Finoskov

Bonjour je recherche des infos sur la chapelle saint galdric 8 chemin saint roch

File:Caveirac,château12,intérieur07.jpg

File:Caveirac,château12,intérieur07.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!

213.245.42.74 17:07, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Caveirac,château12,intérieur08.jpg

File:Caveirac,château12,intérieur08.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!

213.245.42.74 17:09, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Recategorisations restored after accidental delete

@Finoskov: Bonjour, thank you for your interest in the categorisation of old carriages. I see you say there are no five-glass landau carriages in France. We have a problem because names vary from country to country. Without going further into it at this point (I should explain i have been away for some days and I think you may have made many changes which I am just finding) would you please discuss your planned future changes with me. -because I might learn something and it would stop a completely unnecessary war between us.

I entirely agree that the national name for a particular carriage should be used but if it is in fact a five-glass landau in the USA your re-categorisation needs to feed into that five-glass landau category. Please know that after your first few changes —which gave me no worries— I will not dispute or even look at (right now) your changes if we can just debate them before you make more.

It is wonderful to have another probably much more knowledgeable person taking part in this.

I've a lot of other WP catch-up to do so I'm putting this matter aside for a day or two. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 10:46, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Coach or carriage

Yes it is true that they are both horse-drawn vehicles. There is great difficulty in naming vehicles satisfactorily so they can tie through to supranational categories. Someone has added stagecoaches to Horse-drawn carriages? I had better go and change it now.

Or should I wait to hear your opinion?

Thanks Eddaido (talk) 12:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

My mistakes

Thank you for pointing out some of them. May we talk about how they arose?.Eddaido (talk) 12:18, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Merci...

... d'avoir corrigé les licences sur ma série de photos de tableaux du musée de Grenoble. J'avoue que j'avais fait l'impasse sur les subtilités de la réglementation étasunienne sur le droit d'auteur :-) Cordialement, Jvillafruela (talk) 13:24, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Départements

Bonjour, j'aimerais beaucoup que tu m'expliques ton revert. Comme modification inutile, il se pose là. Visiblement, tu n'as pas remarqué que si tu mets "all", presque tous les départements portant des noms de rivière disparaissent, étant donné que les départements sont nommés "Creuse" et non "Creuse (department)", ce qui est tout à fait logique. De gros malins ont pensé qu'il y aurait des homonymies et que "communes in Eure" or "churches in Eure" pouvait concerner le département et la rivière et ont rajouté (department) à la majorité des noms de départements. Peut-être trouves-tu joli de voir des liens rouges mais, dans le cas des listes de département, cela supprime nombre de départements ayant un lien bleu seulement si "all" n'est pas mis (Aube, Creuse, Gers, Indre, Isère...). --Birdie (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Je passe sur les formules de politesse puisque cela ne te concerne visiblement pas. Quel est le texte relatif à ton assertion ? --Birdie (talk) 11:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Bon, mon ironie a quand même porté ses fruits puisque tu as finalement pris la peine de répondre. Je ne vois pour ma part aucune trace de courtoisie en voyant des reverts sans aucune explication. Tu me parles d'un usage, y-a t'il un quelconque texte enjoignant de le suivre ? À défaut de règles ou recommandations, je ne vois pas ce qui pourrait justifier l'emploi d'un modèle inadéquat. Quel est l'intérêt de ne fournir qu'une partie des liens disponibles ? Autant n'en mettre aucun, c'est moins trompeur. Il vaut toujours mieux pas d'information qu'une information erronée ou partielle. Après près de quinze ans de présence et des dizaines de milliers de contributions, en particulier en catégorisation, je connais les us et coutumes de WP, même ceux de wp:fr qui est loin d'être le plus sympathique. Tu as beau avoir créé la page, il me semble opportun de te rappeler qu'elle ne t'appartient pas et que n'importe quel contributeur, enregistré ou non, est libre de la modifier. À défaut d'un quelconque texte précisant l'emploi du all=yes, je ne compte pas suivre cet usage constant qui n'a pas lieu de s'imposer, certains liens pointant sur des pages qui n'ont même jamais été créées et n'ont pas vocation à l'être. Bonne journée. --Birdie (talk) 12:15, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Louvre N 2272

Dear Finoskov, many thanks for putting up a picture of Louvre statuette N 2272. This seems to have been mislaid for many years, with no other pictures available. Would you have more pictures of all sides? From your picture one can tell that the inscription was badly copied when first published, and I would love to see what's left of the front, too. many thanks and best regards Frauke — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2001:4CA0:0:F23F:E812:15E0:536B:47EE (talk) 14:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Basilique Saint-Sernin

Tu as raison! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:22, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Stalles d'Ambon...

Bonjour.

Je viens de faire attention au contenu de ton annotation sur cette photo et je me demande si tu es bien sûr que ce sont les stalles de gauches qui soient concernées. Non que je doute de ton expertise, mais parce que ça m'arrangerait : j'en ai une photo, alors que celles de gauche ne figurent que sur celle-ci... Si j'avais su... J'ai presque tout le reste du mobilier, d'ailleurs...

Bonne continuation LW² \m/ ^{(Lie ² me...)} 21:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Point-virgule

Pourrais-tu à l'avenir tâcher de respecter davantage l'orthographe française et mettre un espace avant un point-virgule ? Étant-donné que tu répètes à foison les mêmes paragraphes, cela serait particulièrement agréable. Merci. --Birdie (talk) 18:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

template:category redirect

Hi. For long term categories where the name significantly differs, we would normally implement category redirects per Help:Redirect.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:51, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:L'Empereur romain, un mortel parmi les dieux

Bonjour Finoskov, il ne me semble pas qu'utiliser ce nom contrevienne au respect des règles de renommage : c'est l'intitulé officiel de l'exposition. Voir aussi cet exemple : Category:Claude, un empereur au destin singulier. Bien à toi et ravi si tu es dispo la semaine prochaine pour cet événement : fr:Wikipédia:Journées contributives au Musée de la Romanité. --Benoit Soubeyran (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

File:Hôpital Joseph Imbert.JPG

File:Hôpital Joseph Imbert.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 15:24, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Plus que quelques jours pour participer à Wiki Loves Monuments France !

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est ouvert pour une semaine encore, jusqu'au 30 septembre. Déjà plus de 6 000 photos ont été importées cette année alors vous aussi rejoignez le concours ! Cette campagne de contribution concerne tous les monuments et objets mobiliers présents dans la base Mérimée et dans la base Palissy. De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la verrière décorative au reliquaire, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Vous pouvez dès à présent mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments et objets du patrimoine français. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international constituera ensuite une sélection des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Ambrussum-Ruines du pont Ambroix-20210818.jpg

Bonjour Pourquoi avez-vous changé l'ID mérimée de mes deux photos du pont Ambroix ? file:Ambrussum-Ruines du pont Ambroix-20210818.jpg et file:Ambrussum-Dernière arche du pont Ambroix-20210818.jpg Bien qu'il enjambe le Vidourle à l'oppidum d'Ambrussum (PA00103760), il est aussi référencé séparément comme pont d'Ambrussum avec la référence PA00103057 Salutations
Daniel Villafruela (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Mas de Méjanes (Les Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer)

Bonjour. Pouvez-vous m'expliquer pourquoi vous avez annulé ma modification à Category:Mas de Méjanes (Les Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer) ? Le format que vous avez remis en place est totalement exotique et ne correspond pas à celui que l'on peut trouver sur d'autres catégories similaires. Merci. Olivier (talk) 09:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Je fais en particulier allusion à l'utilisation de "<big><big>". Olivier (talk) 09:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Toile Denys Puech1.jpg

File:Toile Denys Puech1.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!

2A01:CB00:A05:D100:50A7:6C34:B9EA:D3FB 20:41, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Toile Denys Puech2.jpg

File:Toile Denys Puech2.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!

2A01:CB00:A05:D100:50A7:6C34:B9EA:D3FB 20:41, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Flogging the Iberian horse. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

Andy Dingley (talk) 16:40, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

About Category:Costumes of the Pays d'Arles

Dear Finsokov, Some time ago, there was a discussion on Commons about the many different category names of tradional clothing, (traditional) costumes, (folk) national costumes, and so on, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/07/Category:Traditional clothes by country. The conclusion was that the name of the parent category on Commons will be Category:Traditional clothing. And because of the Universality principle all subcategories should have the same name. So Themightyquill and I put a lot of effort and time to harmonize the names of all the subcategories; one of them was Category:Traditional clothing of the Pays d'Arles. Yesterday you reversed my changes and reopened Category:Costumes of the Pays d'Arles, which I gave a redirect to Category:Traditional clothing of the Pays d'Arles. Apparently you did not agree with my changes. But because these changes where iniated by the conclusions of a Commons discussion, you should have discussed your changes before you implemented them. Would you please reverse your changes and make a discussion page for this category, so we can discuss why you want these changes and give the Commons community the chance to join this discussion? --JopkeB (talk) 05:09, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Mary Franklin paintings in France

Do you think this is the painting referred to in the Journal of Montelimar 14 Jun 1902, p2 RN

... une Mireille à la fonaine, signed MARY FRANKLIN, from Arles. This canvas, with vast dimentions, is part of the highly acclaimed collection exhibited by Mr. [Baptiste] Greffe, With the native grace of the girls of Arles, Mireille appears, in this vulgar occupation, in all the brilliance of youth. The color is good and is distinguished by sober tones, a very successful effect, school bumped, dear to the delinquency of painting. At the same time, striking realism, the visitor is offered the features imbued with a youthful stamp full of vigor, — the boldly rolled up, — under which all those of the present generation who have seen him bent under the weight of the years, recognize a great artist to me.

GOOGLE translation - September 22, 2022

Mireille at the fountain, signed MARY FRANKLIN, from Arles. This painting, with vast dimensions, is part of the very noticed collection exhibited by Mr. [Baptiste] Greffe, With the native grace of the girls of Arles, Mireille appears, in this vulgar occupation, in all the brilliance of youth. The coloring is good and is distinguished by sober tones, of a very successful effect, of the shocked school, dear to the delinquents of painting. Alongside, strikingly realistic, the visitor is offered the features imprinted with a youthful cachet full of vigor—the lip boldly rolled up—under which all those of the current generation who have seen it bent under the weight of the years, recognize a great Montilien artist. 71.30.8.73 18:06, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Si madame Mary Jett Franklin est venue à Arles il est possible qu'elle ait peint ce tableau. Mais à ma connaissance elle est juste venue se perfectionner à Paris où elle a exposé à plusieurs reprises. Le cartel du musée Réattu ne donne aucun renseignement utilisable, il dit juste : Mary Franklin (? - ?) Portrait de jeune arlésienne en costume de Mireille _ première moitié du 20e siècle _ huile sur toile _ don de l'artiste à une date inconnue. Par contre je doute que le tableau que j'ai photographié soit celui décrit dans le journal de Montélimar. Le titre de ce dernier est explicite : Mireille à la fontaine, il s'agit donc d'une jeune-fille en costume de Mireille puisant de l'eau à une fontaine et non d'un buste. Par contre il s'agit probablement de la même artiste, deux peintres nommées Mary Franklin à Arles, ça fait une de trop. P.S. : Si cela peut vous rendre service je peux faire un agrandissement-recadrage sur la signature. Finoskov (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for posting this photo! I am working on a catalogue raisonne of Miss Mary Jett Franklin's artwork & would appreciate any information about her paintings in Europe. She was born 1842 in Athens, Georgia, USA, studied at PAFA, then went to Paris in 1889. She had a studio on Rue Monteparnasse in Paris until 1914, when World War I began, and she came back to Athens. She often travels to North Africa in summertime to paint and sketch, then painted large canvases in her studio. She died 1928 in Athens, Georgia and is buried there. Will be glad to share a biographical sketch about her that my late mother wrote in 2017. Thank you for any more information about this intrepid lady artist. Eve Ebmayes270 (talk) 18:46, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Abbatiale de Saint-Riquier petit Christ en croix cropped.jpg

Hi Finoskov, could you add a link to the page (source) where this image is presented, not just a deep-link. Who is the creator (artist) of the depicted sculpture? He/She should be named. --Túrelio (talk) 12:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, under none of the links in the description I see any evidence for the claimed free license; only "© Ministère de la Culture (France), Médiathèque du patrimoine et de la photographie, diffusion RMN-GP". --Túrelio (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:Litre funéraire

Bonjour Finoskov et bonne année 2023. Pour une discussion sur User talk:Túrelio, il m'a indiqué un lien où tu figures mais comme mon anglais est limité, je n'ai pas tout compris. Peux-tu regarder cela ? Merci d'avance. Père Igor (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Bonjour et bonne et heureuse année 2023 avec surtout une bonne santé. Effectivement j'ai remplacé en octobre 2020 la catégorie Litre funéraire par Category:Funeral litres in France. Turélio, sans prendre parti, a rétabli l'ancienne catégorie en attendant une décision commune. Pour ce qui est de ma maîtrise de la langue anglaise, elle est très imparfaite et j'utilise Google Traduction. Amicalement en attendant de vous lire. Finoskov (talk) 19:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:Bugatti Type 28 and Category:Bugatti type 28 torpédo 1921 (Cité de l'Automobile)

Bonjour Finoskov. Sorry for writing in English.
We need the first category as a main category for the type and the second category as a subcategory for the remaining car which is exhibited since some years at the Mulhouse museum. The first category is the main category for the Bugatti Type 28 for all of the life of this model from 1921 to today. From 1921 to 1977(?) the car was in the Bugatti factory. From 1977(?) it was in the ownership of the brothers Schlumpf. Since opening of the Mulhouse museum 1982 (or later) the car is on display at the Mulhouse museum. Then restauration and exhibited a few days at Retromobile. After that again on display at the Mulhouse museum. So you can see that the car was the first 60 years of existence not in the Mulhouse museum.
fr:Bugatti Type 28 and de:Bugatti Type 28 and it:Bugatti Tipo 28 are articles of the Type 28 since 1921. They are not articles only for the remaining car which is on display in the Mulhouse museum since 1982 (or later). Do you understand the difference?
When people look at fr:Bugatti Type 28 #Articles connexes and click on Sur les autres projets Wikimedia : Bugatti Type 28, sur Wikimedia Commons then they see: nothing!
When people look at de:Bugatti Type 28 #Weblinks and click on Commons: Bugatti Type 28 – Sammlung von Bildern, Videos und Audiodateien then they see: nothing!
We need the main category for the Type 28. --Buch-t (talk) 09:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Bonjour. Désolé pour écrire en français mais je ne maitrise pas assez l'anglais. A mon avis il n'est pas correct de créer plusieurs catégories pour le même élément à l'heure où il nous est demandé d'éviter les sur-catégorisations (notamment les catégories "gigognes" pour le même item) et autres redirections, ceci afin de diminuer la pollution imputable aux serveurs informatiques surchargés. Ici il s'agit, comme expliqué en français et en anglais, d'un prototype unique jamais produit en série. Il a juste changé d'aspect (peinture) et de localisation dans le temps. On ne peut donc pas considérer qu'il y a un type 28 décliné en plusieurs versions. C'est d'ailleurs pour cette raison que j'ai corrigé de nombreuses sur-catégories créées juste pour classer chaque item automobile en fonction du numéro de série ; là il faut inventer une autre façon de faire, genre Template pour numéro de série. Mais je ne suis pas assez qualifié pour ce faire. Amicalement. Finoskov (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Google-Translation: Hello. Sorry for writing in French but I don't speak enough English. In my opinion it is not correct to create several categories for the same item at a time when we are asked to avoid over-categorizations (in particular "nesting" categories for the same item) and other redirections, this in order to reduce pollution attributable to overloaded computer servers. Here it is, as explained in French and English, a unique prototype never produced in series. It just changed appearance (paint) and location over time. We cannot therefore consider that there is a type 28 available in several versions. It is for this reason that I have corrected many super-categories created just to classify each automobile item according to the serial number; there it is necessary to invent another way of doing things, like Template for serial number. But I'm not qualified enough to do that. Sincerely.

Bonjour. I do not agree to your opinion. But I need more time for explaining. --Buch-t (talk) 09:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

@Billinghurst and Wdwd: You deleted the red-linked category in the title. Could you please comment? --Leyo 20:51, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

(barging in) Ich hab schon mehrmals n dicken Hals gekriegt. Instead of moving categories Finoskov creates new ones tagging the previous ones for deletion. That's bad behaviour. Years ago I asked them to refrain from that but they refused to do so. One could consider some restrictions if action-related blocks will be available soon... --Achim55 (talk) 21:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@Leyo: From admin point of view, empty category, and findable through HotCat through exactly same type ahead, no wikidata entry--so without subject matter expertise it meets the criteria for deletion. No irons in the fire, so no issue either way in what happens. For me, if something has a WD entry that is typically the indicator of the importance, relevance, xwikiness, and where I would step in and start conversation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

@Leyo: Hi Leyo, please see my comment on this on de.wp: de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Wdwd/Archiv/2022#Bugatti. (Was a SD on an empty cat/C2).--Wdwd (talk) 08:34, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

The Category:Bugatti Type 28 was not empty from October 9th 2021 to December 26th 2022. Then Finoskov changed it.

The category was at Wikidata Q2927698. Look at October 2021. Later Finoskov changed.

A proper category description doesn't save anything either, because it can be removed.

I think that it is possible for Finoskov, after changings on commons and wikidata, to make speedy deletion requests for every category after emptying. Without discussion, without consensus. Not good. --Buch-t (talk) 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Finoskov, ta réponse est encore en attente, y compris pour la contribution d'Achim55. Si la langue pose problème, pourquoi ne pas utiliser DeepL ? --Leyo 16:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Bonjour à toutes et à tous. Même avec les barrières de langue, je pense avoir répondu clairement la première fois. Mais recommençons. L'automobile nommée torpédo type 28 de 1921 est un prototype, donc un modèle unique, n'ayant jamais été développé, conservé au Musée National de l'Automobile à Mulhouse (autrefois Cité de l'Automobile) qui est son propriétaire au nom de l’État Français et non pas sa localisation. De plus comme cette automobile est classée en tant qu'Objet monument historique, elle est incessible et, à part des prêts pour des expositions temporaires à l'extérieur, elle est et restera à Mulhouse. Pourquoi est-il utile de conserver une catégorie mère ne servant à rien puisqu'il n'y a pas d'autres type 28 et qu'il existe une seule catégorie "fille" dédiée? Quant à créer plusieurs catégories pour chaque automobile de collection selon l'endroit où elle a été photographiée, j'estime que c'est de la "rigolade" pour rester courtois. Je rappelle que nous devons apprendre la sobriété en matière de création de catégories et de redirections multiples. C'est dans le même esprit que je suis pas d'accord, et cela depuis longtemps, avec Archim55. Il vaut mieux supprimer définitivement les catégories inutiles ou mal nommées (voir les innombrables catégories libellées en français alors qu'elles devraient l'être en anglais, et celles au singulier) plutôt que les renommer avec redirections. Il est certain que cela demande plus de travail donc de temps. Et à quoi sert d'édicter des règles et donner des conseils si c'est pour ne pas les respecter. Voilà veuillez m'excuser d'avoir été si long.

D'autre part si j'ai été long à répondre c'est que la controverse et les joutes écrites ne m’intéressent pas et il y a trop à faire pour perdre du temps en discussions stériles, trop fréquentes à mon goût sur Wikipedia dans son ensemble. Trop nombreuses les pages de discussion fermées au bout de plusieurs années sans consensus et donc sans prise de décision.

Cordialement malgré tout.

Google-Translation : Hello everyone. Even with the language barriers, I think I answered clearly the first time. But let's start again. The automobile called torpedo type 28 from 1921 is a prototype, therefore a unique model, having never been developed, kept at the National Automobile Museum in Mulhouse (formerly Cité de l'Automobile) which is its owner in the name of the French State and not its location. Moreover, as this automobile is classified as a historic monument object, it is not transferable and, apart from loans for temporary exhibitions outside, it is and will remain in Mulhouse. Why is it useful to keep a useless mother category since there are no other type 28s and there is only one dedicated "child" category? As for creating several categories for each vintage car depending on where it was photographed, I think it's a "joke" to be courteous. I remind you that we must learn sobriety when it comes to creating categories and multiple redirects. It is in the same spirit that I disagree, and have for a long time, with Archim55. It is better to permanently delete useless or badly named categories (see the countless categories labeled in French when they should be in English, and those in the singular) rather than renaming them with redirections. It is certain that it requires more work therefore of time. And what is the use of laying down rules and giving advice if it is not to respect them. So please forgive me for being so long. On the other hand if I took a long time to answer it is that controversy and written contests do not interest me and there is too much to do to waste time in sterile discussions, too frequent for my taste on Wikipedia in his outfit. Too many discussion pages closed after several years without consensus and therefore without decision-making. Regards anyway. Finoskov (talk) 17:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I think that you do not understand the problems.

On one hand, you want more and more small categories for your purpose. On the other hand, you make deletion requests to categories which are not useful for you but useful for others and for the community. And you make faults in the structures when you do not split some categories.

When you go to fr:Bugatti Type 28 and click on „Sur les autres projets Wikimedia : Bugatti Type 28, sur Wikimedia Commons“. What do you see? A deleted category. It is good? No!

Either if prototype or serial model, there is no difference in the category structure. The category:Bugatti Type 28 should be subcategory of Automobiles Ettore Bugatti automobiles. Your favourite category:Bugatti type 28 torpédo 1921 (Cité de l'Automobile) is for the last existing car. The name is correct only for the time since it is in the museum.

You cannot transport a car from a museum to a car show, take a picture there and afterwards claim the picture shows a car in a museum.

The name of the category:Bugatti type 28 torpédo 1921 (Cité de l'Automobile) is no indication where seen. The car was photographed in the museum in Mulhouse and at the Retromobile in Paris.

Have a look at the mother categories of this category:

category:Mulhouse Cité de l'Automobile (Palissy protection) ok

Category:1920s Bugatti automobiles in the Musée National de l'Automobile requirement: all pictures made in the Museum No

category:1921 Bugatti automobiles ok

category:1921 automobiles in museums requirement: all pictures made in the Museum No

Category:Automobiles Ettore Bugatti automobiles ok

category:Schlumpf collection (Bugatti) ok

category:Bugatti prototypes ok

Category:Torpedos (automobile body style) made in France ok

category:Bugatti torpedos ok

In this case we need a category for „seen in the museum“ and one for „seen at Retromobile“. Or remove the two mother categories „museum“ in the category and put „museum“ or „Retromobile“ in every picture. Do you want this?

You wrote „joke“ but you made the faults with the wrong structure. You put cars photographed at Retromobile in a subcategory of „seen in Museum in Mulhouse“. This is wrong.

According to the German article: The Type 28 was built in 1921. It was stored in the factory up to 1977. Then came in ownership of Schlumpf. Later, when Schlumpf was bancrupt, the state became new owner. In which year? Perhaps 1981. So we have roundabout 60 years before and 40 years after. Do you want to reduce the history of the car to the last 40 years? No! The 3 articles (de, fr, it) describe the Type from beginning to today. So the name of the main category must be Bugatti Type 28. Regards --Buch-t (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Bonjour.

• N'est-il pas illogique de créer une catégorie-générique ou catégorie-mère ou catégorie-chapeau (quelque soit le nom donné) lorsqu'elle ne contient qu'une seule sous-catégorie ou catégorie-fille ? C'est exactement le cas pour ce soit-disant type 28. Le projet 28 (Ettore Bugatti baptisait tous ses projets TYPE nn qu'ils soient ou non réalisés) n'a jamais été commercialisé. Il n'existe qu'un seul prototype qui fait l'objet de la catégorie dédiée.
• C'est d'ailleurs exactement le même problème pour le soit-disant type 68. Les seuls éléments concrets du projet 68 réalisés du vivant d'Ettore Bugatti sont trois moteurs (jamais retrouvés) et une carrosserie sans moteur qui fait l'objet de cette categorie. Le type 68 n'existe donc pas et j'ai placé les trois photos contenues dans cette catégorie dans celle-ci. Et il ne devrait pas être trop difficile de corriger les liens dans l'article Wikipedia.
• Pour le problème plus général des catégories utilisant IN, elles sont à mon avis mal nommées mais ce n'est pas moi qui les ait créées, donc je fais avec. Et rien ne justifie que In soit traduit par photographié à tel endroit. Pour les véhicules exposés en permanence au Musée National de l'Automobile à Mulhouse, ils sont sa propriété alors que ses expositions temporaires peuvent montrer des automobiles venues d'ailleurs.
• Pour moi le sujet est clos et il est inutile d'espérer d'autre réponse de ma part. C'est à un administrateur de prendre ses responsabilités. Je me rangerai à son avis s'il est justement argumenté. Cordialement.

Google-Translation :

Hello.

• Isn't it illogical to create a generic-category or mother-category or hat-category (whatever the name given) when it contains only one sub-category or child-category? This is exactly the case for this so-called type 28. Project 28 (Ettore Bugatti baptized all his TYPE nn projects whether they were made or not) was never marketed. There is only one prototype which is the subject of the dedicated category.
• It is moreover exactly the same problem for the so-called type 68. The only concrete elements of the 68 project carried out during Ettore Bugatti's lifetime are three engines (never found) and a body without an engine which is the subject of this category. Type 68 therefore does not exist and I have placed the three photos contained in this category in this one. And it shouldn't be too hard to fix the links in the Wikipedia article.
• For the more general problem of the categories using IN, they are in my opinion badly named but it is not me who created them, so I make do with them. And nothing justifies that In is translated as photographed at such a place. For the vehicles on permanent display at the National Automobile Museum in Mulhouse, they are its property while its temporary exhibitions may show cars from elsewhere.
• For me the subject is closed and it is useless to expect another answer from me. It is up to an administrator to take responsibility. I will agree with his opinion if it is justly argued. Cordially.

Finoskov (talk) 20:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Second problem

Hello Finoskov.
Main Category: Category:Automobiles in France is for automobiles in France. Not for automobiles made in France, automobiles built in France, automobiles in French ownership or something else. It is a fault to put any picture of an automobile outside of France in this category. It is the same for every subcategory of this category.

1. You put Category:Philos automobiles in this category. It is wrong. Not all files in this category are made in France.
2. You put Category:Pilain automobiles in this category. The same error. In this category there are automobiles seen and photographed in Sweden.
3. You created Category:Roadsters made in France. According to the name of the category, it is for Roadsters which were made in France. Not for Roadsters seen in France. You put it in Category:Roadsters in France, but this is only for Roadsters seen in France.
4. You created Category:Roadsters in France. You forgot to put it in Category:Automobiles in France by body style.
5. You created Category:Cabriolets (French language) in France. This must be for cabriolets seen in France. But you put the Category:Sizaire-Naudin type 12 HP cabriolet (Autoworld Brussels) 1910 from Belgium in this category. Fault. Also you put the Category:Cabriolets (French language) made in France in this category. But not all cabriolets made in France were seen in France.
6. You created Category:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501. This car war photographed in Switzerland and in France. It is not possible to put the whole category in Category:Pantheon Basel or in Category:Musée National de l'Automobile. Because not all pictures in this category were made in Switzerland or in France. I solved the problem with creating Category:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501 at Pantheon Basel and Category:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501 in the Musée National de l'Automobile. --Buch-t (talk) 12:32, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

You corrected points 1 to 5. I corrected point 6 in the past. No more action required in this part. But please remember in the future the difference between "seen in France" and "made in France". --Buch-t (talk) 17:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Bonjour.

• N'est-il pas illogique de créer une catégorie-générique ou catégorie-mère ou catégorie-chapeau (quelque soit le nom donné) lorsqu'elle ne contient qu'une seule sous-catégorie ou catégorie-fille ? C'est exactement le cas pour ce soit-disant type 28. Le projet 28 (Ettore Bugatti baptisait tous ses projets TYPE nn qu'ils soient ou non réalisés) n'a jamais été commercialisé. Il n'existe qu'un seul prototype qui fait l'objet de la catégorie dédiée.
• C'est d'ailleurs exactement le même problème pour le soit-disant type 68. Les seuls éléments concrets du projet 68 réalisés du vivant d'Ettore Bugatti sont trois moteurs (jamais retrouvés) et une carrosserie sans moteur qui fait l'objet de cette categorie. Le type 68 n'existe donc pas et j'ai placé les trois photos contenues dans cette catégorie dans celle-ci. Et il ne devrait pas être trop difficile de corriger les liens dans l'article Wikipedia.
• Pour le problème plus général des catégories utilisant IN, elles sont à mon avis mal nommées mais ce n'est pas moi qui les ait créées, donc je fais avec. Et rien ne justifie que In soit traduit par photographié à tel endroit. Pour les véhicules exposés en permanence au Musée National de l'Automobile à Mulhouse, ils sont sa propriété alors que ses expositions temporaires peuvent montrer des automobiles venues d'ailleurs.
• Pour moi le sujet est clos et il est inutile d'espérer d'autre réponse de ma part. C'est à un administrateur de prendre ses responsabilités. Je me rangerai à son avis s'il est justement argumenté. Cordialement.

Google-Translation :

Hello.

• Isn't it illogical to create a generic-category or mother-category or hat-category (whatever the name given) when it contains only one sub-category or child-category? This is exactly the case for this so-called type 28. Project 28 (Ettore Bugatti baptized all his TYPE nn projects whether they were made or not) was never marketed. There is only one prototype which is the subject of the dedicated category.
• It is moreover exactly the same problem for the so-called type 68. The only concrete elements of the 68 project carried out during Ettore Bugatti's lifetime are three engines (never found) and a body without an engine which is the subject of this category. Type 68 therefore does not exist and I have placed the three photos contained in this category in this one. And it shouldn't be too hard to fix the links in the Wikipedia article.
• For the more general problem of the categories using IN, they are in my opinion badly named but it is not me who created them, so I make do with them. And nothing justifies that In is translated as photographed at such a place. For the vehicles on permanent display at the National Automobile Museum in Mulhouse, they are its property while its temporary exhibitions may show cars from elsewhere.
• For me the subject is closed and it is useless to expect another answer from me. It is up to an administrator to take responsibility. I will agree with his opinion if it is justly argued. Cordially.

Finoskov (talk) 20:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Third problem

Category:Bugatti Type 68
Bugatti Type 68. There were open and closed cars. Perhaps one called Type 68 and the other Type 68 B. bugattipage.com and de:Bugatti Type 68 describe both cars in one article. In it:Bugatti Tipo 68 there are remarks to engine types 68/C and 68/E. We need a main category for all types of Type 68. With subcategories for the open and for the closed car.

The current status with "

Not to be confused with Bugatti type 68 B roadster (M.N.A.0608) 1942.

" and "

Not to be confused with Bugatti Type 68.

" is not good.

Also here the same problem as written at #Second problem: You put the category with the pictures made in Germany in the Category:1940s Bugatti automobiles in the Musée National de l'Automobile. This pictures were not made in France. --Buch-t (talk) 12:32, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

No answer within 14 days.

Achim55 wrote something above at #Category:Bugatti Type 28 and Category:Bugatti type 28 torpédo 1921 (Cité de l'Automobile): You create a new category, move the contents of another existing category into the new category, and then make a speedy deleting request on the old category. As a result, the version history and the connections are lost. I have not yet criticized this approach. Also, you don't fixed all the links. See also talk 2019

I think the usual way is:

• move the old category (also category talk page if available)
• move the content
• Adjust all links
• Speedy deleting request on the old category

Two such cases have now occurred in which I am directly affected. Because I used the category talk page before deleting.

First case:

• New: Category:Bugatti prototype 68 B roadster (M.N.A.0608) 1942, no Category talk:Bugatti prototype 68 B roadster (M.N.A.0608) 1942
• Old: Category:Bugatti type 68 B roadster (M.N.A.0608) 1942 and Category talk:Bugatti type 68 B roadster (M.N.A.0608) 1942

User:Taivo deleted the category with (author's request) and the category talk page with (Orphaned talk page). Taivo, please explain.

I find it impossible to end an existing discussion by deleting it. But that's exactly what happens as a result of this strange approach. That's close to vandalism.

Generally I accept speedy deletion requests for categories by category creator – this means accepting own mistake, and category creator is usually more competent in the matter than I am. If everybody else would request the deletion, then I would hesitate or even decline, but Finoskov's (as original creator of the category) request I fulfilled. Generally orphaned talk pages are eligible for speedy deletion, actually "orphaned talk page" is a standard reason for deletion of talk page and there's nothing vandalistic. Taivo (talk) 17:33, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Second case:

• New Category:Bugatti prototype 68 (modern realization), no Category talk:Bugatti prototype 68 (modern realization)
• Old: Category:Bugatti Type 68 and Category talk:Bugatti Type 68

User:Túrelio deleted the category with ((incorrectly named) duplicate, content moved to Category:Bugatti prototype 68 (modern realization)), not deleted the category talk page. Túrelio, please explain.

The reason for deletion (incorrectly named) is definitely wrong. The name Bugatti Type 68 for the correct designation for all vehicles and engines that arose in connection with the small car project.

de:Bugatti Type 68 describes exactly this small car project with different vehicles and engines. Of course there must be a Category:Bugatti Type 68, which can be divided into subcategories. It is wrong only to put Category:Bugatti prototype 68 B roadster (M.N.A.0608) 1942 or Category:Bugatti prototype 68 (modern realization) to the German article.

Any ideas to stop this wrong way? --Buch-t (talk) 08:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Any ideas to solve the problem with the Bugatti Type 68? I'm afraid any of my actions would be reverted. --Buch-t (talk) 08:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Bonjour.

• N'est-il pas illogique de créer une catégorie-générique ou catégorie-mère ou catégorie-chapeau (quelque soit le nom donné) lorsqu'elle ne contient qu'une seule sous-catégorie ou catégorie-fille ? C'est exactement le cas pour ce soit-disant type 28. Le projet 28 (Ettore Bugatti baptisait tous ses projets TYPE nn qu'ils soient ou non réalisés) n'a jamais été commercialisé. Il n'existe qu'un seul prototype qui fait l'objet de la catégorie dédiée.
• C'est d'ailleurs exactement le même problème pour le soit-disant type 68. Les seuls éléments concrets du projet 68 réalisés du vivant d'Ettore Bugatti sont trois moteurs (jamais retrouvés) et une carrosserie sans moteur qui fait l'objet de cette categorie. Le type 68 n'existe donc pas et j'ai placé les trois photos contenues dans cette catégorie dans celle-ci. Et il ne devrait pas être trop difficile de corriger les liens dans l'article Wikipedia.
• Pour le problème plus général des catégories utilisant IN, elles sont à mon avis mal nommées mais ce n'est pas moi qui les ait créées, donc je fais avec. Et rien ne justifie que In soit traduit par photographié à tel endroit. Pour les véhicules exposés en permanence au Musée National de l'Automobile à Mulhouse, ils sont sa propriété alors que ses expositions temporaires peuvent montrer des automobiles venues d'ailleurs.
• Pour moi le sujet est clos et il est inutile d'espérer d'autre réponse de ma part. C'est à un administrateur de prendre ses responsabilités. Je me rangerai à son avis s'il est justement argumenté. Cordialement.

Google-Translation :

Hello.

• Isn't it illogical to create a generic-category or mother-category or hat-category (whatever the name given) when it contains only one sub-category or child-category? This is exactly the case for this so-called type 28. Project 28 (Ettore Bugatti baptized all his TYPE nn projects whether they were made or not) was never marketed. There is only one prototype which is the subject of the dedicated category.
• It is moreover exactly the same problem for the so-called type 68. The only concrete elements of the 68 project carried out during Ettore Bugatti's lifetime are three engines (never found) and a body without an engine which is the subject of this category. Type 68 therefore does not exist and I have placed the three photos contained in this category in this one. And it shouldn't be too hard to fix the links in the Wikipedia article.
• For the more general problem of the categories using IN, they are in my opinion badly named but it is not me who created them, so I make do with them. And nothing justifies that In is translated as photographed at such a place. For the vehicles on permanent display at the National Automobile Museum in Mulhouse, they are its property while its temporary exhibitions may show cars from elsewhere.
• For me the subject is closed and it is useless to expect another answer from me. It is up to an administrator to take responsibility. I will agree with his opinion if it is justly argued. Cordially.

Finoskov (talk) 20:37, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

You wrote nothing about your controversal method of creating a new category instead of moving the existing category. But you wrote that you do not want to answer in this part. I hope that you read the following.

I found Commons:Rename a category. At Commons:Rename a category#Rename process you can read how to move a category.

At Commons:Rename a category#Deleting the old category you can read: If the old category is a simple typo or you are the only person who ever used the category and you are the one fixing it up, it can safely be deleted. I think it is clear that you should not make any speedy deletion requests in the future to categories which where used by other users.

Now I have created Category:Bugatti Type 68. There was no regular deletion request and no regular deletion discussion in the past.

It is a main category for everything in connection with the Type 68. It is the perfect category for de:Bugatti Type 68.

The 2 different vehicles (roadster & coupé) are in 2 subcategories. I put these as subcategories to the new main category.

Feel free to make a regular deletion request. I cannot accept a further speedy deletion request. I will wrote Einspruch, objection, Veto. --Buch-t (talk) 14:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931a.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931a.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.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

O.K. et merci. Finoskov (talk) 10:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931b.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931b.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.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

O.K. et merci. Finoskov (talk) 10:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931c.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931c.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.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931d.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931d.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.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

O.K. et merci. Finoskov (talk) 10:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931e.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Bugatti type 46 S berline décapotable 1931e.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.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC) —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

O.K. et merci. Finoskov (talk) 10:25, 7 March 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:Bugatti 44-784 coach aérodynamique Gangloff 1928f.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Bugatti 44-784 coach aérodynamique Gangloff 1928f.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.

TommyG (talk) 17:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Lambesc church (pipe organ)

Je ne vois pas l'intérêt de placer cette catégorie à la fois dans la catégorie église de Lambesc et dans une sous-catégorie de cette catégorie. Pourquoi pas alors la placer aussi dans la catégorie bâtiments de Lambesc, dans la catégorie Lambesc, etc ... ?? Fr.Latreille (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

category-changes

Hi Finoskov, I was notified (User talk:Túrelio#Category:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501) by another user that you wanted to change a category to a new name, but therefore choose to simply copy its content (but not the file-history) to the new name and thereafter simply requested deleted of the old category. That is not the preferred procedure for such kind of change. Instead, you should request to move the "old" category (and its talkpage) to the new category. Thereby, file-history is preserved. --Túrelio (talk) 08:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

D'Ieteren

Bonjour, Il semble que le renommage de cette catégorie soit controversial. Merci de discuter à ce propos. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) and Gadwall (Mareca strepera) in Nepal.

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2023 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighteenth 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 (2023) 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 top 5% of 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 14 October 2024, 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 2022 Picture of the Year contest.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) 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 2023.

Round 2 will end at 28 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Finoskov. breaking the rules.

Buch-t (talk) 14:06, 2 November 2024 (UTC)