User talk:Io Herodotus

User page Go to my User page

Talk Page Leave me a message.

Contributions What I've done.

Toolbox The testing zone

houses The testing zone

Guestbook Please do sign

File:RobbieRobertson74.png

---

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

Voorne

Hello Please do something about File:Voorne in 500 - 700 AD (Berendsen).jpg. This picture is really good. I don't understand what is wrong with it. Best Regards.--Io Herodotus (talk) 21:28, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I can't do very much in this case. The image never had a license which is required on commons - compare Commons:Licensing. I cannot find any inication for a free license on the given source - http://www.geo.uu.nl/fg/palaeogeography/data/geology/ICFS.pdf - either. You may try to raise an Commons:Undeletion request but I don't see a big chance for success. regards--JuTa 21:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Al-Serkal

You are right, probably the pic. was made in 2014 . --Milei.vencel (talk) 05:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Parthenon

About the categories "Parthenon in (date)" you have removed "Restoration of the Parthenon". Why did you remove it ? It really showed the different steps of the restorations. At least this category must have a link, whatsoever, with the Parthenon and not only Greece. It could be ""The Parthenon per year" or something like that. What do you think ?--Io Herodotus (talk) 08:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: Sorting categories by year into restoration is wrong. Restoration is when you see scaffolds, machines, and/or workers on the picture. This is not the case on all pictures by year. So, category "Parthenon in 2009" is logically to sort into "2009 in Athens". There could be also a category "Partehon by year", as sub of "Athens by year", but currently there is none. The category "Restoration of the Parthenon" is to add independently to each picture that shows restoration. --A.Savin 13:41, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

OK I agree, a restoration doesn't last so long, it's wasn't the right word. "Athens by year" could be a sub of "Athens by year", but also a sub of "Parthenon". I insist on that point. Someone looking for images of the Partenon wouldn't necessarily look for "Athens by year".--Io Herodotus (talk) 16:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: Yes. Category:Parthenon by year and for parental categories: Category:Parthenon + Category:Athens by year. --A.Savin 16:09, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Since each category, like "cat. The Parthenon in 2009" has a sub, here "cat. Athens in 2009". Do you think it's necessary for "cat. Partenon by year" to have a sub "cat. Athens by year", it looks like a duplicate to me. --Io Herodotus (talk) 17:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Maps

Hello. I would like to create maps for the provinces of Cambodia (for the geolocalization). I don't know how to create them or how to start them. Regards --Io Herodotus (talk) 02:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! You need to know to work with a vector graphics program like Inkscape, Illustrator or CorelDraw (better) or a raster graphic program like Gimp or Photoshop (worse). Then it is necessary to know what map projections are and how they work. Without this knowledge it is senseless to start to work on location maps. Do you have the knowledge? Regards, NNW 11:59, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your anwer. I know what a map projection is, only on theory, I have tried to use Inskape but I gave up, I couldn't find the tutorials for that. Nevertherless I have created some maps Zuiderzee Works, Stelling van Amsterdam or Plan Delta. Do you think that's enough ?--Io Herodotus (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Difficult to say. It depends on how good you want to have your maps. Which source do you want to use? You could use OSM but it has the wrong projection. You could ignore this because the provinces in Cambodia are relatively small but if you want to create a correct location map then OSM won't be a good source for you. Then you will have to be attentive with the data, e.g. it is a pity that you chose JPG for Stelling van Amsterdam the Netherlands blank.jpg. The first version is a map with sharp edges but the more you changed the file the more blurred it became. This could have been avoided by using PNG instead of JPG. For location maps it is important to have a good quality of data because you don't know in which size your location map will be used (that's why a vector graphic is always better than a raster graphic). NNW 14:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Lift bridges in Amsterdam ?

Hallo You Herodotus, when trying today improving the categorization of bridges in Amsterdam, i saw to my surprise that there is new (dd. 10 apr 2017) Category:Lift bridges in Amsterdam. And i saw that the category is very empty: no text, no comment, no explanation, no image and no sub-category...

And then i saw that you made it. I really appreciate that you are also working with bridges in Amsterdam, but i have doubts here. Do you know many lift bridges in Amsterdam? Do you know files on Commons that belong in this category? Do you know about yourself or other people intending to upload relevant files to Commons?

When i checked the Category:Lift bridges in the Netherlands, i saw 11 subcategories, ten with contents and this one, and 11 files that were not in a subcat. I saw one file that should be put in an existing subcat, which i did. So now there are 10 (ten) orphany files in the category Lift bridges in the Netherlands, really not a good start to make new subcategories. Keeping in mind that all bridges can be categorized in a bridges-category, so local as is reasonable, as in: Bridges in North Holland, Bridges in Amsterdam, Bridges in Amsterdam-Noord, etc. Yours, --Paulbe (talk) 22:35, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello. When I created Category:Lift bridges in Amsterdam, I didn't know the existence of Category:Drawbridges in Amsterdam, I apologize for that; we may ask for its deletion.
By the way a drawbridge is a bascule bridge, isn't ? Category:Bascule bridges in the Netherlands has bridges in Amsterdam which are not drawbridges, is there a need for another category ? How to name it ? When I saw that I gave up...We could think about it. Regards.--Io Herodotus (talk) 23:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

File copyright status

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons. While everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the project, one of your recent file uploads had missing or false information regarding its source and copyright status. Please note that Wikimedia Commons takes copyright rules and infringement very seriously. Files may only be uploaded and included if their copyright status meets the conditions stated in our licensing policy, and if their provenance is clearly documented. Files that fail to meet those conditions may be deleted, and users who fail to meet them may be blocked. Please follow our first steps, if you haven't already. If you have questions, feel free to ask at the Village Pump copyright question page or on my talk page. Thank you.  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 03:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

inkspace

Il est conseillé d'utiliser inkspace plutôt que des logiciels donnant des images en jpeg; ceci je le comprends fort bien. J'essaie de m'y mettre mais je bute sur quelques problèmes. Où trouver un forum ou un lieu adéquate pour avoir une assistance ?--Io Herodotus (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour, il y a plein de choses sur fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/Contenu wikigraphiste. Pour les forums, linux graphics est pas mal même si vous utilisez pas linux. Aussi Imppao's Weblog | Un autre weblog sur les logiciels libres est bien. Bon courage ! --Touam (talk) 19:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Après, les images jpg ne sont pas proscrites, ça dépend vraiment de ce que tu veux représenter. Un dessin vectoriel réalisé sous Inkscape est plus utile pour un schéma, mais si il s'agit d'un dessin réaliste/détaillé, un jpg convient très bien. Triton (talk) 18:01, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

L'image jpg bave quand je la travaille trop, c'est horrible. Merci pour l'info sur le forum linux, qui a l'air pas mal. Y a-t-il un bac à sable sur wikimedia commons ? pour en discuter. --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

C'est pour la couverture de la pochette d'album des Beatles? Un dessin vectoriel serait en effet mieux. Le mieux est de demander sur l'Atelier comme dit Touam Triton (talk) 11:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Ce pourrait être ça en effet, mais je travaille sur "File:Sarasvati-ancient-river.jpg". Sinon l'atelier graphic est surchargé; j'ai longtemps été dessinateur donc j'aimerais maîtriser cet outils, mais j'ai des réflexes autocad ou microstation qui ne m'induisent souvent en erreur. --Io Herodotus (talk) 14:49, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Salut, si tu veux je connais assez bien Inkscape et les cartes comme celle sur laquelle tu travailles. Il faudrait la vectoriser en svg. N'hésite pas si tu as des questions ! Skimel (talk) 15:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Merci. J'ai commencé un svg. Puis-je le mettre sur un brouillon quelque part ? J'ai colorié "rivage actuel" pas de problème, mais pas "rivage ancien" qui est adjacent et a donc une limite commune et je ne sais pas comment faire (d'ailleurs je viens de voir une erreur sur la carte, rivage actuel n'est pas dans la légende. --Io Herodotus (talk) 11:43, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Tu peux télécharger ta carte sur Commons, sous le nom Io Herodotus 1.svg, par exemple, en indiquant que c'est bien un fichier de travail. Skimel (talk) 17:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

RE: Vitraux de la Sagrada Familia

Je vais regarder pour voir. Salutations--Canaan (talk) 15:39, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Bientôt ils mettront la croix de la façade de la Passion, pour voir si je passe et prends des photos de tout. Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 22:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Que voulez-vous dire, les saints fondateurs?--Canaan (talk) 15:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Par exemple les saints sur ces photos: File:Barcelona 2015 10 12 0241 (22559512203).jpg, File:SF - Claustro.jpg. --Io Herodotus (talk) 15:25, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Saints at the exterior of the nave

• Hello. Maybe we should split the following category: Category:Outdoor sculptures of the nave of the Sagrada Família to create the following 2 categories: Category:Outdoor sculptures at the eastern side of the nave of the Sagrada Família and Category:Outdoor sculptures at the western side of the nave of the Sagrada Família. Do you want to do it?

• Gaudí said that the the saints who are founders of religion orders and that are linked to Barcelona, should have sculptures. Full list is: Pere Nolasc, Antoni Maria Claret i Clarà, Joaquima de Vedruna, Joan Bosco, Josep Oriol, Josep Manyanet i Vives, Joana de Lestonnac, Vicenç de Paül, Felip Neri, Josep de Calassanç, Ignasi de Loiola, Jeroni, Francesc d'Assís i Teresa de Jesús.

• And yes, we know the six names of the saints at the east side. From left to right are: Santa Juana of Lestonnac, St.Philip Neri, St.Vicent of Paul, St.Joseph of Calasanz, St.Ignatius of Loyola, St.Domingo of Guzmán. At the following website you have them all: http://www.sagradafamiliagaudi.com/Vista%20General/Fachada%20de%20la%20Natividad/Claustro%20y%20Nave%20Lateral/Nave%20Lateral/Santa%20Juana%20de%20Lestonnac.html If you click the green arrow to the right, you'll see the six sculptures. If you click to the left, you will see the six of the west side. --Jordiferrer (talk) 01:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

• Good job. I have edited som of the categories. --Jordiferrer (talk) 14:18, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  I didn't name the category of St Vicent of Paul, because he is barely visible. --Io Herodotus (talk) 15:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

• I've been aways for a while, sorry. Not sure if Caiaphas is present at the sculpture of the trial of Jesus. The catalan references just mention Pontius Pilate washing his hands. And, maybe we could create the category "Sculptures of people at the Segrada Família" but not sure if that is needed, for now. --Jordiferrer (talk) 18:31, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Photos

Je vais chercher à voir, même si je n'ai pas un très bon zoom.--Canaan (talk) 15:09, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Merci, oui il doit falloir ça...ou un drone. --Io Herodotus (talk) 06:13, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Salut. A propos de cela reste le même, je suis désolé. J'ai fait une nouvelle photo de l'abside, de la façade de la Passion avec la nouvelle croix triomphale et la croix. Aujourd'hui, je n'ai pas été à l'intérieur, de quoi exactement avez-vous besoin des vitraux? Je pourrais regarder mes fichiers. Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Waoh Génial. Merci. Pour les vitraux, je qu'ils ne sont pas encore installés ,je verrais demain, il est tard ici. --Io Herodotus (talk) 16:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Ce que je cherche, ce sont les vitraux de la partie haute de la nef comme ici File:2008 Sagrada Familia 13.JPG, mais je crois qu'ils ne sont pas encore posés, ainsi que le saint Vincent de Paul si l'échafaudage est parti. --Io Herodotus (talk) 11:13, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Ils sont trois anges.--Canaan (talk) 15:22, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Je ne suis pas tout à fait sûr, mais je crois que Marie est plus avancée que celles des évangélistes.--Canaan (talk) 10:59, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Je regarderai pour voir, bien que cette photo semble être faite à partir d'une terrasse ou quelque chose, non? Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 15:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Salut. Je ne sais pas si l'un de ceux-ci vous servira ([1], [2], [3]), il est difficile de faire une bonne photo générale comme ça au niveau de la rue. Nouvelle photo de la croix triomphale plus d'échafaudage ([4]).--Canaan (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

3 Marys

• A the Passion Facade we can find the three Marys at the Category:Sculpture of the Deposition of the Cross in the Passion Facade of the Sagrada Família. There we have: Mary, mother of Jesus, with her sister Mary of Cleophas, and with Mary Magdalene.
• Please do not get confused with 2 other sculptures:
  • At Category:Sculpture of Crucifixion of Christ at the Passion Facade of the Sagrada Família, below the cross, we have Mary Magdalene and Saint John.
  • At Category:Sculpture of Denial of Peter in the Passion Facade of the Sagrada Família we simply have 3 women representing the three times tha Peter denies, with a rooster at the left.--Jordiferrer (talk) 19:27, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
    • I have seen that new photo. I am not sure. I will let you know if I find out! --Jordiferrer (talk) 18:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

File:ParthenonNorthReconDiag6183.jpg

File:ParthenonNorthReconDiag6183.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!

Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Derivative of copyrightable original graphic; uploader claimed authorship only for the photograph but not the original graphic Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

This is a message I had from Leonard (the author of the pic) in 2016. --Io Herodotus (talk) 04:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Is this the image you reference?

This is mis-attributed, likely being a cropped camera image that I took of interpretive materials publicly presented at the site or a nearby museum. My PD release is for that image and not the original text. I believe that the credit for the original image should be attributed to the Hellenic Ministry of Culture.

This was quite some time ago and I do not have the supporting detail.

Regarding the color scheme, the bottoms of the columns reflect the standing portions prior to reconstruction. The mixed assembly above illustrates the 1923-1930 re-stacking of fallen pieces. Accurate measurements enabled by modern technology enable the original source of the column drums to be identified. A proper modern reconstruction will involve the disassembly and re-stacking (after insertion of new stone cuttings into the earlier restoration's cement-filled cavities in the drums).

The source image's descriptive text:

The north collonade of the Parthenon was restored for the first time during the years 1923-1930.

Restoration work was focused on the area between the 4th and the 11th columns from the east.

:

The purpose of the current restoration project, in process since the year 2000, is to correct

the inadequacies of the previous intervention.

for this purpose, the monument;s architectural members are dismantled and conserved. The cement

fillings are replaced with new ones of Pentelic marble and the restored members are reinstalled in

their original positions. Titanium clamps are used for joining the architectural members.

Completion of the work, with all previous misplacements of architectural members corrected, will

give the north side of the monument the appearance it had before the explosion of 1687

- Leonard.

Also this image can be found on this site [5] or this blog [6]

I don't know what the rights are. --Io Herodotus (talk) 15:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

---

Deleted: per above - COM:DW/unknown status - no FoP in Greece. --Эlcobbola _talk 17:23, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Categoría

Lo siento, no hablo francés, pero he entendido que no era necesario vaciar una categoría ¿a cuál te refieres para solucionarlo?. Saludos! MiguelAlanCS (talk) 15:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Creo que hemos hecho una redirección al mismo tiempo :) MiguelAlanCS (talk) 16:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

1970 Bentley automobiles

@Io Herodotus: Hi, it would be better for you to set up these categories correctly rather than having me follow you along fixing your well-intentioned mistakes. You can work out how to do it if you just follow other examples. A good example is Ford automobiles. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 02:13, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Rolls Royce Silver Dawn

Ci-joint une message que je viens de mettre sur le page discursive pour la "Rolls Royce en Australie":

What it is

I've done a bit of googling and I'm >98% sure it's a Rolls-Royce Silver Dawn (unless they had a special name for Australian customers ... which seems very unlikely). Would Heroditus (or anyone else) mind if we renamed it on that basis? As Rolls Royce Silver Dawn in Australia? Regards Charles01 (talk) 06:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:NK-15.jpg

Copyright status: File:NK-15.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:NK-15.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

— Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 10:21, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright violations

---

Hello Io Herodotus. You have uploaded one or more files that are copyright violations. You have done so despite requests from editors not to do so, and despite their instructions. See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter useful. This is your last warning. The next time you upload a file that violates copyright, you will be blocked. Please leave me a message if you have further questions.

--Yann (talk) 06:36, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Striene-ca1300.jpg

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Striene-ca1300.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work. While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

 

Yann (talk) 06:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Work goes on the retouching of the world's most classic structure, the Parthenon bottom.jpg

• File:Work goes on the retouching of the world's most classic structure, the Parthenon top.jpg
• File:Showing the enormous size of the columns of the Acropolis.jpg

Bonjour, Ces fichiers n'ont pas la bonne licence. Merci de corriger. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 06:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

File:KmerWikipediaMainpageScreenshot4thAugust2018.jpg

File:KmerWikipediaMainpageScreenshot4thAugust2018.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!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

author /copyright

Hello. For the File:Striene-ca1200.jpg, I have mentioned two authors, me and another one who could be considered author of the work, since I used a tiny bit of his map to create the Striene file. I don't understand why this file has been deleted. Idem for File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg Regards. --Io Herodotus (talk) 16:10, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus: Do you have the source file addresses for those files? That's what's needed. If you could put those here, I can look into it. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Concerning File:Striene-ca1200.jpg and File:Striene-ca1300.jpg, I used File:Burgundian-possessions-in-the-low-countries.png

Concerning File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg, File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-en.jpg and File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar.svg.png I used File:Qatar location map.svg. Cheers to your heath! --Io Herodotus (talk) 05:15, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus: Unfortunately, I don't see a source on that image either. The uploader's contributions do not seem to suggest they are a cartographer. Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Qatar location map.svg also ? It's used for geolocalisations of Qatar! --Io Herodotus (talk) 08:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus: On File:Qatar location map.svg see "Source own work, using United States National Imagery and Mapping Agency data

Well I'm not sure how to write down this license, I have tried something on File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg. Regards

Copyright status: File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-en.jpg

Copyright status: File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-en.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-en.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

• File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg
• File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar.svg.png

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:18, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

RE: Portes en bronze.

La porte a deux portes, certes, mais je pense qu’elle est considérée comme une porte, en particulier à cause du message qui est écrit sur les deux portes. Je ne sais pas, comme vous l'entendez. Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 16:43, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Statistiques de vue

Quand je veux regarder le nombre de vue d'une photo, je tombe toujours sur "Analyse des pages vues" pour "cats" et "dogs". Est-ce un bug? --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

C'est que le lien est complété. Il suffit de choisir le bon projet (commons.wikimedia.org) et remplacer "cats" et "dogs" par le nom de l'image (File:abc.jpg). --H₂O^(talk) 10:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Merci, cela fonctionne. Bizarre tout de même, il faudra donc faire cette manipulation à chaque fois! --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:21, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Question: Est-ce l'Analyse des pages vues qui a changé, ou ais-je changé involontairement un paramètre? C'est quand même pénible de remettre le bon projet et d'écrire le nom du fichier à chaque fois. --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:36, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Comment faire pour que cela revienne comme avant ? Suis-je le seul à avoir ce problème? --Io Herodotus (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Ça dépend des paramètres personnels que tu as choisis et de l'endroit d'où tu lances l'outil. Si tu cliques sur le lien de l'outil depuis la page de l'historique d'un fichier et que ton paramètre est «auto-complétion», alors l'outil affiche directement les statistiques de ce fichier. Si tu lances l'outil depuis la page principale de l'outil et que ton paramètre est «auto-complétion», alors l'outil affiche l'exemple de cat et dog. Si tu lances l'outil alors que tu as choisi et enregistré le paramètre «pas d'auto-complétion», je suppose que l'outil affiche une boîte vide. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Merci. Mais où sont ces paramètres? Je suppose que c'est quelque part dans préférence, mais impossible de trouver. --Io Herodotus (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Il s'agit des paramètres disponibles sur l'interface même de l'outil, en haut à droite. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Merci. Je clique sur le lien de l'outil depuis "historique du fichier" (depuis la page principale, je ne vois pas cet outil); dans ces paramètres, "auto-complétion" est bien renseigné, pourtant les chiens chats reviennent quand même! Peux-t-on choisir le projet? Je tombe sur wiki.en alors que je suis en commons-wikimedia. --Io Herodotus (talk) 06:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Ah, je crois qu'il y a un problème dans la version française de l'interface de Commons. Normalement, sur Commons, j'utilise la version anglaise de l'interface, c'est pourquoi cela fonctionne. Mais si tu utilises la version française, c'est probablement ce qui explique que ça ne fonctionne pas. Prenons un exemple concret. Disons le fichier File:Molenplaat.jpg.

• En utilisant l'interface en anglais, allons sur la page de l'historique de ce fichier. Si on regarde le lien prévu pour «Pageviews Analysis» (les statistiques de consultation), c'est https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?project=commons.wikimedia.org&pages=File:Molenplaat.jpg. Analysons ce lien. On voit que, puisqu'on est sur cette page, le lien est déjà complété avec le nom du projet «commons.wikimedia.org» et avec le nom du fichier «File:Molenplaat.jpg». En cliquant sur ce lien, on arrive au bon endroit, avec les statistiques de consultation de cette page sur Commons.
• Testons maintenant avec la version française de l'interface de Commons. Allons sur la page de l'historique du fichier. On voit que le lien vers les statistiques de consultation est https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews#project=commons.wikimedia.org&pages=File:Molenplaat.jpg. On remarque une différence. Dans le lien, le «?» a été remplacé par un «#». Apparemment, cela rend le lien défectueux. Si on clique sur le lien, cela arrive quand même sur le site de l'outil, mais le reste du lien ne fonctionne pas et on arrive plutôt sur la page par défaut de l'outil, avec l'exemple des pages «Cat» et «Dog» de en.wikipedia.org.

-- Asclepias (talk) 14:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Merci encore, effectivement la version anglaise fonctionne. Dans ce cas, il faudrait le signaler aux administrateurs de la version française. Ce bug est apparu il y a moins de deux mois. --Io Herodotus (talk) 05:04, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

ionic capitals

Hello friend

You seem to be a specialist on the matter. When I look at those two pictures File:Propylaea, Athenian Acropolis (internal view), Athens cityscape. Athens, Greece.jpg and File:Propylaea, Acropolis, Athens (10045826295).jpg an ionic capital has turn 90 degrees! Would you have any explanation for this ?

Regards --Io Herodotus (talk) 01:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: Hello, Io Herodotus. I studied classical archaeology long ago. I do this as a hobby. The Propylaea has two facades decorated with Doric columns while its interior is supported by Ionic columns. The capitals of these columns face those walking inside the building and look up to admire the structure. The main priority of men like Pericles, Phidias, Ictinus, Callicrates and Mnesicles was to satisfy the vanity of the Athenians who would reward or ruin them at will with their vote in the assembly. This is my interpretation. Best regards.

Thank you. Look closely those at two pictures. In one of them (in 2013), the ionic capitals are both facing East-West, whereas on the other picture (picture of 2011) one capital is oriented East-West and the other one is oriented North-South. The 2011 picture looks odd! Did they try different possibilities ? Maybe we don't know how originally, they were oriented.

Best regards --Io Herodotus (talk) 05:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Le_Bistro français

Good evening, Io Herodotus. Tomorrow I am going to climb the Rock myself and see with my own eyes. I will also photograph the Propylaea from every angle giving the necessary attention to the Ionic columns. Then I will upload the photos to Wikimedia Commons. The pictures you sent me are a few years old. The whole place up there is under heavy reconstruction. Things might have changed since then. I can only say that in the reconstruction of the Acropolis work the best minds of the Hellenic Ministry of Culture. Personally, I never noticed what you are telling me but to be honest I never focused my attention on it. Also, my instructors at college (that was 20 years ago) never made a mention of it, either. I doubt, however, if the capitals were in place back then. I will see if I can find an archaeologist up there to answer my question. I will tell you more tomorrow. Best regards.

@Io Herodotus: This is one of the pictures I took of the Propylaea earlier today: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_two_Ionic_capitals_of_the_Propylaea_on_March_5,_2020.jpg There are only two Ionic capitals in the whole structure and this is their current position. I do not know why the place them like this but my assumption as I told you yesterday is that their purpose is to face people as they look up for aesthetic reasons. I do not think there has been any experiment up in the reconstruction in general. The people responsible for the work are all highly experienced archaeologists, scientists, and professors in universities.

@George E. Koronaios: I think I solved the mystery. It was an optical illusion. Even in 2011 the capitals were both in the same direction. I made a zoom in the picture to realize this. Sorry I wasted your time. Io Herodotus

Catégorie Parthénon

Bonjour. J'ai en effet essayé de trouver la cause du problème, mais je n'ai rien trouvé et je n'ai pas de piste. Cordialement. BrightRaven (talk) 15:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Mysterious categories

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T247187

On those files :Parthenon 1, Parthenon 2, Parthenon 3, category "North-East view of the Parthenon" is mysterious to me. If it is inquired on the file, it appears twice (which does not interfere with the tag which normally prohibits that); if it's not inquired, it still appears and I don't know where this information comes from. --Io Herodotus (talk) 04:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

You speak of the doubled category. I do not understand, too, but as info: I purged the file pages and also did null edits. So let’s hope this will be fixed in some hours (recently a similar issue lasted for another day). — Speravir – 23:16, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

The problem is still not resolved. Some people work on it... nearly 1000 views for those files! --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

• Same problem with Propylaea 1, Propylaea 2, Erechtheum 1 etc. (many more) all uploaded by the same user.

They had the category within the description, perhaps that is the reason for that. Erechtheum 2 still has its category within the description (I didn't do any edit on it). --Io Herodotus (talk) 11:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I fixed this one, and this does not display anymore the category twice. Strange, it is. — Speravir – 01:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

No, it's not properly fixed yet, look closely. --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the category issue the edit has fixed this! If you did not see this this is or was a caching issue. — Speravir – 23:55, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Categories are written (usually on the bottom) in the file, they can be modified. This not true for this file. --Io Herodotus (talk) 02:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Look at that one : Mausoleo !...--Io Herodotus (talk) 16:20, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

(insert) Oh … my … gosh! — Speravir – 23:55, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• Try to remove "Category:Eastern side of the Erechtheum" on that one : Erechtheum 3 !!! --Io Herodotus (talk) 09:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
• Some people keep searching, even if not many people write on this problem here (nearly 1000 views for some pictures)... No one has found the solution yet. --Io Herodotus (talk) 04:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

See now also #Subcats missing below. — Speravir – 22:34, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

And also this discussion, which is tracked in T247187. --Io Herodotus (talk) 04:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• Impossible to connect to Phabricator. "You must verify your email address to log in" nothing there. --Io Herodotus (talk) 02:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
• Conclusion: At the creation of a file on commons wikimedia, if the category is inquired within the description, this creates a bug which is yet impossible to fix (hoping someone will resolve the problem). --Io Herodotus (talk) 10:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• The problem seems to be nearly solved. If the category is inquired within the description, this no longer creates a bug, (I tried tried it). The files I have mentioned may be modified... except that one : Erechtheum 3, impossible to remove "Category:Eastern side of the Erechtheum". --Io Herodotus (talk) 03:31, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
• The problem was solved a while ago, but it came back. For instance Mausoleo has no categories within the file, but they are still shown for some unknown reason. --Io Herodotus (talk) 04:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Porte

Est la porte de Gethsémani de la façade de la Passion. Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Le premier est l'Ascension du Christ sur la façade de la Passion, œuvre de Subirachs. La seconde est une garde-robe de la sacristie, conçue par Gaudí. Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 16:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Oui, la sacristie à l'ouest, qui a été achevée en 2016.--Canaan (talk) 16:48, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Structured data

Commons asked me to fill structured data, to create claims.commons.wikimedia.org/SuggestedTags

I have a problem. Are the items the same as categories in Wikimedia Commons?

For instance on File:Al-Muttaqin-2020-3.jpg, I would like to add "column" in structured data But the item is understood as "column of a newspaper" and I cannot find "column (architecture)"

We already fill categories. What is the purpose of those claims except on very specific cases ?

--Io Herodotus 12:41, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: This is a very contentious issue. Category names are solely in English, and so are not particularly accessible to non-English speakers. They're also not necessarily precise: categories about artists often contain a mix of images of the artist and images by the artist. Structured data is based on Wikidata items, which are translatable and often have many translations, and there are enough properties to make fine distinctions about the relationship between the image and some items.

In your specific case: If you type "Q4817" into the depicts box, the right kind of column will appear. This is because "Q4817" is the Wikidata identifier. If you ever run into this problem in the future, you can find the Wikipedia page for the concept you're trying to add, then click "Wikidata item" on the sidebar. The ID will appear in the header of that page. Vahurzpu (talk) 14:32, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

• Also note: adding structured data is not a substitute for adding categories. One of the reasons this is, as Vahurzpu put it, "contentious" is that a second system ("depicts" via structured data) was added, largely paralleling categories, but independent of it. - Jmabel ! talk 15:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
• Thank you for your answers. This seems complicated. I don't know how the search engine works, with those statements or with categories or both. Very often it doesn't find what I'm looking for, when I click on something I would like to open it writes "haswbstatement:P180=Q(...)". But that's probably another question. --Io Herodotus 15:48, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

• @Io Herodotus: better search for media is in the works, with the first round of prototyping finished up and a new round to begin early next month. You can keep an eye on that page and the talk page for immediate updates on the project. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

• I don't know what information to enter.
  Let's talk about a bridge for instance
  What to enter?
  just bridge
  category with the name of the bridge
  transport
  country
  What precision is needed ???--Io Herodotus 12:06, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

If not already done you should read COM:DEPICTS maybe some of your questions are answered there. Current policy is most precise statement what in most cases will be the same as the category. For many information there are specific properties for. Like e.g. country (P17), located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), location (P276) or located in protected area (P3018). --GPSLeo (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

If statements are the same as categories, a bot could very well do that. --Io Herodotus 04:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

• Several bots do that — all those I know of remove categorization that is in wikitext of a page when it is equivalent to what is in Wikidata. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

• makes it sound that the contention behind these two models is that the Wikidata mechanism is label-indenpendent and thus can be multilingual, while the wikitext-based Commons categories are hardcoded (usually in English). Well, to make a long story short, it is very much not the issue. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 06:55, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Fair point. That was more responding to "We already fill categories. What is the purpose of those claims except on very specific cases?", which as far as I can tell is one of the criticisms of the system. Vahurzpu (talk) 13:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

• Sure. Like I said, long story short. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

The Parthenon

Hello George

Sorry to bother again. This file here should be a picture of an element of the Parthenon. I really don't see anything like this on today's building. Do you think this is correct? Io Herodotus 08:22, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Greetings Io Herodotus. You do not bother me at all. I know where this is. I have taken several pictures of the Parthenon from that particular spot. This fragment lies opposite the West Facade of the Parthenon. If I recall correctly it used to be part of the temple. However, I am going to go there tomorrow to verify it to take a picture of it. In the meantime, please check this out. "File:The interior of the Temple of Hephaestus on June 27, 2020.jpg" This is a picture I took from another Doric temple, the Temple of Hephaestus in the Ancient Agora of Athens. Zoom in the picture and notice the roof between the four Doric columns. I think the fragment in your picture is from the roof of the Parthenon (that is not the proper term to describe it, though) which was blown up in the 17th century. What I do not recall also is if this is part of the original temple or it was made after a similar piece found near the temple. Tomorrow I will be able to give you more details.

Thank you for your answer, it's strange nobody ever took that picture since that time. I hope they will put it back where it belongs

Someone, who probably worked there, took those pics:

column Where was this picture taken from? Probably the interior

Angle Where was this picture taken from?

South side Somebody was able to jump up there

Regards --Io Herodotus (talk) 07:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, Io Herodotus, once again. I have news. Today I climbed the Rock and photographed the slabs. I will upload the photos to Wikimedia later during the day and I will send you with a new message the names of the files. As I told you yesterday these slabs have been placed opposite the West Facade of the Parthenon. According to the guard they are modern copies of the originals used in previous restorations but removed during the current one because the archaeologists think they are dated. They have not decided yet if they are going to resuse them or not. This is what the guard told me. I checked all the site markers on the Rock and I was not able to find any picture of the slabs. The guard was unable to date them either. The process of restoring the Acropolis is a neverending one. What you see in the pictures you show me most probably does not exist anymore. I mean most of these pieces may have been relocated. I am talking about the decoration and not the columns. These are two pictures of site markers I took which you may find useful. They will give you an idea of the nature of the restoration process througout the last decades: "File:The site marker about the restoration of the Parthenon on September 13, 2020.jpg" "File:The site marker about the first restorations of the monuments on the Athenian acropolis on September 13, 2020.jpg". The reason why nobody has photographed these slabs is because from the moment they were removed from the monument, were treated with contempt by the visitors who tend to focus their photography on the monuments themselves and not the surrounding area. As for the last three pictures you showed me I can only make assumptions but only for the first and the third. These are from the Parthenon. I think they were taken from the scaffolding in place back then. The mountain you see in the distance of the third picture is Hymettus. As for the second one it can be from anywhere but if it is from the Parthenon you can be sure that these fragments have all been removed and replaced as you will read on the site markers I sent you. In a few hours I will send you the pictures of the slabs. Best regards.

P.S. These are the pictures: "File:West Facade of the Parthenon on September 20, 2020.jpg" "File:Architectural elements from the restoration of the Parthenon on September 20, 2020.jpg" "File:Marble slabs from the Parthenon on the Acropolis, 20 September 2020.jpg" "File:Marble slabs from the Parthenon on September 20, 2020.jpg"

George E. Koronaios

Carte de l'Empire carolingien

Bonjour ! Sur [7], ne serait-ce pas opportun de transcrire l'allemand Lothringen par Lotharingie ? Cordialement, --Claude Zygiel 14:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Bonjour oui tout à fait d'accord, mais je n'arrive plus à modifier le fichier.--Io Herodotus (talk) 07:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Eh bien nous sommes deux ! Peut-être en passant par l'atelier graphique ? [8] Cordialement, --Claude Zygiel (talk) 12:12, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

South side

Thnak you very much for your explanations. I have created a category for the slabs.

Concerning the south side, there is a capital on the ground and 3 columns remain to be completed. Is there a plan to restore it, like they did for the north side? Io Herodotus 09:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Always a pleasure. I am glad I was able to help. I will visit again the Acropolis on September 29. I am going to photograph the south side even though is not that easy since it is full of kiosks and containers. I will definitely try to find out what are their plans for this side even though it depends on the mood of the guard on duty or the engineers I may come across. I will message you as soon as I have news. Best regards.

George E. Koronaios

@Io Herodotus: Greetings, Io Herodotus. Yesterday I revisited the Acropolis because I realized I had forgotten to photograph a site marker I was very interested in. I had the chance to talk with 3 archaeologists. They told me that in regards to the south side of the Parthenon they intend to restore the sekos. Eventually they will fully restore the temple, however, this is not something which is going to happen anytime soon. Personally, I do not expect any of us to live long enough to see this. I took this photograph of the north side (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_restoration_process_of_the_Parthenon_on_September_25,_2020.jpg). The people you see talking in a circle are engineers and archaeologists. They had placed a plan of the temple on the ground but I did not have the chance to ask them anything because they looked very busy. I took several other pictures of the south side which I am going to upload gradually during the next few days which you may find useful. So long as I have the physical strength, the time, and the money I will be keeping a photographic record of the whole process. Best regards.

George E. Koronaios

Thank you very very much. Personnaly I would think they should add copies of the metopes on the South side, but it's only an ignorant's wish. They built it in ten years... But to restore it a bit more difficult. Io Herodotus

Always a pleasure! I remember long ago when I read The Knights by Aristophanes. Paphlagon (Cleon the demagogue) threatens his opponent that he is going to put him in charge of an old trireme which in order to repair it he will need more money than if he built a new one. Eventually, they will restore everything but I do not think any of us will be around to appreciate the final result. By the way, whenever you need pictures or an update on any archaeological site in Athens do not hesitate to ask. I do this as a hobby and I really enjoy it. This also apply to any archaeological site within Attica but this might take a little longer since I will have to schedule and excursion and also to take into consideration possible quarantines within my municipality etc.

George E. Koronaios

File:Bismarck1894 Marina Amaral color.jpg

File:Bismarck1894 Marina Amaral color.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!

AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 22:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Morocco de facto map.jpg

Hello friends: There seems to be some problems with your newly uploaded map. The actual control line should look like this map.

The source is the United Nations Mission in Western Sahara https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/46398b1b2.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.62.182.10 (talk) 03:44, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

2021

Thank you, Io Herodotus! Happy New Year to you and your loved ones! The restoration projects on the Acropolis have not ceased due to the lockdown even though all archaeological sites are closed to the public. A new elevator for people with disabilities has been placed on the Acropolis and a new ramp for the visitors next to the Parthenon has been built. Several other projects are underway everywhere. I am going to photograph everything as soon as the lockdown is over. Once again, thank you very much, and take care! :-) George E. Koronaios

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	:-) George E. Koronaios (talk) 16:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Temple of Artemis Agrotera

There was a small temple in Athens, I have created Category:Theorical anastylosis of the Temple of Artemis Agrotera about it and I'm not sure if those drawings refer to that very temple as they have little informations on the descriptions. As I was writing, I just realized you took a picture of what is left today! I understand the river Ilissus has almost desappeared. Best wishes again and thank you for the news on the Parthenon. --Io Herodotus 03:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Greetings again, Laurent :-). I would like to add something in regards to River Ilissos. The river still exists but it flows under the streets and avenues passing over the old riverbed. A decision was made in the time of my grandparents by the authorities to turn the old river into a sewer because the locals used to throw all kinds of garbage in the river which in the warm months of summer became a threat to public health. Both ancient rivers (Ilisos and Cephissus) still exist but shared the same faith. Unlike Ilissos, however, Cephissus in certain areas is still open, has water that is visible and during the rainy months of the year, the stream becomes very violent. As for the Temple of Artemis Agrotera, I am going to photograph again the site in a few days. It is closed to the public but I cannot be sure whether that is because there is an excavation underway or because there are no funds currently available for the partial restoration of the temple. I am adding to this message two links from YouTube. They are both from a Greek channel dedicated to the exploration of the underground rivers of Attica. The first one is about Ilissos while the second one is about Cephissus. It is a sad sight but the team managed to make these recordings because it was not a period with heavy rains. Otherwise, these tunnels would be full of water. Mount Hymettus is still in place and all its water passes under Attica until it reaches the sea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWI2hprUiDc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfQLrXhV2MM&t=855s

George E. Koronaios

File:Clem Cover.jpg

File:Clem Cover.jpg 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.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.facebook.com/ClementineMossHealing/ Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

BrightRaven (talk) 09:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

File:AnnaKritinaEhrlich.jpg

File:AnnaKritinaEhrlich.jpg 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.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: no licence by M Ehrlich photography Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

BrightRaven (talk) 09:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 week

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 week for the following reason: Uploading unfree files after warnings. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

BrightRaven (talk) 09:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Category

Category:The Parthenon in 1853 has the special category (on the bottom of the page) Category:The Acropolis in 1853, but when I click on it, it says "There are no pages or files in this category". --Io Herodotus 09:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: I null edited the former, fixing the latter. A back end process should have gotten to it eventually.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 12:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: Thank you. Why does it happen ? How do you fix it ? It happens again to Category:The Acropolis in 1916 Category:The Acropolis in 1923 and probably much more. Perhaps I should wait for the back end process, how long does it take for that ? --Io Herodotus 15:02, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: You used Template:ParthenonYear in Category:The Parthenon in 1853 in this edit 10:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC). You created Category:The Acropolis in 1853 in this edit 09:19, 26 February 2021‎ (UTC). You started this section 8 minutes later. Making sure that pages are currently categorized by templates, and that the corresponding categories show them, appear to be background processes with low priorities that sit in job queues until the required resources are available. Once the changes happen at the master database for a project, they then have to be propagated to all the slaves, and then the cached results have to expire. All that takes time. You can increase the speed dramatically by null or content editing the source page once you have created the target page.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 05:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Search engine

I hate that stupid search engine ! Often it gives that result "haswbstatement:P180=something something" which means nothing to me. I hope it will be improved, one day. Wikimedia Commons deserves something better. --Io Herodotus 13:34, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

See Special:MediaSearch. Zoozaz1 21:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. This one works well. Why don't they change it ? Io Herodotus

Hi I'm glad you like the new search experience! We are planning to make Special:MediaSearch the default search landing page starting with anonymous/not-logged-in users first at the end of March, and then moving to logged-in users at the end of April as long as no blockers arise. You can read more about it in the release announcement here. CBogen (WMF) 13:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Les flèches fabriquées en France

Je ne suis pas sûr, ce sont peut-être les finitions de l'etoile de Marie. Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 16:30, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Editing photos

Be careful when you edit and upload modifications to CC BY-SA work, such as File:Jubilee and Munin, Ravens, Tower of London 2016-04-30.jpg -> File:Jubilee and Munin, Ravens, Tower of London 2016-04-30 (lighter).jpg. The licence requires that you attribute all those involved in the image making (so you must include yourself, rather than claiming this is my photo alone). You need to describe the changes made. And take care to remove award categories (featured pictures, etc) that don't apply to the copy. -- Colin (talk) 09:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I didn't know those rules. Apparently you made the change yourself, thank you. The reason I have created a lighter version is because this beautiful and amazing picture appeared too dark on my personnal page [9]. --Io Herodotus 15:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

You can also use the templates {{Retouched picture}} to note what changes you've made and {{Derived from}} to link back to the original. clpo13_(talk) 15:53, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

carte des autoroutes de France

Bonjour,

Je te réponds très tardivement à la suite de ton message de janvier dernier. Je viens de compléter Category:Historical maps of French autoroutes network avec les années 2012 à 2019 et de mettre à jour les cartes animées (j'ai arrêté en 2019 car il n'y a eu aucune ouverture de section d'autoroute en 2020).

Cordialement, Benjism89 (talk) 15:04, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

File:Map of the Palembang LRT.jpg

File:Map of the Palembang LRT.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!

Twotwofourtysix (talk) 06:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Category:Christophe de Coulanges

Category:Christophe de Coulanges It says "no wikidata", there is one which it doesn't find. --Io Herodotus (talk) 01:01, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Io Herodotus: no one had linked it to Commons, which doesn't happen magically. I'll take care of it. - Jmabel ! talk 02:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
• Done. - Jmabel ! talk 02:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

link wikidata commons

Hello

I Have the same problem again; link János Piry Cirjék (Q1236709) wikidata to János Piry Cirjék commons. I don't know where I go wrong. I have asked "Wikidata:Project chat" about it.

Regards

--Io Herodotus 13:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Io Herodotus: again, that Wikidata item is not linked to Commons. Did you look at https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q2966518&diff=1594620512&oldid=1504990041, which I linked in our discussion on the Village pump? You need to make an analogous edit to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1236709. - Jmabel ! talk 14:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:Maps_concerning_the_First_Crusade

Maps concerning the First Crusade 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!

Enyavar (talk) 08:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Maps by century shown

Is Category:Maps by century shown a good name? I would be tempted to rename it to Category:Maps by century.

- Io Herodotus (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Maps by century could be confused for Category:Maps by century made. I suggest keeping the current name for clarity. TilmannR (talk) 21:05, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. --Io Herodotus (talk) 21:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:year maps of Austria-Hungary

To be divided into:

Category:year maps of Austria-Hungary shown

Category:year maps of Austria-Hungary made

--Io Herodotus (talk) 08:12, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus Did I get this right: you would like to distinguish between maps that show Austria-Hungary and maps that were made in Austria-Hungary? How to we usually handle that with other countries? El Grafo (talk) 13:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

We do not distinguish where a map has been made in any map category tree I am aware of. That idea should go nowhere, imho.

What we ARE doing is "maps by language" (Russian-language maps of China, Japanese-language maps of Korea...).

I think this proposal is not about the location the maps were made, but the time it was made: "old maps of..." amd its subcategories have a requirement to be contemporary to the shown content, for example "1886 maps of Austria-Hungary" must be made/published in that year (the publication cycle back then was long enough that I always advocate to use decades: "1880s maps of..."). Whether by year or decade: such category should never include later maps showing Austria-Hungary in 1886: Those maps belong into "Maps of the history of..." and may be sorted by key of the year shown. If there are enough maps of the history, they are to be sorted into "Maps of 18th-century France" vs. "Maps of 14th-century France". In fact, a map my be a "1880s map of 14th-century France", which needs three categories: "Maps of 14th-century France", "1880s maps of France" and "1880s maps showing history". Only for maps made in the 2000s onwards, we currently do not distinguish by the year the history maps were drawn. One contributor once pushed "Maps showing <year>", which I suppose could also be useful if more widespread, as long as this category is only applied to history maps. --Enyavar (talk) 15:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:year maps of Austria-Hungary would be poorly named. It be Category:Maps of Austria-Hungary by year; subcats would be [[:Category:<year> maps of Austria-Hungary]]. That might be what you meant, but I wanted to clarify.

Normally a map of a place made in one year but reflecting another year would be (for example) Category:1920 works (or a subcat of that) plus (again for example) Category:1914 maps of Austria-Hungary or (if the decade scheme is preferred) Category:1910s maps of Austria-Hungary- Jmabel ! talk 15:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

The origin of my question is simply that I was looking for a category showing the history of Austria-Hungary by year. --Io Herodotus (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

The point is that "made" isn't a proper split. Category:Maps by year shown does exist but isn't broken down further. Category:Maps by year created is very sparse but also doesn't break down into countries. Even though it isn't technically the same, we have Category:Maps of Austria by year and Category:Maps of Hungary by year but not broken down further. I have seen some people use a Category:year works in Austria-Hungary type category if there is a significant difference which I think is better than maps by year created. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Io Herodotus, I totally agree that the current structure of Category:Maps of Austria-Hungary is far from perfect. There are "Maps of A-H by year" which lists exactly the same categories we also find under "Old maps of A-H" except they are better organized there, by decades. Also, there are a lot of maps that aren't old maps, but history maps, and thus should be sorted directly into the "Maps of..." category (there is not "Maps of the history of...", because it is a former/historical country in the first place, so every new map is at the same time also history map).

In your place, I would start with creating only the following six categories at first: "Maps of A-H showing the 1860s/1870s/1880s/1890s/1900s/1910s". These categories would have the "1860s maps of A-H" as sub-categories, and "Maps showing the 1860s" and a new "Maps of A-H by decade" as the parent categories. You then categorize each and every "Map of A-H" which is not a contemporary map, into one of the six categories, and key them by year if possible. The old contemporary maps that aren't yet properly categorized, should be treated as well, to fill out the subcategories. Maps that are so general that you cannot pin them down to a decade (like most locator-maps etc), must be left out of the exercise.

As a result, you afterwards have cleanly organized "maps showing decade" with "maps made in that same decade" as a distinct subset. (For 'maps made in the 1940s showing A-H': now that is way too specific I think, but at least there is this cat here to help.)

if you then realize you have enough maps to warrant a further split into "Maps of A-H showing <1913>", I think you should proceed similarly, but with years, creating up to sixty more categories. I am strongly arguing to have at least ~10 files per category, so for "weakly populated" years, you should leave the stuff in the decade-cats, just as well as the maps that don't have a definite reference year. If you go for this whole idea, I volunteer to help with the navigational template if you don't know how to create it yourself.

In fact, it is a great idea to use A-H as the example country for this kind of experimental structure, because of its very limited time of existence from the 1860s to the 1910s. (France, Russia, Poland or Sweden would be vastly more difficult to implement, spanning many hundred potential year-categories). If this kind of experiment succeeds, I think nothing would speak against doing it again for the "Austrian Empire" that preceded "Austria-Hungary", and doing it again for "Austria" for all maps after 1919... And then begin to sort Ottoman Empire history maps that are currently only organized by centuries. --Enyavar (talk) 22:04, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• Coalesce them all into Category:Old maps of Austria-Hungary, and use a sort key to order them by year. Split out maps that only show part of Austria-Hungary into appropriate geographical sub-categories. Categorise old maps showing a particular previous date into Category:Old maps of the history of Austria-Hungary, as per the standard Template:TFOMC, viz.:

Use the appropriate category for maps showing all or a large part of Austria-Hungary. See subcategories for smaller areas:

Where to categorize or find maps of Austria-Hungary

If the map shows	Category to use
Austria-Hungary on a recently created map	Category:Maps of Austria-Hungary or its subcategories
Austria-Hungary on a map created more than 70 years ago	Category:Old maps of Austria-Hungary or its subcategories
the history of Austria-Hungary on a recently created map	Category:Maps of the history of Austria-Hungary or its subcategories
the history of Austria-Hungary on a map created more than 70 years ago	Category:Old maps of the history of Austria-Hungary or its subcategories

General principle: "Maps of X by year" categories are an abomination. They make it impossible to browse the range of maps over a particular period, nor to see the historical sweep of their development. Even "Maps of X by decade" are generally a bad idea. All such categories should be ruthlessly eradicated with fire. Here endeth the lesson. Jheald (talk) 22:58, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

cc @Io Herodotus, El Grafo, Enyavar, and Jmabel: . Also @AnRo0002: who first created most of these horrors. Jheald (talk) 23:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

A bad idea, that will result in total chaos. And by which year would you even sort them: File:Austria-Hungary by Ludó.png could be both sorted as 1914 and as 2023. You also contradict yourself when you posted the TFOMC template, because that one advises against your suggestion that all "Maps of A-H" belong into "Old maps of A-H".

Yes, a few misguided folks create categories with only a single map which is an abomination. NO, a category with 4500 maps in them is not easier to browse, it is simply another type of abomination. Once you get more than 200 maps in the same category, things start to become unwieldy instead of more browseable, and I'd argue that 100 maps are bad enough. It's not even as if such maps all show the same area, either. Also, I hardly ever see keys being used, unless I start to set them, and setting keys for a category of 400 maps is easier said than done. Give me 40 maps and I may set keys to order them. Give me 4000, and I'll be much more likely to create you a few appropriate sub-categories. For example, when some other misguided folks begin to create 30 detail cutouts per map - see for example here. Ugh, but that's another topic. I don't have a full count for A-H, but we have certainly several hundred old maps at least, so I'd argue a split by decade (made) is highly reasonable.

But that is not even the point: If I understood Io Herodotos correctly, they wanted to split/merge maps by the year made (which we have), and by the year shown (which we don't have). An SVG map made 2010 and a map created in 1880, can both show Austria-Hungary in the 1880s, which for that reason may fit into the same category. And so far, we simply don't facilitate that (strict division between old and history maps). Io asked how it can be done nevertheless. --Enyavar (talk) 05:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Ottoman Empire history maps

hello

Thank you for your interest. In fact at the moment the A-H has very few maps showing history.

About the "Ottoman Empire history maps", do you think it could be organized by decades ? I don't think it's necessary by year.

I have tried to start something with Category:Maps of the history of the Ottoman Empire in the 1560s. I don't undertand why it is categorised with Category:1560s maps of Asia, it should be "Maps of the history of Asia" but it's late here.

Regards

---Io Herodotus (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

"Maps of the history of <place>" means maps that depict the history of that <place>.

"Old maps of <place>" means contemporary maps of that <place>.

"1560s maps of Asia" means maps that were created between 1560 and 1569, that show Asia to their knowledge back then. A 1895 map, or a map created today, when showing Asia in the 1560s is a "Map of the history of Asia", or a "Map of 16th-century Asia". The category you created here is named so that old maps from the 1560s may not be included. Wasn't your plan about something like "Maps showing the Ottoman Empire in the 1560s"? That would include both old maps and history maps. --Enyavar (talk) 06:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

I mean Template:MapHistoryOttomanDecade should generate "<date> Maps of the history of Asia" and "<date> Maps of the history of Europe", but it generates "<date> maps of Asia". I don't understand why.

--Io Herodotus (talk) 10:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Ah! Okay, I mostly use templates that work from other areas, and modify them. But as far as I understand that template, it should work like you say, not like how it works right now. Maybe it transcludes the category from another template?

Anyway, I see only about 60 maps about 15th century history of the O.E., I don't think that's enough to justify ten subcategories. --Enyavar (talk) 10:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

What are these positions

Hello,

On those pictures File:Beyrouth. Turc priant le matin - Dumas. LCCN2004670415.jpg and File:Religious Ceremonies and Customs of Tajiks. An Azan to Announce Prayer Time WDL10860.png.

Do you know what are those positions ? Sitting in salat, Qiyam, du'a or something else ? Io Herodotus (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

• Hi, Io Herodotus.

This is an unusual position. The hands are raised as during the takbir, but it is usually not done while sitting. If he is a Turk, then it is better to ask the Hanafis.

This is not a position in prayer. So they stand while reading the azan before prayer (1, 2) Maqivi (talk) 21:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer, it could be shiism ? --Io Herodotus (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (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 are all 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.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Category doesn't show

Category:Construction of the Sagrada Família in 2023 has the subcategory Category:Churches in Barcelona photographed in 2023.

When I click on the latter the previously mentioned category should show up, it doesn't.

---Io Herodotus (talk) 10:13, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

There is a template involved. As you created the page you know it, and could have told it, so that people don't look for other reasons, perhaps wasting quite some time.

The server does not not update categories defined via templates as promptly as other pages. I didn't look closer at the (non-trivial) template code. I don't know whether it should be tweaked or if you just should wait.

(And it is latter that has the former as subcategory.)

–LPfi (talk) 19:01, 1 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)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:PassionFacade-1970-1.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:PassionFacade-1970-1.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:PassionFacade-1972-1.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:PassionFacade-1972-1.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:PassionFacade-1972-2.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:PassionFacade-1972-2.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:PassionFacade2017.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:PassionFacade2017.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:SagradaFamilia-15-08-2013.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:SagradaFamilia-15-08-2013.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:SagradaFamilia-24-09-2011.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:SagradaFamilia-24-09-2011.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

File:SagradaFamilia2015.jpg

File:SagradaFamilia2015.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!

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Koh-Pich-Triumphal- arch-2018.jpg

File:Koh-Pich-Triumphal- arch-2018.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Magasin de la Sagrada Familia

Bonjour Canaan

Y a-t-il un magasin dans la Sagrada Familia ? dans le transept sud-ouest. Je suppose que ce doit être récent et probablement provisoire. File:Museum shop, Sagrada Família, Barcelona, 2023.jpg

Toujours pas de photos des 2 tours de évangélistes terminées

Io Herodotus

Oui, il y a une boutique de souvenirs, elle est là depuis des années. C'est provisoire, oui, j'imagine qu'un jour ils vont l'enlever ou le déplacer. Concernant les nouvelles photos, je n'y suis pas allée depuis longtemps, on verra quand j'aurai un peu de temps. Salutations. Canaan (talk) 17:57, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Merci, si vous avez l'occasion d'aller sur place, j'aimerais aussi voir l'avancemnet du baptisphère, dont les fondations devraient être terminées maintenant. --Io Herodotus 21:24, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

[10] Salutations.--Canaan (talk) 17:45, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Marque de cigarettes

Bonjour @Io Herodotus, J'ai vu que vous aviez annulé ma modification du nom de Category:Alain Delon (cigarettes) en Category:Alain Delon brand for cigarettes, vous avez eu raison car ça fait tache avec l'ensemble des autres marques (noms de sous-catégories). J'avais choisi ce nouveau nom car, avec l'autre nom, je pensais que j'allais y trouver des photos de l'acteur Alain Delon avec des cigarettes, autrement dit en train de fumer !

C'est une sous-catégorie bizarre de mon point de vue de la Category:Alain Delon qui ne parle pas cinéma mais marque de cigarettes. Elle a donc un rapport éloigné avec l'acteur.

Maintenant il est trop tard, mais si vous aviez appelé toutes les sous-catégories de Category:Cigarettes by brand sous le modèle Category:Alain Delon (cigarettes brand), ce qui est plus juste quant à la description, je ne me serais pas fait piéger. La prochaine fois que vous annulez, pensez à laisser un mot d'explication. Bonne journée. Cinéma-1930 (talk) 09:17, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Merci Category:Alain Delon (cigarettes) est aussi une sous-catégorie de Category:Cigarettes by brand. Rien n'est trop tard. Je n'avais pas pensé aux utilisateurs cherchant leur idole en train de fumer. Par ailleurs je crois que celui-ci n'était pas trop fier de cette marque. Les cambodgiens que je connais ne savaient pas que Alain Delon était une personne réelle. Une fois il y avait un film à la TV, je dis à ma femme regarde Alain Delon ! Elle était surprise. --Io Herodotus (talk)

Bonjour @Io Herodotus

Je ne sais si vous avez reçu une notification pour ma réponse. Cinéma-1930 (talk) 23:14, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

The Propylaea of Athens

Hello Choliamb

On File:Propilei - Pomardi Simone - 1820.jpg, why did you remove "Category:The Propylaea in 1820". In my opinion, it's a usefull information to know the story of that building. When I think of it, it's probably because this drawing was made a few years earlier and published in 1820.

Sincerly. Io Herodotustalk]]) 09:54, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus. I hope you don't mind that I moved your question here to my main user talk page, where I think you intended to put it, rather than on the talk page of my cheatsheet of Institution templates, where I almost overlooked it.

As for your question: yes, the explanation you suggested is precisely the reason I removed the 1820 date. Pomardi accompanied Edward Dodwell to to Greece in 1804–1806, and all of the original drawings and watercolors that formed the basis for the illustrations in Dodwell's publications and in Pomardi's own book were made during that trip. So while the date of the engraving itself is 1820, it's not quite true to describe it as a view of the Propylaea in 1820. I see you've moved it to the 1800's (i.e., 1800–1810), which is more accurate, and is what I probably should have done, rather than just removing the category. My apologies for that.

But if you want to assign it a more precise date, I think you can. The original drawings made by Dodwell and Pomardi on that trip were the subject of an exhibition at the British Museum in 2013. Looking through the book that was published in conjunction with that exhibition, I see that all of the drawings of buildings on the Athenian Acropolis were made in 1805, including one of the Propylaea from the same angle as this (much simplified) Pomardi engraving. So I think it would be mostly accurate to describe this as a view of the Propylaea in 1805 (even if Pomardi did make some changes, like the addition of the cannons at the top of the facade, when adapting it for the 1820 publication).

Personally, however, I'm not sure that these individual year categories, which usually contain only one or two images, are very helpful to users. Certainly I find them a little annoying, since when I go looking for a view of the Propylaea in the 19th century I have to keep clicking on every single subcategory, over and over, just to see what's available. And it easily leads to the separation of related files: so, for example, one copy of James Robertson's photograph of the Propylaea in 1857 (File:A ruined temple, Greece.jpg) is placed in Category:The Propylaea in the 1850s, while another version of the same photograph (File:James Robertson, The Propylae on the Acropolis, 1857, NGA 155347.jpg) is placed in Category:The Propylaea in 1857, without any way for a casual user who sees one of them to know that the other exists. It would be more useful, in my opinion, to group such images together in larger categories like "Historical views of the Propylaea" or "19th century views of the Propylaea", or "Views of the Propylaea before the Greek war of independence." Anyone who wants to know the precise year of a given image can read the description. I think this is more consistent with the way that most people use the Commons. But again, that's just my opinion, and I understand if you feel differently. I'm certainly not going to start nominating such categories for deletion.

Best wishes, Choliamb (talk) 13:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Parvis de la Sagrada Familia

Bonjour Cannan

La décision concernant le parvis de la basilique devait être prise en mai 2023, mais je ne vois rien de nouveau sur le sujet. (démolion de quelques bâtiments ou d'un quartier entier). Une décision a-t-elle été prise ou, comme je le pense, c'est toujours en suspens.

--Io Herodotus 15:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Non, rien n’est encore décidé et je pense que la décision prendra beaucoup de temps.

Salutations. Canaan 16:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Tours centrales

Les tours des évangélistes devaient faire 125 m et la tour de Marie 120 m, mais quand je regarde les photos prises de loin, il me semble voire clairement que la tour de Marie est plus haute. C'est peut-être une hauteur sans la croix et sans les sculptures des évangélistes. Aurais-tu une explication?. --Io Herodotus (talk) 17:09, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

En effet, selon le projet de Gaudí, la tour de Marie devrait mesurer 127,5 mètres et celles des évangélistes 135 mètres, mais par décision de l'archevêque de Barcelone, Lluís Martínez Sistach, qui considérait que la tour de Marie devait être plus haute que celles des évangélistes, il a été changé, et maintenant celui de Marie mesure 138 mètres.--Canaan (talk) 17:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup je vais l'ajouter dans l'article (après avoir cherché les références) Io Herodotus 07:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Sagrada Familia apse pinnacles

Hi Io Herodotus.

I appreciate your work in updating the Sagrada Familia model to reflect the current state of works.

Can I implore you to update the file wherein the pinnacles of the apse's radial chapels be turned brown?
It's because those pinnacles depicting the O Antiphon in proper sequence have yet to be constructed.

You can refer to the earliest version of the current file to see the architectural element I'm talking about.

Thanks in advance, and Happy New Year 2024.

Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 09:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you and tell me if this is correct. Io Herodotus

File tagging File:Chroy-changvar-bridge.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Chroy-changvar-bridge.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

--Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 17:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)