Unser Ratgeber Erste Schritte und unsere FAQ können Dir nach Deiner Anmeldung hilfreich sein. Sie erklären, wie Du die Benutzeroberfläche anpassen und zum Beispiel auf Deine Muttersprache umstellen kannst. Auch erklären sie, wie Du Dateien hochladen kannst. Daneben erläutern sie unsere grundlegende Lizenzpolitik. Du benötigst keine besonderen technischen Kenntnisse, um hier mitzumachen. Sei mutig hier beizutragen und gehe von den guten Absichten anderer aus. Dies ist ein Wiki - es ist wirklich einfach.
Setze Babelvorlagen auf Deine Benutzerseite, so dass andere sehen können, in welcher Sprache sie Dich ansprechen können, und zeige deine grafischen Fähigkeiten.
Alle Deine hochgeladenen Dateien sind in Deiner persönlichen Benutzergalerie einsehbar. Trage dazu im Feld User Deinen Benutzernamen ein und bestätige mit ENTER.
Bitte unterschreibe auf Diskussionsseiten, indem Du ~~~~ tippst.
Verwende das CommonSense-Werkzeug, um geeignete Kategorien für Deine Dateien zu finden (damit andere Leute sie ebenfalls auffinden können!).
Um auf eine Bildbeschreibungsseite zu verlinken, schreibe dies:[[:Image:Foo.jpg]], so dass dies angezeigt wird: Image:Foo.jpg
Sofern Du Dateien aus einem anderen Projekt überträgst, verwende bitte immer das Werkzeug CommonsHelper.
Hast Du einen Fehler gemacht?
Wolltest Du eine Datei umbenennen oder sie verschieben? Lade sie einfach erneut hoch und markiere die alte Datei mit {{badname|Richtiger Name}}
Ausführliche Informationen findest Du auf der Seite Löschrichtlinien.
Danke, dass du Image:Soviet Union Muslim Population 1979.jpg hochgeladen hast. Ich habe bemerkt, dass die Beschreibungsseite nicht bestimmt, wer das Bild erstellt hat und daher der Urheberrechts-Status unklar ist. Falls du die Datei selbst erstellt hast, vermerke dies bitte auf der Beschreibungsseite (siehe Lizenzbausteine weiter unten). Wenn du das Medium nicht erstellt hast, dann solltest du auch bestimmen, wo du es gefunden hast. z.B. den Link zur Internet-Seite und den Nutzungsbedingunen des Inhaltes der Seite.
Falls das Medium auch keinen Lizenzhinweis hat, musst du unbedingt auch einen hinzufügen. Wenn du das Bild, die Audiodatei oder Video selbsterstllt hast, kannst du den Baustein {{GFDL-self}} für die GFDL oder {{PD-self}} für public-domain setzen. Siehe Commons:Lizenzvorlagen für die komplette Liste der nutzbaren Lizenzen und den dazugehörigen Lizenzbausteinen.
Bitte beachte, dass alle Bilder ohne Quellen- und/oder Lizenzangaben eine Woche nach dem Hochladen gelöscht werden. Dies kannst du auf der Seite Richtlinien zum Löschen nachlesen. Falls du irgendwelche andere Dateien hochgeladen hast, überprüfe bitte auch ob du jene Quellen- und Urheberinformationen angegeben hast. Du kannst alle von dir hochgeladenen Bilder mit dem Galerie-Tool ansehen. Danke. Matt314 10:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:Cornucopia.jpg wurde als urheberrechtsverletzende Datei gekennzeichnet. Auf den Wikimedia Commons werden nur Dateien, die unter freien Lizenzen stehen, akzeptiert, das heißt Bilder und andere Mediendateien, die von jedem für jeden Zweck verwendet werden dürfen. Für genauere Auskünfte lies bitte Commons:Lizenzen. Fragen zu Commons können auf Commons:Forum gestellt werden.
Die Datei, die du hochgeladen hast, wird bald gelöscht werden. Wenn du der Meinung bist, dies sei keine Urheberrechtsverletzung, erkläre dies bitte auf der Bilddiskussionsseite.
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Auf deine Frage zu antworten , sage ich dir erst mal das das Bild für den Artikel Gerhardt reingestellt wurde, weil in dem Buch die ersten Gedichte von Gerhardt erschienen sind. Von dem Johann Crüger muss ich erst mal einen entsprechenden Artikel aufbauen, wenn er nicht schon in der Wikipedia ist. Quasi versuche ich den ursprünglich URV Artikel von Paul Gerhardt neu aufzubauen. Brauch aber eben halt ne Weile, weil ich mich in die Materie einarbeiten muss. Übrigens schreibe ich nicht nur Artikel zur protestantischen Umwelt von Wittenberg, sondern auch zum Umfeld von Deutschland, wo Wittenberg quasi eine Rolle mitgespielt hat. So ergänzen sich Forschungsfelder anderer User und man in den direkten Austausch treten.
Daher bin ich auch in der Lage, als Ansprechparthner für überregionale Themen zu fungieren, die mit WB zu tun haben. Nichts destso Trotz, wenn du das Bild weiter an deinem Ermessen verlinken willst, tu dies bitte. Übrigens wenn ich mit der Fertigstellung von dem Gerhardt Artikel fertig bin, hast du Lust vor der lesenswert Bewertung, mich noch zu beraten wo Schwächen dann an dem Artikel sind? Ich will dann eigentlich noch Jannemann über den Artikel als Berlin Spetzi rüberscheuchen, aber erst mal muss ich den Artikel lesenswert machen. Daher bin ich auch über deine Hilfe dankbar. mfg aus Wittenberg Torsten Schleese 01:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC) PS wir sehen uns wahrscheinlich wieder im WP Chat da können wir dann mal intensiever Quatschen.Reply[reply]
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Please don't create categories willy-nilly if you don't have enough knowledge of the subject-matter, as was done with Category:A_O. That had several problems, such as that Omega is not an "O", and the Alpha-Omega is not a "Monogram of the name of Jesus Christ"! AnonMoos 13:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
danke dass du das von mir gemachte Foto vom grenzstein einsortiert hast. Ich habe dann aber festgestellt, dass es bereits eine Kategorie Boundary stone mit Grenzsteinen gibt. Da dann ne paralellkategorie boundary marker zu machen ist wenig sinnvoll. ich hab das bild jetzt mal verschoben, und für boundary marker nen sla gestestellt. Sorry, is nicht gegen dich persönlich gerichtet oder so. Soll hier nur kurz zum besseren nachvollziehen meiner Überlegung dienen --Jeses 23:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
alles klaro, man lernt immer dazu, vielleicht wäre ein catdirect günstiger (zu Vermeidung von Wiederholungsfehlern)? Grüße --Wst <sup>[[Benutzer_Diskussion:Wst|question</sup>]] 23:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
An catdirext hab ich gar nicht gedacht... is noch nicht gelöscht, könnte man immer noch einbauen. hab jetzt gerade leider keine zeit, aber heute abend sicher... mal sehen, wer schneller ist... --Jeses 09:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Willst du diese Seite gelöscht haben bzw. ist sie nicht nötig? Dann kann ich sie löschen, aber stelle dann in Zukunft bitte {{speedy|Begründung}} auf solche Seiten. Gruß--Bo-rhein-sieg 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Deine beiden zuletzt hochgeladenen Flickr-Bilder müssen noch „reviewt“ werden. Bist du so nett und suchst die URL der Bilder mit der Bildbeschreibungsseite auf? Dann kann ich folgende Vorlage einfügen: {{flickrreview|Borheinsieg|xx:xx, 15 December 2006 (UTC)}}.--Borheinsieg 21:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Habe ich mich auch erst gefragt und gedacht, das hieße sozusagen „public domain“. Ich glaube, es gibt auf flickr auch noch Fotos, die nicht jeder sehen kann und man muss sich dafür irgendwie anmelden oder so.--Borheinsieg 21:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You originally changed the category in this picture from 'Death' to 'Personifications of death'. I think this was a good move.
However, you have just deleted 'Personifications of death' and added 'Death and the maiden'. This is excellent, but I have reinstated your 'Personification of death' category, as I think both these categories are valid for the image. I hope you agree.
Quite true - I didn't notice 'Death & Maiden' was a sub-category of 'Personifications...'. I have removed the latter for reasons of overcategorisation. Thanks. Nick Michael 22:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Kategorien sind auf Commons fast immer in der Pluralform. Es wäre also gut, wenn du z. B. statt „Woman of Benin“ „Women of Benin“ schreiben würdest, einfach in Anlehnung an die passende Oberkategorie. Gruß--Borheinsieg 12:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst, mit deiner Signatur scheint irgendwas nicht zu stimmen. Für mich sieht es so aus, also wolltest du das "question" hochstellen. Dafür müsstest du dann [[User:Wst|Wst]] <sup>[[User talk:Wst|question]]</sup> in deine Einstellungen übernehmen und dann noch einen Hacken bei "Raw signatures" setzen. Viele Grüße --Matt314 21:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo, höre bitte sofort auf, dein umkategorisierendes Treiben aus der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia, wofür du dort letzlich unbegrenzt gesperrt wurdest, hier fortzusetzen. Ich bin nun schon auf mehrere Änderungen von dir gestoßen, die schlicht quatsch sind - zum Beispiel diese: [1]. Es ist Unsinn, ein Tier noch einmal in die Familienkategorie einzusortieren, zumal es sich schon in einem Artikel befindet, der dort einsortiert ist. Und die Kategorie "Feed" gibt es gar nicht. Kategorien sind offensichtlich nicht deine Stärke - also lass es, sonst wirst du auch hier (und alle deine sicher kommenden Sockenpuppen - siehe Wikipedia) gesperrt. -- aka 08:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Beleidigungen fallen erfahrungsgemäß auf den Verursacher zurück. Noch nicht vorhandene Kategorien besagen zunächst nur, dass sie noch nicht vorhanden sind. Wenn Kategorien in deinen Augen offenbar nicht dazu dienen sollen, die jeweiligen Dateien bequem aufzufinden, stell das bitte dort zur Diskussion wo es hingehört. Wenn du etwas nicht verstehst, kannst du gern in dem Ton fragen, der ansonsten auch hier üblich ist. Ich wäre der letzte, der sich Sachdiskussionen verschlösse. Eine besinnliche Vorweihnachtszeit wünscht --Wstquestion 08:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Was verstehst du nicht daran, dass es Unsinn (und hier deshalb ungebräuchlich) ist, ein Tier sowohl in eine Familienkategorie als auch in eine Tierartseite, die in dieser Kategorie ist, einzufügen? Deswegen habe ich nicht den Sinn von Kategorien in Frage gestellt - unterstelle mir bitte auch so etwas nicht. Solche Dinge wurden hier in den vergangenen Jahren übrigens schon oft diskutiert. Sicher weisst du das auch und hast in den entsprechenden Archiven (Forum & Co) nachgeschlagen, machst es aber dennoch "irgendwie anders". Oder weisst du es etwa nicht und fängst einfach so an, hier massenweise etablierte Sortierungen zu ändern? Nochmal ganz deutlich: wenn du weiter umkategorisiert, wirst du auch hier zum Schutz des Projektes gesperrt. Du bist in der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia bereits vielen, vielen Leuten damit dermaßen auf den Wecker gegangen, hast so viel unnütze Arbeit nötig gemacht und wurdest schließlich - da du dich entgegen deiner Aussage oben eben Sachdiskussionen regelmäßig verschließt - unbegrenzt gesperrt; das reicht langsam. -- aka 09:33, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
die von dir gewählte Überschrift zum Thema empfinde als provozierend und nicht sachdienlich. Abschließend dazu: Auf der (übrigens exzellenten Fotoserie) sind zwei Spezies, die m.E. einer je gesonderten Kategorisierung (es war zuvor keine[!] vorhanden) bedürfen. Wenn es für die eine eine Familie, die andere aber eine Art ist, sehe darin keinen Fehler (geschweige "Unsinn") sondern einen Anfang (im Sinne der jeweiligen Auffindbarkeit). Kundigere werden es präzisieren, keine Sorge. Und Schluss unter dieser missglückten Überschrift. --Wstquestion 09:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ein Bild muß nicht zwangsweise in einer Kategorie sein, wenn es in einer (sinnvoll kategorisierten) Seite verwendet wird - siehe oben. Um das konkrete Bild geht es dabei nicht - es war nur ein Beispiel. Die Überschrift habe ich geändert. Der Rest gilt natürlich weiterhin. -- aka 10:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ich denke schon, dass Wst hier überwiegend sinnvolle Änderungen und Ergänzungen vornimmt, wenn man sich seine Beiträge einmal anschaut. Es wäre wirklich sehr schade, wenn diese „Energie“ (er ist hier momentan wohl einer der aktivsten Benutzer) hier massenhaft falsch verwendet würde. Du solltest einfach beachten, dass Bilder, die schon in einer entsprechen kategorisierten Galerieseite eingebunden sind, im Normalfall keiner weiteren Kategorisierung bedürfen. Und doppelte (redundante) Kategorisierungen sind natürlich auch zu vermeiden. Wenn das wirklich nicht klappen kann – was ich nicht glaube – reicht es ja auch, die vorhandenen Kategorien nach einer weiteren Unterteilungsmöglichkeit abzusuchen, da können ja eigentlich keine Probleme auftauchen.--Borheinsieg 16:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wish you would put as much thought into the new categories you create as you do into the grim endless merciless pitiless struggle you perpetually wage against so-called "redundant" categories on image description pages. For example Category:Ichthys for you seems to include only fish shapes, not the actual Greek letters ΙΧΘΥΣ (to judge by the images you left in Category:Monograms of the name of Jesus Christ ); it would be nice if you could provide some explanation or rationale for this (or if the name of the category had been chosen in such a way as to make this clear). Also, the category Category:Cross Fleurie (sic) seems to group indiscriminately together the "Cross Flory" and "Cross Bottony" of heraldry, without explaining why you think that there's some special connection between the two. And most of the images in Category:Trinity in heraldry do not generally fall under "Ecclesiastical heraldry" in the conventional ordinary sense, and the main effect of creating Category:Trinity in heraldry was to pointlessly and needlessly split the representations of the "Shield of the Trinity" diagram between that category and Category:Trinity symbols. And Category:Trinity symbols and Category:Triquetra are somewhat pointless as they now stand, since you moved only about half the relevant images into these categories. Finally, the point of categorizing is actually to HELP PEOPLE FIND THINGS WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THEM, not to place everything into tiny mini-micro-sub-niche nano-categories with an absolute minimum number of images in each category. Categories with a lot of images may be a problem in some contexts, but perfectly fine in other contexts. Just because a category has a lot of images, doesn't mean that it absolutely must be subdivided. AnonMoos 17:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks for your considerations. What are your concrete alternatives? I tried to proceed from existing terms and create no new. Because my English is not sufficient. The term “Cross fleurie” existed already. The "category ichthys" was begun today and is not perfect. My dictionary says: triquetrus is Singular. Greetings --Wstquestion 22:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Even if the singular were Triquetrus, the plural would be Triquetri, according to ordinary Latin inflectional patterns. Only if the singular were Triquetrum would the plural be Triquetra. But in fact, in the ordinary modern usage of the word to refer to a three-fold visual symbol, the singular is Triquetra and the plural Triquetras (or perhaps somewhat archaically and pretentiously "Triquetrae"). In English, Triquetra is an abstract geometrical shape, Triquetrum is a physical object, and I don't think that "Triquetrus" is even a word at all...
if you mean, triquetras is more appropriate, should set you a "seecat" --Wstquestion 19:51, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I now began. However it isn't my sphere of interest. --Wstquestion 17:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Re: The broader categorization issues -- I'm sure that I'll eventually get around to fixing up some of the problematic situations which I care most about, but the more general solution is for you to be a little bit more cautious in making broad sweeping recategorizations in subject areas where you have little direct personal knowledge -- and also maybe to occasionally consider whether the people who came before you might have already achieved a rough-and-ready categorization scheme with some definite practical advantages, even if it doesn't fully accord with your concepts of pure theoretical abstract logic in categorization... AnonMoos 19:37, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
perhaps we should in each case advise the virulent cases on the concrete discussion side? --Wstquestion 19:51, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure -- Category:Triskelion was placed under Category:Spirals because some Triskelions are made up of spirals. But not all Triskelions are made of of spirals (look at gallery page Triskelion). So if you remove Category:Spirals from images in Category:Triskelion, then there's no way to distinguish between Triskelions which are spirals and Triskelions which are not spirals -- and somebody going to Category:Spirals to find spiral images might have a more difficult time finding appropriate images that they're looking for. AnonMoos 16:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bitte ändere nicht die Lizenzen in Bildern anderer Benutzer. {{PD-self}} ist nicht das gleiche wie {{self|Attribution}}. Ich beziehe mich auf diese Korrektur [2]. Attribution erfordert die Namensnennung des Urhebers, PD gar nichts. MfG --BLueFiSH 19:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sorry und danke für den Hinweis. wo sind solche Erläuterungen les- und abrufbar? --Wstquestion 22:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Im konkreten Fall sind in den beiden Vorlagen deutschsprachige Entsprechungen verlinkt, Template:PD-self/de & Template:Attribution/de, da kann man sich den Unterschied herauslesen. Eine Übersichtsseite, die die Unterschiede komprimiert wiedergibt, ist mir nicht bekannt. MfG --BLueFiSH 02:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst, ich glaube, Wine ist so ein Begriff wie Wasser, von dem es kein Plural gibt. Mir ist natürlich klar, dass es im deutschen das Wort Weine, also Plural gibt, aber deine angelegten Kategorien sind ja eher Themenkategorien zu Wein in Deutschland. D.h., da könnten auch Weingüter, Weinkeller und alles mögliche andere drin enthalten sein. Ich denke deshalb, das müsste Wine of Germany heißen.--Borheinsieg 22:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Die plurale Terminologie habe lediglich als bereits vorliegend aufgegriffen. Google findet zudem "fine wines" und andere Spezialitäten. "Weingüter" etc. wären freilich bedenkenswert. Allerdings bleiben selbst die besten Kategorien unvollkommen und Kompromisse. Wenn du es so wichtig findest, dass du es umstellst, werde mich so lange anderweitig umtun. Grüße --Wstquestion 07:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nein, natürlich nicht Weingüter als Name der Kategorie, sondern ich meine, dass Weingüter auch in die Kategorie Wine(s) eingeordnet werden. Dass Google fine wines findet, ist nicht verwunderlich. Aber das Thema heißt wahrscheinlich Wein in Deutschland und nich Weine in Deutschland. Aber ist nicht so wichtig, wenn ich es ändern möchte, kümmer ich mich darum. Also kannst ruhig weitermachen, zur Not geht ja immer noch ein Template:Seecat.--Borheinsieg 10:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your edits! However, could you please mark your changes by filling in the edit summary? If you change the category, put "cat" or "category"; if you add a template, put the name of the template, such as "{{rotate}}". Thanks! --Spangineerenws(háblame) 05:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Adding categories to biota that has been identified and placed on a gallery page[edit]
Please review the guidance at COM:TOL#Categories. "Images that are known with certainty to represent a particular species should appear in the species article, and not be categorized in any of the taxa categories." Please look under "Links" at the bottom of an image page to see whether it appears in the species article. Best wishes, Wsiegmund 16:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When editing image description page Image:Boehme-heart.jpg, you took away some actually existing categories, and added non-existent categories instead. Please don't do that again. Thank you. AnonMoos 08:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Der sagte, es solle eine Vermittlung hinter den Kulissen verlaufen.
Grüsse, Simpl
Wst, bitte erzähl mal was über den Zwischenstand am besten per mail.
Ist was Konstruktives im Gange - oder bleibt nur der Weg per Abstimmung? -- Simplicius 21:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst, mal ein kurze Zwischenfrage. Ich finde es gut, dass du hier sinnvoll mitwirken kannst, was ja auch in der Wikipedia jahrelang der Fall war. Wie steht es mit deinen Vermittlungsversuchen im Stillen? Bitte maile mir mal kurz. -- Simplicius 21:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Wst. I've just seen your category Category:Mussels in heraldry. In fact, ordinary English for Pilgermuschel is scallop or cockle-shell (non-technical), and the heraldric English is escallop[3].
Hi! Could you make a couple of diffusion maps also for Taoism and Neopaganism (like those of the other religions), both for the percentage and number of adherents in the world?
Taoism - 400 millions worldwide
China - 100/350 millions.
Taiwan - 5 millions.
South East Asia (Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Bhutan, Malaysia, Laos, Myanmar, Singapore and Philippines) - 1/2 millions, mostly in Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Bhutan, Singapore and Malaysia.
USA - 100 thousand.
Canada - 50 thousand.
Australia - 50 thousand.
New Zealand - 30 thousand.
Neopaganism - 4/5 millions worldwide
USA and Canada - 2.5 millions
Europe, Slavic Countries and Australia - 2.5 millions
Very small communities in South Africa, Brazil, Peru, Mexico, Uruguay, Argentina, Hong Kong and Singapore.
Thank you! =D --Nyo 17:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sorry I cannot. The real author of the maps may be You can find here: [4]. Greetings --Wstquestion 09:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
...mal an dieser Stelle für die Wappenkategorisierungen. Bei der Eule von Uhlstädt wollte ich schon selber... Wie gehst Du vor? Grast Du die neu hochgeladenen Wappen ab oder gehst Du die Wappenkategorien bzw. Listen wie diese durch? Andere, ähnliche Baustelle: Die Kategorien der Wappen in den Bundesländern laufen langsam aber sicher über (ich habe selbst 800 dieser Teile hochgeladen und noch ca. 300 vor mir :-)) In Schleswig-Holstein (Category:Coats of arms of municipalities in Schleswig-Holstein) wurden inzwischen landkreisweise Unterkategorien angelegt, die - schon wegen der Ladezeit - übersichtlicher sind und nur die kreisfreien Städte in der Kat belassen. Würdest Du für die anderen Bundesländer Hand anlegen wollen? Ich weiß - eine Heidenarbeit... gruss Geograv 09:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
wenn es sich ergibt, gern. Aber eigentlich nicht meine Baustelle. Ich durchmustere zuweilen die Neuzugänge, und hänge mich dann in eine interessante Kat. Die Not ist eigentlich überall gleich groß. :-( Grüße --Wstquestion 09:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ich beteilige mich gerne an solchen großflächigen Neuordnungen. Was für ein Name sollten die Kats denn haben? So wie bei SH (Coats of arms from the district ...)? Ich neige ja eher dazu, den deutschen Namen (Landkreis) zu nehmen, aber was meinst du?--Borheinsieg 17:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ja. "Landkreis" klänge für mich wohl identifizierbarer. Aber was sagt Graf Geo? --Wstquestion 17:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Im Englischen sind die Bezeichnungen für die einzelnen Verwaltungsebenen in Deutschland jedenfalls so undefiniert und dehnbar, dass ich die offiziellen Bezeichnungen für besser halte.--Borheinsieg 17:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wäre auch für Landkreis (in NRW und SH Kreise); die "districts" in SH wären dann aber wieder außer der Reihe :-) - flächendeckend ergäben sich einige Schmankerln: wie heißt die Kat beim Mittleren Erzgebirgskreis (district of Middle Ore Mountains / Coat of arms from the Landkreis Mittlerer Erzgebirgskreis) oder wie beim Stadtverband Saarbrücken, der Region Hannover? Ähm, Sachsen-Anhalt sollte man vielleicht erstmal außen vor lassen, ab Juli gibt es ja dort (bis auf Lkr. Stendal und Altmarkkreis Salzwedel) komplett neue Landkreise, das Umsortieren beginnt auf de-wp ja schon teilweise jetzt. Geograv 18:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Das mit SH ist kein Problem, das würde duch den Tag {{seecat}} nach kurzer Zeit automatisch (Bot) umsortiert. Bei der Region Hannover und Stadtverband Saarbrücken würde ich Coats of arms of the ... machen, hört sich nicht schlimmer oder besser an als of the Landkreis .... Das mit dem Mittleren Erzgebirgskreis ist dagegen etwas problematischer: Coats of arms of the Mittlerer Erzgebirgskreis hört sich zwar komisch an, ich würde es aber aufgrund der fehlenden Alternative und der Einheitlichkeit nehmen. Was Sachsen-Anhalt angeht, könnte man wohl schon jetzt damit anfangen, ich glaube, auf Commons interessiert es die User (falls es überhaupt welche gibt, die dareingucken ;-) noch weniger, ob das aktuell ist oder nicht. Ach ja: Lieber of the Landkreis oder from the Landkreis?--Borheinsieg 19:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"of" scheint mir häufiger als "from". Und auch geläufiger --Wstquestion 21:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Obwohl, ich denke, from ist schon besser, da "of" ja eigentlich "von" bedeutet – was sich ja nur auf das Wappen des Landkreises bezieht und nicht auf die Wappen der Städte und Gemeinden. Wappen aus (from) passt da schon besser, zumal da ja auch noch Wappen aus Ortsteilen dabei sind.--Borheinsieg 15:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst, warum hast du beim Artikel church die cat:Christianity gelöscht? Soweit ich sehen konnte, beziehen sich alle Inhalte von Church doch ausschließlich auf christliche Kirchen. -- Túrelio 20:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hoffe, dich recht zu verstehen. cat:Church sehe als subcat von cat:Christianity. Daher genügt hier jeweils eine (!) cat. Oder meinst du was anderes? Grüße --Wstquestion 22:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
nicht ganz; es ging nicht um cat:Church sondern um den Artikel Church und diesen Edit [5]. Gruß -- Túrelio 10:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ja. daran wird es deutlich. Sehe den Artikel durch cat.:Church ausreichend kategorisiert, da diese eben fest als Subcat von cat.:Christianity erscheint. noch Fragen? --Wstquestion 11:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alles klar. Danke. -- Túrelio 11:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Too small" isn't by itself a speedy reason. Has this been replaced with a better image yet? or is it perhaps just not of a useful subject? --Gmaxwell 00:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
recht herzlichen Dank, dass Du Dich meiner Bilder angenommen hast. Ich bin zur Zeit erst mal mit dem Hochladen beschäftigt, später wollte ich auch in die "Geheimwissenschaft" der Kategorisierung einsteigen. Ich gebe zu, dass die Einteilung in Ober- und Unterkategorien für mich noch ein Buch mit sieben Siegeln darstellt, sich mir manchmal auch die Logik mancher Kategorieeinteilungen nicht erschließt. Deshalb bin ich dankbar, wenn sich "Profis" um die Bilder kümmern. --Wuselig 16:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ja zuweilen habe wegen der schieren Unüberschaubarkeit Überblickstabellen zu erstellen gesucht. Wo es dir mal zu "wuselig" ;-) wird, sag Bescheid, dann werde neue Tabelle versuchen. Grüße --Wstquestion 16:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand very well and I think that your intention is good, but before to create a new category, why don’t you put the following photography (for exemple) in the right category :
I see you've changed the brackets round one of the categories from {{}} to [[]]. What's the significance of that? --MichaelMaggs 18:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your idea of starting [[Category:Churches of New South Wales]] using Image:Tooma - Church of Our Lady of Perpetual Succor.jp] is a good one but I have adjusted your initial input edit into the image so that it actually works as a categorisation link - sorry but you forgot to add the [[brackets]]. I have also added 6 more images. --VStalk...images 12:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
that is the sense of the thing. --Wstquestion 12:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst, bitte etwas mehr Umsicht beim ergänzen von Kategorien. Du hast bei dem oben genannten Bild die Lizenz mal eben gelöscht (siehe [7]). --Axel.Mauruszat 20:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ja, sorry! aber war da noch Novize. Hoffe, hab inzwischen dazugelernt. nfU --Wstquestion 20:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I already told you that Image:Allahumahabbah.JPG is much more of an Arabic-speaking Christian thing than a "symbol of Islam" (considering that it's a direct quote from the Arabic translation of the New Testament). What part of this are you having difficulty understanding? AnonMoos 07:48, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why? We have Bahá'í symbols Buddhist symbols, Christian symbols etc. What's the problem? --Wstquestion 07:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, we would be spared the sight of you typing "jewish" uncapitalized -- the lack of capitalization has rather unpleasant connotations in English! -- for one thing... AnonMoos 14:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I explained above at "16:03, 26 December 2006" that it was desirable to have some way of distinguishing Triskelions which are actually spirals from those that aren't (even if Category:Triskelions has Category:Spirals added to it, not all Triskelions are in fact spirals). You did not bother to reply at that time. At least until you do explain yourself, do not remove Category:Spirals from individual triskelion images. Thank you. AnonMoos 14:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sorry for my unreflected manipulations. I hope that I now unterstand. Greetings --Wstquestion 17:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not an advocate of category:round, I simply merged the gallery and category because of someone elses request... but I don't see how removing is correct on this image. The category serves the arguably useful purpose of making round images available via search, but your removal breaks that. Am I missing something? --Gmaxwell 13:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thx for Your note. I'll try a distinguisher cat.--Wstquestion 14:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. I'm not sure that photographs are to be placed into the "in art" subcategories. I believe that the "in art" subcategory is reserved for illustrations and paintings. It would be hard to understand what wouldn't go into the "in art" subcategory if photographs are placed into them. Jkelly 20:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst, bitte kategorisiere keine Bilder – wie beispielsweise dieses, offensichtlich nicht allzu altes Kunstwerk – die offensichtlich keinerlei Informationen über Herkunft und Lizenz haben (vermutlich – mit einem wachen Auge – Urheberrechtsverletzungen). Genau wie in der Wikipedia bzgl. der Artikeleinbindung gilt hier, dass solche Bilder mit völlig ungeklärtem Status zumindest nicht neu kategorisiert werden sollten. Gruß --Überraschungsbilder 13:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
danke, die cat:lightnings bietet mittlerweile eine Auswahl. Mehr noch suche Franckesche Stiftungen aktuell (historische bereits vorhanden). Was kann man da machen? Grüße --Wstquestion 20:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Du hast vor ein paar Tagen die Category:Alb angelegt und mit ein paar Bildern gefüllt. Ich halte sowohl Namen als auch Inhalt der Kategorie für etwas problematisch, weiß jetzt aber auch keine bessere Lösung. Der Begriff Alb ist mehrdeutig, es gibt ja auch noch die Schwäbische und die Fränkische Alb, die umgangssprachlich oft einfach nur als "Alb" bezeichnet werden. Da könnte es zu Verwechselungen kommen, so dass zumindest ein Klammerzusatz angebracht wäre. Außerdem gibt es im Schwarzwald zwei Flüsse dieses Namens, die außer dem Namen nichts gemein haben. So hat denn auch die jetzige Kategorie zwei Bilder von der Alb im Südschwarzwald und eins von der Alb im Nordschwarzwald. -- Grüße, Ssch 09:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
oha, war mir so nicht bekannt. Könntest du dich kraft deiner Kompetenz der Sache annehmen? Grüße --Wstquestion 09:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Naja, ich weiß halt nicht, was eine gute Lösung wäre. Ich könnte natürlich das eine Bild, das die nördliche Alb zeigt, rauswerfen und die Kategorie in "Alb (river in the southern Black Forest)" umbenennen. Aber das ist kein schöner Name, noch dazu für nur zwei Bilder ;-) Ich nehme an, dass Du mit der Anlage der Kategorie einen bestimmten Zweck verfolgt hast, deshalb wirst Du am Besten beurteilen können, was das Zweckmäßigste ist. -- Ssch 16:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In solchen Fällen pflege ich zu warten, bis eine zweckmäßig hantierbare Anzahl von Dateien der jeweils zu differenzierenden Kategorien zusammengekommen ist, dann ergibt sich sich eine sinnvolle Bezeichnung mitunter von selbst. Grüße --Wstquestion 17:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Könnte man da nicht eine Begriffsklärung machen? Kersti 14:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why did you remove my pictures from the clothing and costume categories[edit]
You did not comment in either the picture nor my talk page as to why you removed my pictures from the clothing and costumes categories. I am reverting your edits as they are un commented; I am treating them as vandalism. --Allyn 04:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry for the troubles. Well it seems to me almost as a fashion parade. But without many items, with one model and with raincoat. "Category:raincoat" i'll tried to realize. I thought, that would be enough. If You insisted on "clothing and costume categories", I suggest to build a new own cat - may by named "Category:Allyn's clothing" or so - as a subcat both of clothing and costume categories. Otherwise I fear to lose the clarity in our categorization. Greetings --Wstquestion 07:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ich habe - da ich in den letzten Tagen versucht habe die ganzen Pferdekategorien durchzusortieren - schon eine Weile darüber nachgedacht, eine Kategorie Category:Horse coat colors anzulegen, frage mich aber ob Dein Konzept so funktioniert. Bei den weißen Pferden sehe ich beispielsweise das Problem daß die Amerikaner die Farbe des Schimmel nicht als "white" sondern als "grey" bezeichnen während es meines Wissens auf Commons kein Pferd gibt das die Farbe gibt die als "White" bezeichnet wird. Aber vielleicht ist es trotzdem so, daß man so kategoriesieren kann und dann einen Artikel über die Pferdefarben schreibt, in der alle Tiere mit selteneren Farben auftauchen und von den häufigen Farben nur ein Beispiel. Kersti 15:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gibt es evtl. 'white horses' und 'grey horses' als unterschiedene Gruppen? Die jeweiligen google-Bilder legen eine solche Vermutung nahe. --Wstquestion 15:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ja - das gibt es - die als "true-white" bezeichneten Pferde haben ein Gen,m das dazu führt daß sie keine Farbstoffbildenden Zellen in der Haut haben und deshalb weiß sind. Die Greys sind unsere typischen Schimmel, die in beliebiger Farbe geboren werden und im Laufe ihres Lebens weiß werden. Ich habe Deine Kategorie mal mit den Interwikis verlinkt. Die Information steht sowohl im englischen Artikel über die Farben, ebenso sind die entsprechenden Informationen im deutschen Artikel zu finden.
Eventuell ist aber deine naive Herangehensweise durchaus sinnvoll, wenn man das Ganze in der Einleitung jeweils erklärt. Nichtenglische Wikipediaautoren werden das Problem ja durchweg haben. Ubnd da bestimmt 99% der weißen Pferde Schimmel sind, ist es klug sie in die Hauptkategorie "White Horses" zu tun weil sich sonst dort ein Chaos entwickelt, sobald man nicht aufpaßt, weil jeder der nicht viel Ahnung von Pferden hat natürlich die Schimmel als weiße Pferde einordnet.
Es macht relativ wenig Sinn, neue Kategorien für einzelne Pferderassen aufzumachen, weil es grundsätzlich sinnvoller ist, wenn ein solcher Bereich einheitlich entweder nur durch Galerien oder einheitlich nur durch Kategorien geordnet wird - ich habe zu jeder Rasse die es gibt eine Galerie eingerichtet, deshalb würde die Kategorie Horse breeds nur unübersichtlicher wenn man jetzzt zu jeder Rasse noch zusätzlich eine Kategorie anlegt, ohne daß dadurch neue Informationen hinzukommen. Kersti 20:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Welchen Sinn solle es machen die Kategorie "Horses" aus den Pferderassen herauszunehmen? - das ist eine Übersicht die möglichst schnell sowohl von Horses als auch von Equus caballus aus erreichbar sein sollte, weil man sie ständig braucht. Finde ich. Kersti 20:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Es erschien die Platzierung der Rassen unter 'equus' im Hinblick auf die entwickelten Regularien in commons stringent, und horses für alles Übrige (Farbe, Kunst, etc.). Aber eigentlich überhaupt nicht meine Baustelle. Werde nicht weiter die Pferde scheu machen. Ade. --Wstquestion 21:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah - na die Regularien kenne ich noch nicht. Ich denke allerdings entweder muß man ganz eindeutig differenzieren, so daß jede Gallerie und jede Kategorie nur in einem von beidem auftaucht oder man muß alle Kategorien und Gallerien in beiden Kategorien aufführen - eine halbherzige Lösung ist da sehr verwirrend und macht alles extrem unübersichtlich. Wo genau sind diese Regularien? Kersti 21:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Da steht zu dem Thema gar nichts drin - erwähnt ist, daß die Tierarten mit dem lateinischen Namen bezeichnet werden sollen - aber daran hält man sich bei den verbreiteten Haustieren ja sowieso gar nicht. Aber für die Aufteilung der Themen auf die Kategorien unter lateinischem oder deutschen Namen steht da nichts. Allerdings würde ich sagen, daß ich Farben und Rassen unter Equus sehen wollte, selbst wenn ich die kulturellen Themen unter Horses einordne und die biologischen unter Equus - einerseits weil sich Rassen biologisch unterscheiden und die Haustierwerdung auch naturwissenschaftlich untersucht wird, andererseits weil die Artikel über einzelne Pferderassen wohl die größte zusammenhängende Gruppe von Artikeln über Pferde ist. Mit den Farben verhält es sich ähnlich, das Thema ist aber bei weitem nicht so wichtig. Kersti 12:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I saw that you were cleaning up Category:Cities by country. Please ensure that you do not orphan any images in the process. Thanks. Siebrand 22:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand well why you changed the category honey to honeycombs, but I do not agree with removing categories yellow and textures...
Next time, you should contact me before, thanks--SuperManuSuperMessage 08:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Be aware that not all pictures of honeycombs should go to the texture category. I think only pictures showing a close-up of the structure should go to this category, but not picture showing the whole comb, with the wood frame...that is the reason why I don't think the organization of honeycombs category as belonging to the texture category is fine...texture are often used afterwhat to create design drawing to fill forms with patterns... --SuperManuSuperMessage 12:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Guten tag. Hello Wst. My apologies, I do not speak German, only English and French. One question I want to ask: I noticed that you had deleted many of the categories that I used to classify my recent additions to the Commons. Your additions of categories are mostly valid (and I would like to keep them), but why would you want to delete the other categories? Surely, all also fit into Zoology, Anatomy and the other groups deleted. I added the other categories to enable other users to find them more easily. Please reply either here or on my talk page. Thanks, and best wishes. Esseh 04:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi esseh, I think for the categorizations: as much as necessary, as few as possible. Therefore we also have the subcategories: So - for example - is enough, to put a animal class only in one category, because the class is already a subcategory of the major cat., for example the category:animals. I hope, I have you correct unterstand. happy Easter! --Wstquestion 06:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Wst. I appreciate the idea. I just know that I have searched for images for articles and had diffculty finding them. I think, maybe, your categories should be used, but the others should be included as well, so users can find them easily (e.g. all fit in anatomy, and zoology, but are all separate without). Glucklich Ostern to you, too! (Sorry, won't allow an umlaut, and I'm sure my German is wrong (De = -2!) Esseh 11:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excuse me, but I can find much more Lessing-statues in the Lessing-articles than in the Category:Statues of Lessing, you created today. So I can’t understand the new category. And: whom do you mean with the category: Lessing the writer (Gotthold Ephraim Lessing) or Lessing the sculptor (Otto Lessing)? --84.189.101.18 16:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are many people named "Lessing". You agree, that "Gotthold Ephraim" is the most prominent people named Lessing? Then You can him find in the overcategory. Now the work is not ready. Please wait or let's work together. Greetings --Wstquestion 16:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks for the reponse. In my view that's too fine a categorization - people wanting Modern Movement images are going to look in Modern Movement, they aren't going to drill down. Anyway, that's my view, but perhaps you have a clearer understanding of this, so I leave it up to you. regards -Rodge 17:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. I removed the category from the image as the Category:Ashes was already a sub-category of Category:Cricket - referring to the The Ashes cricket competition - and I didn't think the ritual use of ashes had anything to do with cricket! Thinking about it I'll change the cricket category to Category:The Ashes as that makes more sense and Category:Ashes can be a sub-category of Category:Fire. Madmedea 19:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
I have just reverted your mis-categorization of the Frog Princess image for the second time. Therefore, I have come to point out here what I put in the edit summary.
The Frog PRINCE and Frog PRINCESS are two completely different fairy tales.
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Category:Heroes 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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Image:Zwiebelzopf.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Why is this an "ornament"? It looks like a highly mystical and religious symbol with very specific meaning to me. I doubt whether it was ever used to "ornament" anything. AnonMoos 14:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I already told you twice above that this is NOT a "Symbol of Islam" -- but you could have figured it out for yourself without listening to me if you had been paying a little basic attention, since the text "Christianity (Quote from 1 John 4:8 in Arabic Bible)" was already on the page when you added the Islamic symbols category!!!! AnonMoos 14:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
O sorry for my unalert! I hope the next getting better. --Wstquestion 20:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Nabend Wst (oder besser: Moin Wst), ich staune über deinen Arbeitseiffer im Rahmen der Kategorisierung immer wieder und muss sagen, dass ich froh bin, dass du nach dem Schwierigkeiten in der deutschen Wikipedia dein neuen Arbeitsumfeld hier auf Commons gefunden hast. Deine Masse an Neukategorisierungen, Rekategorisierungen und der Aufbau kompletter Navi-Bäume, die du leistest, überrascht mich immer wieder. Respekt, das Wort trifft es wohl am besten. Mach bitte weiter so. Und lass dich von niemanden unterkriegen der dir in irgendeiner Weise "Nonsense-Kategorien" unterstellt. Davon habe ich noch keine gefunden. Auf weiterhin gute Zusammenarbeit. ChristianBier 23:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, und thx auch für deine Bilder, die gute alte Naumburger Erinnerungen wecken. Grüße--Wstquestion 22:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Naumburger Erinnerungen? Sag bloß, du hast Verbindungen zu Naumburg (Saale)? ChristianBier 18:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nur mal so: Ich finde Dein Wirken auf commons und (ehemals) auf Wikipedia echt anerkennenswert! Laß Dich nicht unterkriegen und frohes Schaffen noch! --Mattes 22:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, you created the very useful Category:Narrow passes. Actually this name can mean several types of pass (mountainside, man-made, etc). The English for Hohlweg is... hollow way! And sunken lane. Both are used, but I have chosen the second for the en:WP article (more self-explanatory for non-Germanic-language speakers, I think). So in theory Commons should be the same. Do you have any objection/thoughts? Grüße, JackyR 17:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
[12], вы неправильно ставите категорию, "Под венец" не значит коронация, девушка выходит замуж [13] (венец ===> венчание)--Loyna 17:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Прости, но это немного право ;-) --Wstquestion 19:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, but I've made it as the icons, for use small, in tables, etc. And for me it will be comfortable to have it somewhere in one category. --Shakko 15:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes. Each Evangelist in one (his own) category. Otherwise there is a big chaos - soon or later. Greetings--Wstquestion 16:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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!
Hallo Wst, als ich mich über den merkwürdigen cat-Namen Confession boxes wunderte, habe ich entdeckt, dass du diese cat-Verschiebung vorgeschlagen bzw. eingeleitet hast. Darf ich fragen warum? Ich habe den Begriff "Confession boxes" in keinem der mir verfügbaren Englisch-Wörterbücher und -Thesauri gefunden. Auch im entsprechenden Artikel auf :en (en:Confessional) kommt dieser Begriff nicht vor. Ich möchte daher dringend bitten diese Verschiebung rückgängig zu machen, weil "Confessional" ganz offensichtlich der korrekte englische Begriff dafür ist. Gruß --Túrelio 08:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Vielen Dank für den aufschlussreichen Hinweis. Bin dran. Grüße--Wstquestion 09:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Danke und schönen Sonntag noch. --Túrelio 10:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hi Alex, du identifizierst die Gestalt mit Godehard. Wieso? Die Attribute sprechen eher für Sebastian. Godehard ist es gewisslich nicht. Ich modifiziere. Grüße--Wstquestion 09:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Stimmt, das ist der Hl. Sebastian. Ich bin wegen des Bildernamens durcheinander gekommen. --Moros 12:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not that it's a big deal, but this category change seems wrong to me. Shave ice isn't ice cream (there is no dairy in it). We already correctly have Category:Frozen desserts. Other than that "ice" seems to me to be a precisely correct topic: shave ice is ice + syrup (and sometimes sweet beans, especially if the people making and/or eating it are Japanese).
Thanks for uploading Image:Barf_elmo.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.
Code·is·poetry 08:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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!
I have just proposed to rename it, since 'eating animals' sounds a little strange in English (if you heard it in a sentence you would probably think of animals being eaten, not animals eating something). Richard001 09:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
O, I feared that. What sounds better? "devouring animals"...?--Wstquestion 16:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst! Kannst Du mir erklären, was der Unterschied zwischen diesen Kategorien sein soll? Überall sind kahlköpfige Männer abgebildet. Wo kann man einen Aufräumauftrag stellen? --Frank C. Müller (talk) 16:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hi frank, Könnte sein dass man einmal kahlköpfige Körper und einmal Glatzköpfe pur darstellen wollte. Was mir einleuchten würde. Scheinbar haben das nicht alle Kategorisierer begriffen. Daher der momentane Sichtungsbedarf. Man kann wohl hier so einen Antrag stellen. Hätte da aber nicht viel Hoffnung. Vorschlag: Räums selber auf. Evt. Baldness als Oberkat für die anderen beiden lassen. Die Sache würde dann viel durchsichtiger. Grüße und Dank für deine schönen Fotos--Wstquestion 16:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo Wst! Mir ist die Abgrenzung der Kategorien zu unscharf: Ist es erst dann ein people, wenn die Füße mit drauf sind, oder reicht da schon ein Brustbild. Ich räume alle Bilder nach Baldness und setze in die anderen beiden Kategorien ein seecat. Kann aber ein bisschen dauern. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 01:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Category:Stairwells 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!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Thanks 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:
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.
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!
Did you want this cat deleted? I can do it for you, but in the future if you need an empty/duplicate cat deleted you should put a {{Speedydelete}} tag with "empty cat" or "see Category:propercatname" as the reason, rather than just blanking it :) -- Editor at Large • talk 20:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Category:Campino 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 category, 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!
Hallo,
ich bin ein bißchen verwundert, zu sehen, daß Du einige Bilder aus der Kategorie "religious painting" entfernt hast. Was war der Grund? Es ist ja im Sinn von Commons, daß die eingestellten Bilder unter den entsprechenden Stichworten gefunden werden und ich habe da einige Zeit aufgewendet, die passenden Kategorien zu suchen. Vielleicht gibt es noch präzisere, aber Du hast ja nur entfernt. --Galbrima (talk) 13:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Category:religious paintings sind es ja meist nicht, sondern ganz spezielle religions, sehr oft "Category:christian paintings", wo sie eher hingehörten, aber meist zu ganz bestimmten Themen, und dort waren sie häufig bereits kategorisiert. Ein Überblick zeigt, wie wenig homogen der Kategorieinhalt von rel.paintings momentan ist, es besteht also eigentlich noch weiterer Differenzierungsbedarf. Würdest du da mit mir mitgehen? Über das Wie lässt sich gern reden. Grüße--Wstquestion 14:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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!
Hallo Wst! Ich habe in die Categorienseite Bedding eine Beschreibung eingefügt, die Bedding als Bettzeug beschreibt. Oder meintest du die Tätigkeit Bedding = betten (sich betten, jemd. zu Bett bringen, lagern ...)? --Diwas (talk) 12:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tätigkeit ist gut...;-). Denke das passt jetzt ganz gut. thx--Wstquestion 07:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Danke für die Bestätigung, jemand hatte die Kategorie als Verb kategorisiert, deshalb meine Zweifel. --Diwas (talk) 12:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
First off, don't you think it's about time to archive a significant part of this page?
Anyway, this image is a map of areas that certain groups of Evangelical Protestants have determined to be most lacking in any significant Christian cultural presence (see en:10/40 Window). It's difficult to properly categorize an image if you don't know what it's about, and are not willing to take any effort to find out... AnonMoos (talk) 16:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, where I can read here about the term "Protestantism" (!?). Maybe "Christianity", maybe "Missionaries". But You have us to show "Protestantism"! Otherwise we must strike the term. OK?--Wstquestion 09:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Protestants and Catholics really do not generally collaborate in missionary enterprises at that level, and the en:Second_International_Congress_on_World_Evangelization linked from the article was an Evangelical Protestant conference (see also en:Lausanne_Committee_for_World_Evangelization etc.). If you have more specific categories referring to Evangelical missions to propose, they would be approrpriate, but a vague general category neutral between Catholicism and Protestantism would really not be appropriate... AnonMoos (talk) 17:32, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo,
mit welchen Dateien möchtest du die Kat füllen? Mit Hallenkirchen oder andere?
dann müsste sie evtl. in die Category:Churches by shape und müsste "Hall churches" heißen.
Ich denke mal, fast jede Kirche besteht aus einer Art Halle und die Kat hat sich ja auch nicht so gefüllt... Siehe auch Category:Church interiors
Gruß --++gardenfriend++ (talk) 16:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sieht nach einer Art Gemeindehaus aus. Denn auf dem Schild steht, dass man das Gebäude mieten kann. Dann steht da auch noch, dass darin eine Sonntagsschule abgehalten wird. Deswegen wäre vielleicht eine "Gemeindehauskategorie" das Beste. Gemeindehaus heißt in english "parish hall" (ähnlich wie "town hall"). So ne Kat gibts noch nicht, aber ich wüsste auch nicht wo man die einkategorisieren sollte... Gruß --++gardenfriend++ (talk) 20:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to Molly Teasdale Smith[14], the exact title and description of the event in question is disputed. According to Teasdale and many authors, the painting is usually called the Miraculous Draught of Fishes, however some authors have called it Peter Walking on the Water. See also:[15][16]Viriditas (talk) 10:12, 26 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I think, it isn't the sinking Peter, but the swimming Peter in John 21. What do You means? Greetings--Wstquestion 13:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I mean the subject and title are disputed. Can you confirm or verify that the title is correct? Viriditas (talk) 08:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are no disputes! You should simply read the biblical texts and You will see the differences. Than You may decide! Greetings--Wstquestion 11:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please read my initial comment at the beginning of this thread. The title and subject are disputed. Viriditas (talk) 04:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
St Peter in the water? That's either Matthew 14 or John 21; not Luke 5!! But Matthew 14 shows the boat at night and wind (!) (waves!). John 21 portrays seven disciples (with names), the fishing net according the order of Jesus on the right side of the boat, the time is morning, Jesus near the shore, and Peter swims. OK, including clothings, not naked. Thats the only problem. I think because the prudery in the society of Konrad Witz was strong. Finally it's evident. I don't really understand the "dispute". Greetings--Wstquestion 21:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Category:Red cross 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 category, 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!
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!
wie ich gerade erst gesehen habe, hast Du vor einiger Zeit die Kategorie Wind bands angelegt. Unter Wind band (Singular) wird im englischen Sprachraum -soweit ich weiß- meist eine en:Concert band verstanden, deshalb habe ich Zweifel, dass der Begriff als Oberbegriff für Brass Band, Fanfare etc. geeignet ist. Allerdings fehlt mir hier das endgültige Sprachgefühl.
google scheint mir zu sekundieren. und die schweigende englischprachige WP will ich mal einfach für den Begriff vereinnahmen ;-) GrüßeWstquestion 07:19, 4 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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!
Unity module 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!
Frames 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!
Category:Flower_wreaths_in_art has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Hi & thx. I think it's a good idea. 184 files in this moment - are too many.--Wstquestion 20:35, 14 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply! Does my proposed category name sound right? -- Cirt (talk) 04:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Update: This sub-categorization work should now be Done, feel free to recheck the category. -- Cirt (talk) 15:50, 18 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've made Category:Political cartoons of the United States by decade. (Actually that's what I THOUGHT Cirt had done, but just miscategorized some images... anyway decade and century cats now in place. Apparently Cirt confused the decade names with the centuries; I would have just renamed the cats had I known at first, which would have been less work, but now we have things arranged in finer detail so I hope this should be good.) -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Category:Iron_Maiden_(Torture) 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!
Category:Towers_in_Dubai 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!
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!
I'm guessing from some of your edits that you are at least clueful about Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Care to weigh in at Commons:Help_desk#Orthodox Churches? Know anyone else who should be invited to comment? - Jmabel ! talk 08:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
O thx for the honour. But I'm a small old European. :-( --Wstquestion 20:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Small images 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!
Categories of victims, fatalities, deaths 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!
Category:Frescos_of_Saint_Martin 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!
Wie werden Unterkategorien nach Namen bei zusammengesetzten Namen zB Giovanni dal Fabro einsortiert, unter welchen Buchstaben und wo , wenn Sie nicht besteht kann man eine Regelung diskutieren und abstimmen oder auch festhalten. Danke und Grüße für Deine Hilfe.Oursana (talk) 23:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you created this category, 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!
Category:Mars Roving Vehicle 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!
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!
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!
Category:Monuments_of_Christianity 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!
Lion's Bridge 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!
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Cast net.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:Cast net.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!
Martyrdom 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!
Category:People_with_black_skin_in_art has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Two brothers 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!
Poisonous plants 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 gallery, 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!
Seashells 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!
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!
Category:Philadelphia,_South_Africa 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!
Tracks 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!
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!
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!
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!
Marian icons 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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
Life 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!
Category:Saviour 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!
Haloumi 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!
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!
Christ icons 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!
- 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!
Hell 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!
Sportswomen 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!
Pitaya 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!
Bisons in art has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Category:Islamic_children 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!
Harlequin 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!
Doormen 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!
Category:Slaying 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!
Timing 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!
Adam 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!
Eve 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!
Wudu 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!
Jewish items 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!
Art objects 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!
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!
Symbolic oaks 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!
Groups 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!
Plowing 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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
Afro 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!
Dried meat 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!
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!
Youth and Age 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!
Category:+ 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!
Panels 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!
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!
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!
Animal eyes 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!
Quaker 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!
Erste Schritte
Hilfe bekommen
Tips, Tricks und Spielzeuge
Hast Du einen Fehler gemacht?
Bo-rhein-sieg 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Feeding_a_Bearded_Dragon.jpg&curid=18874&diff=3836526&oldid=2692751){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Anlauf-Moabit-Mutter_Erde_fec.jpg&diff=3897808&oldid=3895828){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Buddhism_By_Country_Numbers.png&action=history){kind=link}
![[6]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Walk_along_the_the_river_with_snow.jpg&diff=4374927&oldid=3729018){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3A2006-06-05_blaesshuhn.jpg&diff=3759092&oldid=2637426){kind=link}
![[8]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Ceratoisis_flexibilis_dead_600.jpg&diff=3962388&oldid=2205596){kind=link}
![[9]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Wintergarten_%28Eingefahrener_Sonnenschutz%29_%28Anemometer%29.jpg&diff=5371926&oldid=3312887){kind=link}
![[10]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3AMoulbaixMoulin.jpg&diff=10501869&oldid=4495217){kind=link}
![[11]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3AOstichesMoulin.jpg&diff=10267591&oldid=4495215){kind=link}
![[12]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Kmakovs_32.jpg&curid=3818412&diff=10814087&oldid=10813414){kind=link}
Done, feel free to recheck the category. -- Cirt (talk) 15:50, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
