Users of Commons must be able to find all images in a category directly. Of course I agree with cross-references between JPGs and TIFFs but complete categorization is always useful. @Krok6kola: no problem at all. We all make mistakes now and then. Vysotsky (talk) 21:16, 18 November 2023 (UTC) het

@Krok6kola: even better, there is a duplicate JPG, so no prob at all. I replaced the 12 categories. Vysotsky (talk) 21:24, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: Yes, you can always access the TIFF file from the .jpg file. They are attached. There is a later photograher, (Highgate I think her name is) whose files are always TIFFs (no .jpgs). Her images are high quality. There is also a Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs and Category:High-resolution TIFF images from the National Archives and Records Administration. There are so many images and categories; duplicates just make categories unnecessarily large! Krok6kola (talk) 21:39, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

I tend to disagree. PNGs and JPGs are not considered as duplicates, but as different formats. So are TIFFs and JPGs -for reasons mentioned above. Vysotsky (talk) 21:56, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: PNGs are not included in this framework. As I mentioned, in Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs, the TIFF can always be accessed through the .jpg. The images in this category were all uploaded by Fæ‎, so this category only applies to those. Krok6kola (talk)

I took a better look at this issue, and I got really scared. You (and perhaps others) have really removed useful categories by the thousands. This is really harmful. If I would be looking for a highres image of Nahum Mitchell for a professional book or article about this historical person, I would be looking at Category:Nahum Mitchell. I wouldn't find this very useful image because you removed it from that category, as "duplicates just make categories unnecessarily large" (your words). No, they don't. This is hilarious. "You can always access the TIFF file from the .jpg file" (your words): no, one doesn't. A user looks at the category, and he concludes: no highres present. Was this method of operation (removal of useful categories) announced somewhere?. Vysotsky (talk) 22:32, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

PS I also found a dozen misplaced files in this category. (ETH, not LoC, no "duplicates".) I hope these examples are exceptions. Vysotsky (talk) 22:40, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Vysotsky: if you want to change policy/guidelines, I suggest you start a discussion on Commons:Village pump or (if you have a specific proposal) Commons:Village pump/Proposals rather than browbeat a user who is following the current guidelines and policies in this respect. But, seriously, this has been discussed before, and I doubt you will find that the consensus has changed. - Jmabel ! talk 04:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I had no intention to change policy or guidelines. I was interested in the rationale of removing categories of TIFF files, and was therefore looking for the discussion about that policy or these "current guidelines". Apart from this discussion I couldn't find any relevant discussion about TIFFs, but I might not be looking at the right pages. Could you perhaps point me in the right direction? Vysotsky (talk) 20:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: Talk to User:Gbawden about that. Unfortunately we are not all perfect. Krok6kola (talk) 22:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

These are just accidents. I am not interested in small exceptions. But could you tell me if there has been a discussion somewhere about the removal of categories at TIFF-files? Vysotsky (talk) 23:02, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: It was not my idea to create the category, I was not part of any discussions regarding it and do not know of any dlscusslons to point out to you. Krok6kola (talk) 22:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I will look elsewhere. Vysotsky (talk) 22:35, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: I believe this approach began with Category:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs, which dates from 31 December 2011, but it may be even older for some other set of imported TIFFs. - Jmabel ! talk 01:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. That's helpful. Vysotsky (talk) 10:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Please, move photos of "houseboats" on Dal Lake their specific sub-category.

There are photos of houseboats- Category:Houseboats on Dal Lake inside the new "Boats on Dal Lake" category you created here Category:Boats on Dal Lake -- Ooligan (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

???? What? Krok6kola (talk) 20:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

There are "houseboats" within your (newly created) category of "boats." -- Ooligan (talk) 20:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

You are correct. That is right. Krok6kola (talk) 20:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Railway museum?

Dear Krok6kola, You placed at least 21 photos, like this football photograph in Category:Nederlands Spoorwegmuseum. I don't know why this was done, but I will change this category to the correct categories. Vysotsky (talk) 11:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky: I am very sorry and thank you for fixing my mistake. I was too tired and should have known that. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk)

File:"Bolter" Iwona Maciejewska,Jan Zieliński (36897280800) (cropped).jpg

File:"Bolter" Iwona Maciejewska,Jan Zieliński (36897280800) (cropped).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!

Taivo (talk) 19:34, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Documents of the United States

It looks like you've been removing Category:Documents of the United States from a lot of images that are clearly documents and clearly from the United States. What's going on? Many of these should be narrowed (in that we have similar categories for every individual state) but just removing the category is wrong, at least on the ones I've seen. - Jmabel ! talk 19:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Could you explain more (be more specific)? I put images in categories that were already in "Documents of the United States" (unless the image was clearly not a document). Must be something to do with Seattle? Krok6kola (talk) 19:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

• File:City of Seattle condemned scale notice, circa 1920 (50973632337).jpg (I guess you could make a case that ephemera like this is not a "document", but your edit summary was just the fact that you were removing the category.
• File:Seattle - ARMS demonstration report, 1978 (49842976712).jpg

Jmabel ! talk 22:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

moved from my talk page== Needs more specific category == File:Cover of Seattle solid waste report, 1974 (39909282043).jpg that Documents of the United States Government. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 00:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)END MOVED

No category here asserts this to be a United States government document. It isn't one. Where are you seeing that? - Jmabel ! talk 00:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

No one is going to find anything relevant in a category that has thousands of images indiscriminately placed there. Most have obvious categories (with a little thought). Most of the images in the category Category:Index cards of the United States were originally there. (Maybe some still are, but I'll find them!) Krok6kola (talk) 00:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage

Hi, you added these two files to this category.

• File:Al Zohdy fan al 5a6 34.jpg
• File:3abdallah Zuhdi fan al 5a6 33.jpg

Could you tell me why you think they are part of this collection? I can't find them on the KhaliliCollections.org web site, or elsewhere on the web. Thanks in advance for any help, MartinPoulter (talk) 17:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: I could be wrong, but I based it on Wikipedia:GLAM/Khalili/Commons categories Krok6kola (talk) 17:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

But these images only appear on that page because you added the category. Was it that they looked similar to images already on that page? MartinPoulter (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: I removed them. They were uncategorized images from 2021 at the time, so I now looked at the uploaders name and what was uploaded by that person. They are apparently Turkish calligraphy. Thanks for drawing my attention to that. It is still a guess, but putting them in some category provides more of a chance that someone (like you) will notice mistakes. I do note that two images from the Khalili Collections appear in Category:Turkish calligraphy Krok6kola (talk) 17:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Mis-categorized file in category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs

Krok6kola,

On August 27th, you added category "LC TIF images with categorized JPGs" to this .tif file: here.

However, today I was the first person to add categories to this (File:Cherry Dale Arts Parade LOC npcc.04227.jpg).

Until today, This file was in Category:Media needing categories as of 7 May 2021

Please, fix other similar files, like [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], and others.

Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 09:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Ooligan: this is actually a tricky one. Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs exists mostly to prevent people from categorizing the TIFFs. In my view it's more like "LC TIF images where categories ought to be on the linked JPGs, not here". Probably calls for a more general discussion, but I don't think Krok6kola was necessarily wrong here. - Jmabel ! talk 20:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel, The following is a quotation from Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs,

"Images should be placed in this category ONLY if there is an exact JPG replica file which is fully categorized, and the two files cross-reference each other. Any further categorization should be done on the .jpg version of the image."

Please, note that the current bolding of the crucial words were actually bolded by @Krok6kola here:

The phrase "fully categorized" may have different interpretations, however, an "uncategorized" file is certainly not fully categorized. The files I had linked above were all uncategorized files located within Category:Media needing categories as of 7 May 2021. So, Krok6kola is not following the current process guidance that they had affirmed by bolding this language themselves.

Also, a review of only 4 days shows that 100s and possibly 1,000s of these .tif files categorized this way have uncategorized associated .jpg files. -- Ooligan (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

• IMHO if anything then it's the wording, and the category name, that's at fault here, not the action.

We do not want to lose anything by these changes.

We already have many files that are far from fully categorised, or uncategorised. This situation is not made worse by adding Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs

We must not remove categorisation from a TIFF that is not on the JPG.

We should not have uncategorised JPGs.

We should bring JPGs to a categorised state as soon as practicable (which may or may not be related to this action).

We may add Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs to bidirectionally-linked TIFFs

We must not add Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs to linked TIFFs that are not, or will not imminently be, cross-linked to the JPGs.

I see no underlying reason why adding Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs has any other relation to the categorisation of the JPGs. Whatever state they had before, so long as we don't make it worse, there's no problem to adding this. Unless we want to start using it as a workflow marker, ie it really is limited to 'categorized JPGs' rather than just linked JPGs, then we don't need to restrict this. Now is that what we want? Is that the most useful interpretation? Or should we relax it (as above) and make its main criterion for use being the linkage, not that the JPG categorisation is complete? Andy Dingley (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm completely with Andy here. - Jmabel ! talk 00:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Me too, with one exception: we should not add Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs to files pointing to JPGs not containing categories ({{Uncategorized|year=2021|month=May|day=7}}) - as this is clearly a misleading category, suggesting these uncategorised files referred to don't need any extra work. The presence of the uncat-tag (at the JPGs) should be checked before adding the LC-TIF tag (to the TIFs). Otherwise the cure is worse than the disease, and the goal of having less uncategorized JPGs will not be coming any closer. The time and energy spent on adding this category could be better spent on categorising files. Vysotsky (talk) 11:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

@Vysotsky, I agree with your perspective.

Categorizing 100's of TIF files with "LC TIF images with categorized JPGs", when the associated JPG files have NO categories is misleading.

@Andy Dingley, about this category you wrote,

"Or should we relax it (as above) and make its main criterion for use being the linkage, not that the JPG categorization is complete?"

Currently, "linkage" is what predominates this category. So, if the word "categorized" is removed from this category's name, then it would no longer be misleading. (Note that category page's explanatory statement would also, need amending.)

@Jmabel, Can a bot make the category name change to the thousands of files, if that is the consensus. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 01:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

In principle, it could be done by a bot (& a lot more easily than by semi-automated methods like Cat-a-lot).

But I wonder about the wisdom of the proposed change. It would really de-emphasize that the purpose of this category is that you don't need to further categorize the TIFF, because that work belongs on the JPEG. - Jmabel ! talk 01:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The category name should be accurate. It should be as Flip Wilson said " what you see is what you get."

The current category's explanatory text states, "This category exists to prevent visual duplication in other categories." -- Ooligan (talk) 21:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

FYI

You changed at one of my images from "Golden hour" to "Blue hour", the photograph was taken round about 1 1/2 hours before sunset - at golden hour. Golden hour is before (!) sunset, blue hour after (!) sunset. ;-) --XRay 💬 14:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@XRay: "Golden hour" is also visual. There should be a "golden" color. See Golden hour (photography). "In photography, the golden hour is the period of daytime shortly after sunrise or before sunset, during which daylight is redder ... than when the sun is higher in the sky.

I certainly know the definition. The color tone is clearly warmer and that is also visible. However, it is definitely not the blue hour. --XRay 💬 15:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)