J 1982

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, J 1982!

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

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

East/West Germany

An welcher Stelle wurde beschlossen, die Mauer in den Kategorien wieder aufzubauen? Könntest du das eine zeitlang stoppen, bis das geklärt wurde? Erfahrungen haben gezeigt, dass es oft sinnvoll ist, nur nach heutigem Gebietsstand zu kategorisieren. Gruß -- Niteshift (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Take it in English. J 1982 (talk) 21:55, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, J 1982! In Germany categorizing by history would put several little states into life again, which many of us right even cant think of. So it is a practical matter to categorize everything by todays political boarders on all levels, beginning on the municipal level. On the state level borders have changed in the reubification. Parts of former GDR states belong to West Germany now. So categorizing GDR against FRG would not go along with the political correctness as well. So, over all, I too believe, that it would be better to keep the inner German boarder where it is, a part of history, a part of many German states we have had. So, we categorize into the 16 states, then into districts and finally into the last level of the municipalities.--Kresspahl (talk) 19:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Why not? It's the same with the USSR. Wikipedia follows a neutral point of new, not what's political correct (which changes over time). J 1982 (talk) 14:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

XXXX in Sweden

Hejsan!

Jag håller på att ladda upp biblar och sidor ur bibelöversättningar här.

Jag har sett dig stoppa in kategorier XXXX in Sweden i vissa kategorier som finns på min bevakning.

?Exakt hur har du tänkt med dessa årtalskategoriseringar?

Vissa biblar är ju utgivna ett år, men tryckta ett annat. Detta kan även gälla platsen. Detta är med andra ord inga klockrena självklara händelser att kategorisera... Flera av dessa biblar är inte alls tryckta i Sverige.

Tex en kategori som du kategoriserat som 1883 in Sweden innehåller bibelsidor, tryckta 1891 i Sverige, men också en som tryckts 1911 i USA... Dessutom är den bibel som här är utgiven 1655 (du har inte kategoriserat den ännu), utgiven med bistånd av en massa personer från olika delar av vad som då var Sverige, dvs många från vad som idag är Finland, Baltikum och Tyskland...

(Category:Bibelöversättningarna av år 1536 är dessutom en bok som utgavs 1956 och innehåller bibeltexter från 1536, så jag vet inte om den är rätt kategoriserad.) -- Lavallen (talk) 14:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Kan inget om bibelöversättningar. Trodde det var utgivningsår. J 1982 (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Böcker är knepiga på det viset, de trycks om och det är då svårt att veta vilket man ska kategorisera som. I vissa fall har dessutom ngn varit framme och moderniserat språket eller översatt mm mm mm.

Det vore logiskt att kategorisera efter ursprungligt utgivningsår på svenska. (Orginalet finns ju alltid på ett annat språk.) Frågeställningen kommer dessutom om det verkligen är en Svensk händelse. Det rör sig snarare en svenskspråklig händelse. För svenska talas det inte bara i Sverige. Och svenska är inte det enda språket i Sverige. Finska biblar har utgivits i Sverige och kanske även på andra minoritetsspråk som samiska mfl. Många biblar är tryckta i amerika och förvånadsvärt många i England. Detta berodde förvånandsvärt nog inte bara på att förläggaren lade tryckningen dit. De äldsta svenska bibeltexterna har vi inget exakt utgivningsår för, bara ett århundrade (1400). (Delar av dem finns här.) -- Lavallen (talk) 19:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Ta bort den om du vill. Jag känner till världspespektivet och tycker det är bra, men biblar på svenska gavs nog ändå mest ut för Sverige (1536 var ju Finland en del av Sverige) och svenska har ändå alltid dominerat i Sverige. J 1982 (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Categories falsely categorized

Hello!

These two categories Category:Andorra in the 1990s and Category:Andorra in the 2000s were in the wrong by-year-category. I fixes that mistake for you. Please check other categories for the same mistake. Thank you in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Årtalskategorier

Vad är meningen med att gömma undan helt aktuella bilder, naturbilder och dylikt under diverse årtalskategorier? jag tycker att det gränsar till vandalism. Tyvärr har du ju hunnit med så många bilder nu, att det blir jobbigt att återställa. Jag kommer att be någon administratör hjälpa till med detta. --Zejo (talk) 16:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Vissa kanske kan kan läggas under båda. Jag gör som de gjort i en del länder (Storbritannien och Tyskland). J 1982 (talk) 16:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Jag tycker som zejo, att det är orimligt att "gömma undan". Tidskategorin bör vara helt parallell, så att bilden han hittas under kommunkategorin, antingen direkt eller under en vanlig underkategori (exempelvis en kyrka e.d). Byt alltså inte ut befintlig kategori - tillägg är däremot OK! Sedan undrar jag dock över nyttan med att kategorisera på årtal för småorter, där det endast finns någon handfull bider totalt. 1990-tal, 2000-tal 2010-tal borde räcka. Det blir ett våldsamt bläddrande om man vill hitta bilder för t.ex Askersund, eller någon annan landsortskommun under -00-talet, med 10 underkategorier med som mest något enstaka objekt i varje. Taxelson (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Samma gäller för personer. Om vi har tre bilder på Bertil Ohlin, så finns ingen anledning att skapa tre olika kategorier med en bild var för olika år. /Ö 19:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Har vi kategorierna skall vi använda dem. Det skapas massor av sådana kategorier här. J 1982 (talk) 12:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Det är ju du själv som skapar dem. Till vilken nytta förstår åtminstone inte alltid jag.--Zejo (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Jag är inte ensam om att skapa sådana kategorier. Jag tänker återställa de jag skapade, det kan dyka upp fler bilder. J 1982 (talk) 16:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Jag ställde en fråga på Village Pump för att se vad fler användare tycker. /Ö 13:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Jag tycker att det är lite meningslöst med pyttesmå kategorier som category:1951 in Lund. Kan du inte bidra med att ladda upp bilder istället för att fragmentisera kategorier? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:35, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Men du bara fortsätter och fortsätter, fast du tydligen inte orkar bry dig att diskutera i Commons:Village pump#By year categories. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 13:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Vi är flera som har bett dig sluta med den enorma fragmentisering av kategorier du håller på med. Kategorierna du skapar är allt för specifika för att vara meningsfulla. Snart finns det lika många kategorier som bilder på Commons, vilket innebär att det kommer att bli omöjligt att hitta en lämplig bild till ett ändamål genom att titta på miniatyrerna på en kategorisida. Man måste veta EXAKT vad man letar efter, och det gör man ofta inte. Sådana här genomgripande förändringar av kategoristrukturen måste diskuteras igenom innan de genomförs. Var snäll och besinna dig! --Zejo (talk) 14:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Nonexistent categories

Please, when you are changing categories: moving something into non-existent categories is not helpful. There is no way to navigate to it down the category hierarchy. If you are introducing a brand new category, you have to tie that category into the tree (by adding supercategories) as well. - Jmabel ! talk 16:08, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Category:2004 Summer Paralympics

In 2004 the new IPC logo was introduced AFTER Athens' games. The previous logo was actual during 2004 Paralympics.
Please, compare with this.
Best regards. Mboro (talk) 09:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Date categories

Hello. I saw this edit: [1] on an image I uploaded. I'm curious to know what those categories are for. Do you intend to add date categories to every image? Jonathunder (talk) 21:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Discuss at Commons:Village pump#By year categories J 1982 (talk) 21:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Where people are telling you that "by year" categories are not helpful for buildings. Now you are categorizing a photo of a library by date!?! /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the link to the discussion; it looks like others have questions that I was going to ask. I don't see support for adding such specific date categories to historic buildings. Perhaps we should discuss this more before adding more. Jonathunder (talk) 22:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I see you've continued to add year categories to buildings. These may be too specific. For example, I know the Gonda Building had years of construction. Can we discuss this before adding more? Jonathunder (talk) 15:35, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I've just added like other people do here. J 1982 (talk) 15:40, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I have not seen anyone else add categories for a particular date to a photo of an old building. Have you seen any? No one else supported doing so in the discussion you pointed me to. Is there support for this elsewhere? Jonathunder (talk) 03:10, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Basque Country versus Basque Autonomous Community

when categorising, please take care of the distinction between Basque Autonomous Community and Basque Country, as explained at Category:Basque Country. Thanks, --Havang(nl) (talk) 11:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Railway stations opened in <year> -> Rail transport in <year>

Hi J1982

You obviously have used a bot to create the cats of Transport by year (according to Railway stations by year of establishment). Actually I have created an intermediate cat-tree Rail transport by year, see for example: Category:1902 in rail transport. Can you use again your bot, to add the missing cats there, please? thanx --anro (talk) 22:48, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

No, I didn't use a bot. But shall we replace all like Category:1982 rail now and use Category:1982 in rail transport. J 1982 (talk) 10:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes this might be a good idea (I'll do it by bot) --anro (talk) 21:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

1994 in Honduras?

Hallo J 1982, I saw you created Category:1994 in Honduras lately. Now the Category:Honduras in the 1990s was not exactly overfilled and I do not really understand why this Category:1994 in Honduras was necessary. Why separate the few '94 pictures (there are some more than the one which is now in the '94-category) from the even so few '98 and '99 Pictures? Hettie (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

All right, there are some more '94-pictures in this category now. But still... why separate them from the other pictures taken in the ninetees? Category:Honduras in the 1990s would fit on one screen without separating them in different years. Hettie (talk) 15:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

We are separating different years in different countries here, and even towns, federated states, municipalities and districts. There is no reason to to different with Honduras. J 1982 (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I fear that I differ in your observation that we "are" separating different years in different countries. Are we? I'd rather say that we do it sometimes, and sometimes we don't. I never saw this happening in say Category:Ecuador (we don't even split that country up in decades). I see it partly done in Category:Guatemala in the 1990s. I am glad to see that it had not been done in Category:Kenya in the 1990s. But even so, what's the use of doing it in such a small category? It doesn't give any usefull information, apart from the fact that one of our contributers traveled Honduras in 1994. Hettie (talk) 15:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Just because we havent split up those countries yet, there is nothing that prevents us from doing it in the future. J 1982 (talk) 17:10, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Well... there is actually. There is a thing called common sence, which prevents us from doing that. And which should have prevented us from doing it in the past. But undoubtedly there is a substantive reason why we are dividing into separate years. Otherwise we would not be doing it. Unfortunately I do not know the reason and I can not guess it. That's why I asked you in the first place. The reason can hardly be that we do this because we do this, is it? Hettie (talk) 21:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Are we still in touch? Hettie (talk) 11:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't here when this project begun, but it's probably just following Wikipedia in mangy languages. J 1982 (talk) 11:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Like for instance the English do on their Category:Years_by_country? The interwiki's on that category show that some language versions indeed do that, but others don't. In both groups big language versions are represented. Well, I suggest we bring this question up at the Commons:Village_pump. Do you agree? Hettie (talk) 12:36, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. J 1982 (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Done so. Let's continue there. Hettie (talk) 14:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Hallo J 1982. Meanwhile the discussion about this topic at the village pump gives me the impression that it would be wiser to stop dividing countries - specially small country-categories - by year. I notice that you did not give your input there. May I invite you to do so? Hettie (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Natural disasters

Hi, please notify that I have changed recently the template for natural disasters, see Category:1977 natural disasters --anro (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:1994 in Honduras

Category discussion notification

Category:1994 in Honduras 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!

Since there are hardly any convincing argument why these country-by-year cats are necessary, I nominated this one for deletion. It might bring up some arguments which were kept hidden until now. As you notice, I'd like to be convinced. --Hettie (talk) 14:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

File:DBP 1964 416 Hauptstädte Hannover.jpg

Can you please show me, why added these 2 cats (category:29 April and category:April 1964) to this stamp? There is no annually at all and for the month/year there is also no reasonable point to this stamp. Don't forget, for the hole Germany and its former states from 1850 until now there are about 7.000 stamps on commons and more to come additionally thousands of stamps from other countries. Every single stamp is (or should be) categorized in a similar way of category:1964 Deutsche Bundespost stamps which is a subcat of category:1964 stamps of Germany and so later also a subcat of 1964 as well. I think I'll remove the overcat of this stamp because it isn't useful and out of scope for a stamp (except such stamps which may have a very dedicated reason, theme, for a more exact date). NobbiP talk 21:26, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. Remove it. Maybe it will be split into months like category:April 1964 Deutsche Bundespost stamps when more stamps aeppear in the future, but that's not now. J 1982 (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

ok, done. NobbiP talk 21:34, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Category:1891_stamps_of_the_Falkland_Islands

1891 stamps of the Falkland Islands 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!

• Also these two: Category:1929 stamps of the Falkland Islands and Category:1933 stamps of the Falkland Islands. Ww2censor (talk) 16:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Year templates

Hi! Thanks for creating templates such as {{Helsinkiyear}}. But please not, that parameters 3 and 4 are completely useless and even harmful because they can be easily misspelled. The same functionally can be achieved by {{#expr:{{{1<noinclude>|0</noinclude>}}}-1}}9 and {{#expr:{{{1<noinclude>|0</noinclude>}}}+1}}0 type expression. In addition, an endash (–) should be used as a delimiter between the years instead of a common dash (-). ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 12:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

You mean what it is called in different languages? J 1982 (talk) 12:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

What you mean by different languages? I mean that you should create the templates so that no parameters 3 and 4 are needed. For example, {{Helsinkiyear|201|1}} should be enough instead of {{Helsinkiyear|201|1|2009|2020}}. Anyway, I created a new template, {{Decade years navbox}} which can be used to clean up these templates. See {{Helsinkiyear}} and {{FinArc}} for usage examples. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 15:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

OK. J 1982 (talk) 15:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:1949 in Chicago

Hello. Thanks for your excellent work! When I create new year/place categories I look at nearby years to see if there is a short template version I can copy and when I find it I use that, but I don't always see one. I notice you've replaced the long form with a short template after me in some later cases, thanks. However on Category:1949 in Chicago, it looks like you accidentally put in the Illinois (state) template rather than the Chicago (city) one, so I reverted you. I just wanted to explain my reverts. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:41, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Chicago has its own template. J 1982 (talk) 15:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I see it now. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 16:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Nobelmallar

Hej! Tack för hjälpen med NobelYear. Vill du ta en titt på {{NobelDecade}} också? Av någon anledningen hamnar inte category:Nobel Prize in the 1900s i huvudmappen. Allt gott, /Urbourbo (talk) 17:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Vet inte hur man gör. J 1982 (talk) 18:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

OK. /Urbourbo (talk) 22:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

User problem

Your by-year categories are irritating, see COM:AN/U#User:J_1982 and his by year categories. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J_1982. Pieter's discourteous comment aside, it would be great if you contributed to this discussion. We would benefit from your input. Thanks. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 03:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Delete requests

Hejsan! Du verkar ha föreslagit ett antal (felstavade) kategorier för radering. Men Commons använder inte mallen {{Delete}} på samma satt som vi på sv.wikipedia använder Radera-mallen. För okontroversiella snabbraderingar används här {{Speedy delete}}. När delete-mallen används skall det skapas undersida till Commons:Deletion requests med mera, lite som "vår" SFFR-process. Här på commons kan man klicka på på "Nominate for deletion" som finns i vänstermarginalen. Då görs ett antal saker för att göra en komplett anmälan.

Men, som sagt, för felskrivningar och sådant räcker det med en enkel {{speedy delete|motivering med hänvisning till korrekt stavad kategori}}. Så har iaf jag uppfattat rutinen här. Vänligen --MagnusA (talk) 09:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Categories not correct

Pleas realise that {{SwedenArc|198|3}} means Buildings !! Not ships. --Stunteltje (talk) 15:36, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

There's no point to exclude ships. Just change "buildings" to something other. J 1982 (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

See the category-structure. No ship-line involved. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:39, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The Stunteltje's comment was adding this page to Category:Built in Sweden in 1983 etc., so I added <nowiki> to it. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 10:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Year–month categories

Please, stop creating year–month categories for Finland for the 1990s (e.g. Category:June 1997 in Finland). There are so few images from that time on Commons that there are absolutely no need to sort them by month. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 01:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I think all Nordic states should start in January 1990. I'm not going to go backwards before that date until we get more images. The images are not so few (not all are probably already categorized by year in at all). J 1982 (talk) 01:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I disagree. I started a formal discussion. See the link below. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 01:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:September 1990 in Finland

September 1990 in Finland has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

––Apalsola ^{t • c} 01:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Help in a category

Can you help me, in a category? I created this category: Category:Christmas 2011 in Brazil. It has a wrong thing there. Eduardo P (talk) 20:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, fixed. J 1982 (talk) 20:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Eduardo P (talk) 20:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Year categories

Hi mate, just so you know, there should preferably be categories for "year in the London Borough of X" for London images. I think most boroughs have a "history of the London Borough of X" category created, eg Category:History of the London Borough of Camden has 28 subcats currently. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not interested in them. I know nothing about London Boroughs. J 1982 (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

....thanks. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Canada

Hello. There is absolutely no need to further subdivide pre-2000 Canadian images by month - there is not enough content to make it meaningful or useful. In any event, the vast majority of recent images are not even categorized by month (post 2000), so there is very little need at the moment to go creating month categories for 1970s, 1980s, 1990s-era Canadian images. I don't mean to be critical of how much work you've done generally, which is impressive, but there should always be a reasonable need for month/year/decade categories before they are created. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:12, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Rugbyunionyear

Hello,

The Category:Years in rugby union is redundant : the categories XXXX in rugby union are sorted twice in Category:Years in rugby union because they are contained in the categories Rugby union in the XXXXs which are already in Category:Years in rugby union. Udufruduhu (talk) 08:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Most topics have this sorting. Categoriesl ike Category:Rugby union in the 1880s shall be in a Category:Rugby union by decade (for images from that decade where we don't know specific years). Category:Years in rugby union is used to easally find just the years. J 1982 (talk) 10:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

There is no point of separating chronology into two subcategories. The categories Rugby union in the XXXXs can contain both subcategories XXXX in rugby union and files whose specific year is not known. And finding a given year in Category:Years in rugby union is even easier when sorted by decade, because there is thus less categories at the first level. Udufruduhu (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, J 1982!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

• Image:Venice, Italy in July 1991.jpg was uncategorized on 12 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Estoniaeventyear

Please look at the two cats using this template. 1) There is an error in source text, 2) Estonia is not in Russia. - A.Savin 11:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I tried to make it look like Template:Estoniayear. J 1982 (talk) 12:37, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Again: Estonia is not a part of Russia. Could you please correct the template, otherwise I must delete it since I have no idea how to correct this. - A.Savin 12:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree with A.Savin. What the template intends to do is to put a cat. to Russia if the year is before 1917. But the template does not work. If you are not able to fix it immediately it should be removed (and the categories categorized correctly by hand). It is very unacceptable to categorize Estonia (or any former Soviet republics) post 1991 as Russia, as you should not categorize Karlskrona as Denmark.... Taxelson (talk) 10:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

video games by year, date , gaming in 1980 and 1980s

Is all this neccessary? Category:Video games by date is completely redundant. Category:Video games by year. And many links are red, but containing subcats like Category:Video games of the 1980s. I will fill them with text, so someone can navigate through them. --Kungfuman (talk) 14:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's better to put the games in one category, and events and other releated stuff in another. J 1982 (talk) 14:20, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

For instance: "West Germany in the 1980s" and "German Democratic Republic in the 1980s"

Hello!

You have created a two different categories about the two German states in the 1980s (only an example by year; applies for any other decade of the 40 years of division). This superfluous categorisation is redundant and in some parts not correct. While a deeper categorisation of East-Germany-topics do make sense, a seperate categorisation of "West-Germany" is superfluous, redundant with "Germany" and in some parts simply incorrect. The status now is that you have left behind a unfinished or better an unfinishable inconsistent category monster. Your East and West differentiation is incomplete, as you can see you can se e.g. in Category:Germany in the 1980s: a division of the categories "198X in Germany‎", "Cities in Germany in the 1980s‎", ... and so on would also be necessary (of course for all decades in question). Do you plan to to this, too? Or don't you want to continue? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:13, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry to intrude, but I have to agree with High Contrast. This issue has come up several times before, and the consensus is almost always to stick to current country/place names for year and decade categories. Otherwise, the category structure becomes unmanageable. Think of how difficult the category structure would be to manage or use if we created separate year categories for any jurisdiction that existed within the area now known as Germany. The categories would be useless unless one had an in-depth knowledge of German history. Therefore, when we have a category such as Category:1981 in Germany it means that it contains media from 1981 pertaining to what is today Germany, and there is no need to subdivide it into the states that existed in 1981. Similarly, a category like Category:1770 in the United States does not mean that the United States as a nation existed in 1770, but rather that it contains media pertaining to 1770 in what is today the USA. Any other approach invites great difficulties. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:1962_in_Milan

1962 in Milan 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!

Friedrichstrasse (talk) 20:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:1965_in_Milan

1965 in Milan 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!

Friedrichstrasse (talk) 20:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Categorisation of Template:Brnoyear

Hi, Brno is not in Bohemia, but in Moravia. Bohemia is not synonymous with the Czech Republic. --Uacs451 (talk) 11:23, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Missing date categories

Hi, if you are running out of inspiration, there are quite some red categories waiting for you. Keep up the good work. --Foroa (talk) 18:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Unnecessary date categories

Please do not create categories such as Category:1986 in transport in Finland. There are so few pre-2000 pictures of Finland in the Commons that fine-categorizing them does more harm than good. BR, ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 10:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I added some more images. J 1982 (talk) 10:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, we have six images for 1986. However, this kind of categorization must be consistent, so we should have images for every year, not only one or two per decade. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 10:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Remember that not all articles are categorized. I think you can check out images from airports, and like "Vanta in the ... (decade)" to find several aeroplanes. J 1982 (talk) 10:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I opened a formal discussion on these categories. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 10:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Transport in Finland by year

Transport in Finland by year 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!

--Apalsola ^{t • c} 10:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Year categorization

Regarding this, that type of detailed year categorization has been critizized a lot, see for example your own talk page above. Please do not restore them. --MagnusA (talk) 06:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

A lot of users do it all the time without any problem. J 1982 (talk) 11:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Här lades det in ett par kategorier om broar och transport, trots att brof-n bara kan anas i bakgrunden. Ta gärna en titt på bilderna först! -- Lavallen 07:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Problems with some year and month categories

Hello. You see to be receiving a lot of criticism about all of the year and month categories. While I think year categories are often very useful (I don't see much value in month categories, although I acknowledge that they are unavoidable it seems for contemporary images), the problem is that you seem to create them indiscriminately without any regard to need or future maintenance. Up above, you stated "A lot of users do it all the time without any problem", but I have never seen another Commons contributor create as many year and month categories that do not necessarily always seem warranted. You are like a machine creating and categorizing by year and month - while I admire your work ethic and dedication to the project, at a certain point this continual creation of year and month categories on just about any subject is not necessarily helpful for the project. Some category trees in particular, Category:Churches by year of photographing, seem absolutely pointless (while I can see some value in something like Category:Buses by year of photographing as vehicle models rapidly change, and Category:Churches by year of completion allows users to follow historic and architectural trends, but Category:Churches by year of photographing is of questionable use - what is there to say about churches based on how some of them looked in, say, 2003, which by the way is not much different than how those churches looked in other years).

I hate to criticize, because you clearly work hard here at the Commons. But the problem here is twofold. First, you create these multiple year categories, seemingly without regard to whether they are needed or not (just because we have Category:2001 in transport in the United States does not mean that we have enough content overall to create a transport by year category tree for, say, Finland). You populate these categories to some extent, and then you move on to category creation elsewhere, leaving the maintenance of these category trees to others. Second, at a certain point, these year categories become a bit like category-spam - it becomes difficult getting contributors to even bother categorizing images in a basic category like Category:1944 in France, when they are faced with a confusing and unwieldy passel of year and month categories, including spam like category:Rocks photographed in Provence in 1944 (ok, ok, I exagerate with that last one).

There is so much categorization work to be done here on Commons - even making sure that images are appropriately categorized in existing, basic year categories. It admittedly awfully subjective as to whether additional year categories are warranted or not, and I am sure that many users would disagree with some of the ones I have created in the past. But, the issue is that you never seem to slow down and discuss these issues when concerns are raised. You keep ploughing ahead without discussion. Last time I tried to discuss this issue with you, about two years ago, it was like talking to a wall. I really wish you would be more open to the comments of others. Thanks! --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Skeezix1000. Problem is indeed that the lowest level categories are created first and filled up with one or two samples. People tend to jump in on each new category as they believe that, because they are there, they must be used and expanded.

The by "year photographed" is completely useless as agreed by several people and it takes a lot of energy away from the basic categorisation process while creating plenty of maintenance work.

I spent a majority of my time on cleaning up Special:WantedCategories in an attempt to trap novice uploaders, but the majority of the work is taken by all sorts of by by template generated date categories that keep flooding the list.

Where I disagree is that, once you decide to go for a category tree, that you go for it completely with all structures at all levels and create a reasonable time span. --Foroa (talk) 16:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Finland has so few pre 2000 images (yet), that we don't split up that much before 2000. J 1982 (talk) 22:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Is that all you took away from this discussion? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Even though I have done (and still do) some year categorizing work myself, I agree with Skeezix1000. Too extensive time based categorization does more harm than good. There is one additional problem with the pre-digital camera era year month categories: Very often the exact date of an old image is not known at all (quite often event the decade is unknown), so even if we had MONTH YEAR categories, we could only add few images to them. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 09:21, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Thanksgiving_by_year

Thanksgiving by year 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!

Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:45, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Kategorierna

Hej! Jag håller på och hjälper till med kategorierna här på commons och har en fråga. Mall {{År}} (exempelvis {{2013}}) används ju för att skapa kategorierna. Går det att ordna så att varje månad för varje land skapas automatiskt genom denna mall? Obelix (talk) 22:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

För det första finns ju inte mallen. Sedan bör man inte skapa tomma kategorier, utan se till att det finns något att stoppa där också. Försök gärna hitta minst en artikel per kategori först, gärna fler. J 1982 (talk) 10:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Personligen tycker jag inte tomma kategorier på commons är något problem. Bara bra att de finns när folk letar efter lämpliga kategorier när de laddar upp bilder. Men konsensus på commons tycker kanske inte det? Obelix (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Finns inget förbud vad jag vet, men risken för radering är ändå stor. J 1982 (talk) 15:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Okej, märkligt. De gånger jag laddar upp bilder så kollar jag bland de kategorier som redan finns. Finns inte en kategori då så struntar jag i den. Obelix (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Men du kan ju skapa en ny kategori när du laddat upp bilden. Att skapa kategorier fungerar likadant här som till exempel på svwp eller enwp. 18:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)J 1982 (talk)

Salzburg - Salzburg state

Hi, you recently categorized a church in the village of Bürmoos as "2009 in Salzburg". Please note: "Salzburg" refers to the city of Salzburg only, the Austrian state of Salzburg is labelled as "Salzburg (state)". (Yes, there are still some older subcategories of Austria left which only have "Salzburg" in their names and refer to the state of Salzburg. This will be changend step by step.) Greetings from Salzburg state, --Eweht (talk) 08:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Snowglobe Barcelona.jpg

File:Snowglobe Barcelona.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!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Category:Libraries_in_the_United_States_photographed_in_2012

Libraries in the United States photographed in 2012 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!

Szilas (talk) 06:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Bremgarten-Dietikon-Bahn 1902.jpg

On 21 October 2011, you added File:Bremgarten-Dietikon-Bahn 1902.jpg into Category:1902 in Berlin. I cannot see any Berlin connection and the caption does not indicate one. Can you remember why you did this?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 16:32, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Belgrade, Yugoslavia, September 1976.jpg

Hej! Ett par frågor om denna. Du har angett att föräldrarna har tagit bilden, men angett källa {{Own}}. Kan du fixa det? Även om jag finner det sannolikt att du har inhämtat tillstånd för att släppa bilden fritt tror jag att Commons policy behöver OTRS eller liknande försäkran. Är orginalet så suddigt eller har det blivit ett oskarpt foto? Om det senare, kan du ta en ny? --Ainali (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Ja, orginalet är suddigt. Ni får gärna ta bort den om ni vill. J 1982 (talk) 17:52, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Standers again

What is it you do not like about the wording " postally in Ludvika, municipally in Smedjebacken, Sweden"? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Restored. I don't know how much information these pages shall have. J 1982 (talk) 14:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Thx! They are only meant to be accurate, and to me you can't have Ludvika without Smedjebacken in that particular case. People who live along that road have lost mail as well as visits because of the confusion there. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

OK. J 1982 (talk) 15:59, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Venice, Italy in July 1991.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Venice, Italy in July 1991.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Venice, Italy in July 1991.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, 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. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. 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!

Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 04:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template Salzburg by year - and others

Hej J 1982, thank you for creating the template <Salzburg by year>. For I don't have any knowledge of creating templates, let me ask you:
1. As you might know, Salzburg refers to the city of Salzburg only, for the federal state by the same name we use Salzburg (state). It would be useful to have also subcategories by year for all 9 Austrian states (Vienna has the status both of a city and of a federal state) and the bigger cities in Austria, which should be - of course - implemented in their corresponding state. Can you create templates like that?
2. Please be so kind to have a look at Category:Salzburg in the 1910s. (I have created this one and 3 more like that.) Is this done correctly? When showing the bottom part of the template Navigating in Salzburg, there seems to be a mistake, because there's an entry called Cities in which is obviously nonsense. Salzburg itself IS a city. I copied the template from another city and changed the name. In other cities' cats referring to decades the enty cities in is not shown. Does this error depend on the Salzburg by year template? Would be nice to have checked that. - Tak så mycket, greetings to Sweden (where I spent my holidays this year)! --Eweht (talk) 23:38, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Meta Cat

Hi J 1982. Please, pay attention when you create a metacat. A metacat by year must have the template {{metacat|year|....}} not that by decade {{metacat|decade|.....}}. Thank you ! Cheers, --DenghiùComm (talk) 18:56, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Kategorier

Hej, Tack för hjälpen med kategorierna för bandybilderna. Jag måste lämna arenan nu så jag hinner inte fixa det. Har du möjlighet att byta namnen på alla så att de heter Kareby (och inte Kaleby) och ändra bildbeskrivningarna till rätt klubbnamn vore det en jättehjälp.--ArildV (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Fixat nu. Skall du gå på herrmatcher i dag? Det är både final och bronsmatch. J 1982 (talk) 09:57, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Titelbild Cellesche Zeitung vom 30. November 1957.jpg

Hi J 1982, why did you categorize the picture above in GDR? Celle is a City in Lower Saxony "DE:Niedersachsen" NobbiP 11:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Kategorier som skymmer mer än visar

Hej, du har ju visserligen tekniskt rätt att det går att se taxi och buss i filmen (med syftning på din redigering här). Men skälet till att jag tog bort kategorierna är för att de inte tillför ringa värde för den som verkligen letar efter media som har en taxi eller buss i sig. Med denna sorts kategorisering kommer det inte gå att hitta något vettigt då i princip alla bilder i stadsmiljö kommer att ligga i typ alla kategorier som finns i stadsmiljön. Konsekvensen blir helt enkelt att kategorisystemet urvattnas. Eller, det är min farhåga i alla fall. Ainali (talk) 09:46, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Bots

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Category:Films by year

Films by year 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!

--DenghiùComm (talk) 05:40, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3wl7zNEQdp6z9Vb

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Autumn in Seattle

If you want to do this even for photos of things that would look pretty much the same for half the year (I'm not sure of the value of that, but I suppose it's OK), wouldn't it be simpler to just place all the Category:October YEAR in Seattle categories in Category:Autumn in Seattle than to hit individual photos? - Jmabel ! talk 16:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

[https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Seattle_-_E._Madison_St._sidewalk_routed_around_trees_in_Madison_Valley.jpg&curid=44122145&diff=175959766&oldid=175249753 Similarly: why not just put Category:October 2015 in Seattle in Category:Autumn 2015 in the United States, instead of an individual photo? - Jmabel ! talk 16:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Because not all images of October 2015 in Seattle show autumn. It shows anything in that town during that month. Autumn 2015 in the United States mostly deals with nature. J 1982 (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Category

Hello J 1982, why did you remove this category? --Wikiwal (talk) 13:28, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I moved it to Category:Church organs in Sweden. J 1982 (talk) 13:29, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I see. Category:Pipe organs in Sweden is the parent cat of Category:Church organs in Sweden. But not all church organs are pipe organs. I'm not convinced that the parent category is right. In other countries this is not the case, compare for example Category:Pipe organs in Germany and Category:Church organs in Germany. Best wishes, --Wikiwal (talk) 13:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Maybe there should be a special category for Category:Church pipe organs in Sweden to avoid double-categoriziation. J 1982 (talk) 13:51, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Maybe. But not all pipe organs are in churches and not all church organs have pipes. I would prefer to delete Category:Pipe organs in Sweden as parent cat of Category:Church organs in Sweden. But this is complicated because Category:Church organs by country ist the subcategory of Category:Pipe organs by country --Wikiwal (talk) 14:09, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

But all Category:Church pipe organs in Sweden are inside curches and have pipes. J 1982 (talk) 14:17, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

That's right. But for the other cases we still need both categories. There are some inconsequences but in my opinion no need to change the whole system. It is as it is. Thanx for thinking about! --Wikiwal (talk) 15:54, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you can create Category:Church pipe organs in Germany (and other countries) if you need. J 1982 (talk) 16:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wooden churches in Sweden by county

Hey J 1982 this category might be superfluos when all wooden churches in sweden are sortet by county --anro (talk) 16:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Some will be sorted by municipality. I think both can be good if you don't know which county a municipality is. J 1982 (talk) 16:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Namn på kategori

Varför används det Category:Sweden photographs taken on 2015-02-08 när den ligger under Category:Photographs of Sweden by date? Borde inte datumkategorin då bli Category:Photographs of Sweden taken on 2015-02-08? "Sweden photographs" låter märkligt i mina öron, även om min engelska är begränsad. /Hangsna (talk) 19:40, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Jag håller nog med dig, men jag följde bara den standard som fanns tidigare. J 1982 (talk) 21:19, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Aha. Överkategorin heter Category:February 2016 Sweden photographs och över det Category:2016 photographs of Sweden. Det hela känns väldigt inkonsekvent. Men å andra sidan, om det är konsekvent med alla länder och datum så är ju standarden också ett sätt att vara konsekvent. /Hangsna (talk) 09:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Det fanns "Sweden photographs taken on x-date" redan innan jag började lägga till fler. Det är ganska svårt att få till enhetlig standard här. J 1982 (talk) 09:35, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Template:Antarcticadisestablishmentyear

Template:Antarcticadisestablishmentyear 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 template, 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. 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!

Auntof6 (talk) 08:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Template:Antarcticaestablishmentyear

Template:Antarcticaestablishmentyear 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 template, 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. 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!

Auntof6 (talk) 08:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Template:Caribbeandiesestablishmentyear

Template:Caribbeandiesestablishmentyear 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 template, 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. 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!

Auntof6 (talk) 08:40, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Baths_by_date

Baths by date 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!

Auntof6 (talk) 06:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:September_2007_Finland_photographs

September 2007 Finland photographs 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!

Achim (talk) 11:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Category:Trams_crossing_bridges

Trams crossing bridges 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!

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:45, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:West Germanychurchphotoyear

Template:West Germanychurchphotoyear 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 template, 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. 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!

Achim (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:West Germanybusphotoyear

Template:West Germanybusphotoyear 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 template, 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. 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!

Achim (talk) 12:50, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Bath in Ronneby, Sweden in June 1983.jpg

File:Bath in Ronneby, Sweden in June 1983.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!

Jcb (talk) 17:38, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Waiters_of_Canada

Category:Waiters_of_Canada has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

E4024 (talk) 12:16, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:Waitresses_by_country

Waitresses by country has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

E4024 (talk) 14:04, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:United_States_Armed_Forces_by_year

United States Armed Forces by year 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!

Senator2029 23:28, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Categories

if there is a category, where all files where taken at the same day and the same place, would you please be so kind not to categorize the individual files in the category, but the cagegory page itself with this information. the way you do it now cloggs up my watchlist. --C.Suthorn (talk) 08:40, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

But not all files in a category may be photographs taken that day, some can be references or video films. J 1982 (talk) 11:46, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Template:Akranesyear

Template:Akranesyear is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: T2: Unused template If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

CptViraj (📧) 16:59, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Albyyear

Template:Albyyear is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: T2: Unused template If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

CptViraj (📧) 17:25, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Almatyyear

Template:Almatyyear is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: T2: Unused template If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

CptViraj (📧) 17:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Antananarivoyear

Template:Antananarivoyear is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: T2: Unused template If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

CptViraj (📧) 17:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Antarcticaarch

Template:Antarcticaarch is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: T2: Unused template If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

CptViraj (📧) 17:03, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Template:Antarcticadestroyed

Template:Antarcticadestroyed is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: T2: Unused template If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

CptViraj (📧) 17:21, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Category:History_of_Sacramento,_California

History of Sacramento, California 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!

Ricky81682 (talk) 08:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Sports_by_country_by_year

Sports by country by year 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!

Zelenymuzik (talk) 09:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:National_Hockey_League_seasons

National Hockey League seasons 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!

Denniscabrams (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Heads-up

diff. You've added this category at long long time ago. It looks wrong to me. If it isn't, please feel free to add it back. Cheers. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Category:Vehicles_carrying_flags_of_United_States

Vehicles carrying flags of United States 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!

186.174.158.204 16:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)