User talk:Dosseman
Dear sir, I have indeed mistakenly added the Category:Hittite metalwork to this photo, having wrongly thought it to be made of metal not terracota. In my defence, I was classifying numerous pictures of Hittie works which were very loosely categorized and whose descriptions were often very vague. Of course I will try to pay more attention, but the best solution to be assured that your photos will be correctly categorized is to add precise descriptions of the objects they show, with name, date, origin, as you did, but also, if possible, some indications about the material, as it is sometimes difficult to identify it properly. Thank you for sharing your pictures here. Best wishes, --Eunostos (talk) 20:02, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Autopatrol given[edit]
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. ~riley (talk) 04:57, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Islama[edit]
Category:Terzibaba Camii ve Külliyesi[edit]
Hi. Thanks for the pictures in and for opening Category:Terzibaba Camii ve Külliyesi. However, I cannot say thanks for opening some new cats which are totally out of our practice and commonsense. Please just as I just did you must make a Category:Mosques in Erzincan if that is what we need for putting Terzibaba Camii ve Külliyesi in. Please look carefully into how I created that cat. People can and want to know more than what Dosseman pictured but what cities have which buildings, which of them are mosques, to which province that city belongs, so that we can make an overall look for all buildings in that province (mosques etc) "in context". If you do not learn rather soon our categorization system and practices I am afraid I will have to ask a ban for opening new cats by you. As appreciative and thankful as I am for all those beautiful photographs you upload to Commons I am as much or even more concerned about who, how and when will be able to correct all your categorization mistakes. Please do not misunderstand me; I only care much for Commons and for the representation of my country, Turkey, in it. Thanks and best regards. --E4024 (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
File:Erzurum Nuri Mehmet Paşa Camii 1615.jpg - Duplicate name[edit]
Hi, while requesting renaming of your files, you requested that two different files should be moved to the same name. Do you want to choose a different one for File:Erzurum Nuri Mehmet Paşa Camii 1615.jpg or should I ust ass a (2) at the end of the name? TommyG (talk) 10:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC) @TommyG: I am utterly surprised how fast the system (and obviously you) work. As for the 1615ː could you use the numer 0911 for the interior, and 1615 for the exterior? Then things will be alright. Thanks for contacting me. As for answeringː is this the correct way, writing on my talk page?Dosseman (talk) 10:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
|
Kuyu kebabı in Kastamonu has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 15:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Kastın ne Moni?[edit]
“Kastamonu is the capital district of the Kastamonu Province” is a wrong sentence. WP is not a reliable source, worse for the case of EN:WP, IMHO. If it were a serious place I could show you examples of other province articles that begin with different formulas. (Even that difference in style is another proof of lack of consistency / seriousness.) Whatever. I see that you're making an effort to learn Turkish. Whenever you reach the level of understanding and enjoying Turkish humour as it's expressed in the title (not by me, but by an urban legend of Kastamonu :) you will find yourself somewhere where you will say, "Oh, I know Turkey". Best wishes. --E4024 (talk) 03:05, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- As you mention knowing examples of wrong sentences of articles about provinces (c.q. districts, towns), why not make it a project, alone or with some others, to correct them? If they’d correct 5 a day, in a few weeks (81 provinces, so a bit over two weeks) the problem would be solved. I’d suggest a thing like “Kastamonu is a town that is the capital of a district (also called Kastamonu or extended to Kastamonu Merkez for Central Kastamonu) and of the Kastamonu Province, Turkey. This article is about the town.” Problem solved? I wanted to make this change ad once. But I failed to find if that part about Merkez is right. In an article “List of districts in Turkey“ it says “One district of a province is designated the central district (merkez ilçe) from which the district is administered.” But is this by law, or just colloquial? Could you let me know?
- However, that does not solve the problem that many categories do not indicate which organisational level they concern. Province, district, town? As part of the just mentioned project I’d suggest adding proper handles there too. If not, the mixing of the three will continue, is my prognosis.
- As for humour, I found the anecdote in your title (on the web it generally was “Kastın Neydi Moni”). I did not laugh my head of though. The humour I like is more of the English/Dutch variety, hard-boiled and without respect for authority. I do hope to understand more of the language though, as it’s fascinating. Did you read Lewis’s “The Turkish Language Reform: A Catastrophic Success”. That’s a book to my liking. His grammar was a bit too condensed for me, but I still use it from time to time, along with four others. Dosseman (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Amphitheater[edit]
.jpg)
Kurz zur Erklärung: Amphi (αμφί) heißt auf Griechisch "ringsum", ein Amphitheater ist also ein ringsum mit Zuschauerreihen ausgestattetes Theater, wie z. B. das Colosseum in Rom, alle anderen, wie auch das in Prusias ad Hypium (Konuralp), sind schlicht Theater. Grüße --Kpisimon
Ich war einigermaßen erstaunt das dies die Reste eins Amphitheaters sein sollten, aber las das in die englische Wikipedia, und nahm an das sei richtig. Ich habe schon an dem Autor dieser englische Text geschrieben und ihm bzw. sie um Brunnen gefragt. Ich habe auch gebeten die Nahmen unter meine Bilder zu ändern (kann ich nicht selbst machen), und werde, wenn ich mehr Weiß ach die Beischriften überschreiben. Dosseman (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
- Danke für Deine Mühen --Kpisimon (talk) 14:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
|
|
Kahramanmaraş Citadel has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
Category:Old_style_buildings_in_Kayseri has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 21:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
Category:Old_style_buildings_in_Kozan has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
Street views in center of Kozan has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 21:57, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
Category:Old_style_buildings_in_Izmit has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 22:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
Izmit Pembe Köşk has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 22:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
Category:Kastamonu_edge_of_town has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
E4024 (talk) 00:42, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Great catch, couldn't agree more. The same structure can be seen in File:20100923 amman60.JPG. So it should be with Category:Umayyad Qasr of Amman. Moved it there and renamed it to Umayyad Qasr of Amman - From the inside.jpg. Thanks. --Tarawneh (talk) 21:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Museum fur Islamische Kunst[edit]
First of all: dont' be sorry, you try to do something good, and generally I appreciate your work. We all make mistakes - you and me. I realize this problem with those general labels (Abbasid Art, Ayyubid art and so on) when I tried to categorize properly collection of the Museum fur Islamische Kunst. All your remarks about it are obviously right for me and I don't pretend that I did everything right. Especially, what you wrote about Ottoman Empire Art and Turkish Art - yea, you are right. Maybe I made some decisions in a hurry. But, at the same time, it is difficult problem and in my experience we cannot expect perfection in relations between categories. There will always be cases like this. That being said, I must admit that Museum fur Islamische Kunst was the first collection that I tried to categorize and I bring with myself my historical approach - I feel good with dynasties, periods, and so on. But now I have doubts if it is so good approach to art collections. First, historical periods divisions are not always the same as art periods divisions. Second, sometimes (in fact rather often) you have something like item from 10th century Egypt and you just don't know if it is Abbasid or Fatimid. So maybe we better categorize by the type of objects, not by periods? Well, now it is done, it is not perfect, but still I think that it is better than this uncategorize mess that was before. Thanks for all your photos. I really love this museum, and it puts a smile in my face that someone appreciate its collection.--Nous (talk) 10:08, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- I think we are in agreement there. And indeed I have had the case come along of things from Egypt, and the museum not indicating to what period it belonged. I am beginning to find out it is wise to keep to inventory number and use in to search in databases. The Berlin museums have a rather good database and I managed to find a lot of extra information, beyond what they put on the tags with the exhibits. It was my first visit to Berlin anyhow, and I loved their museums. It will be a main reason to return. Thanks for your reaction. Dosseman (talk) 13:34, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi Dosseman,
I assume that all these information panels/boards were photographed indoors (you standing indoors), right? As their contents is above COM:TOO, it's considered to be copyrighted. Regrettably, indoor-shots are not covered by freedom-of-panorama exception in Germany:
- File:Pergamon Panorama Parrot Mosaic 8256.jpg
- File:Dome from Alhambra reused in Berlin livingroom 14th century 8433.jpg
- File:Dragon-Phoenix basin Hammered brass 2nd half 13th century Mosul (Iraq) 8337.jpg
- File:The Aleppo Room wall panelling 1600-1603 explained 8519.jpg
- File:Prayer niche from Beyhekim Mosque 13th century Konya 8410.jpg
- File:Information of Palace of Mshatta 743-744 8440.jpg
- File:Information of Palace of Mshatta 743-744 8439.jpg
- File:Dragon-Phoenix carpet Turkey 15th-16th century 8478.jpg
- File:Fragment of Samarra stucco wall decoration 8357.jpg
- File:Berlin Nikolaikirche Raising of Lazarus by Ribestein 1552 53 0412.jpg
- File:Berlin Nikolaikirche Altar cloth from Cistercian convent of Zehdenick - about in German 1300 0434.jpg
- File:Berlin Nikolaikirche Altar cloth from Cistercian convent of Zehdenick - about in English 1300 0434.jpg
_8337.jpg){kind=link}
--Túrelio (talk) 20:39, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
- Dear Túrelio,
- I earlier saw that you probably protected pictures I took in the Tiergarten explaining they were "fop" (in Dutch to fop someone means to play a joke on him, only after months of Wikipedia labour I found what it meant. There ought to be a dictionary of Wiki-terms ). Now I see you refer to notices I took pictures of, rather then writing the text as a description. I suppose you and Wikipedia policies are right in copyright matters. So let it be, your assumption was on the dot. On the other hand I think some of the copyright laws are too silly for words. You may delete the afflicted notices, too bad for people who want to be informed.
- For your work in general, thanks, I've come across it regularly. Dosseman (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you![edit]
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
| Thank you very much for all of your marvellous contributions of photography in the Anatolian and the surrounding geographies, and another thank you for tirelessly uploading them into the WC every single day! Keep up the good work. Emre Dokur (talk) 15:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC) |
You have removed hundreds of files from this category, and some now left w/o any category at all, despite the fact they are all showing the Gedächtniskirche. This is approaching Cat-a-lot misuse, please revert your edits. --A.Savin 13:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
- I used "check for overcategorisation", and deleted files (from the category I was checking in) that were marked as being present in several categories. In particular there were very many pictures by one photographer (Willy Pragher) from the '50s and '60s that were in the "History of Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedächtniskirche", organized according to year, and often in four, five or more other categories as well. For all I know they would remain in those sub-categories. After all, what is the use of having a category showing the church before it was ruined? I may have misunderstood the function of the "check for overcategorisation" but in good faith.
- I will revert my edits but please give me some time to do so. And could you advise me on where I went wrong? And/or advise me for a better method to check on the hundreds of pictures that obviously were clogging this category, with doubles in others? It would be ideal if you could provide me with a list of pictures that now lost their category, I thought I did not create any such orphans. Dosseman (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
- It's not overcat to have a file both in "history of..." and "exterior of...", these two subcats are not depending on each other.
- Sorry, but I cannot make such list, it is too much to have a look at each of your edits. There were three of my own pics on my watchlist, this one and two others; these are only three examples out of many.
- What I can do is just rollback all your recent Cat-a-lot edits. I have no time & desire to look at each one, sorry! Cat-a-lot is to handle with care, if you cannot, do not use it at all, Regards --A.Savin 14:37, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
- If you could roll-back all cat-a-lot edits I made today, that will save me hours of un-editing, so please do so. The first was of Berlin Breitscheidplatz 048988a.jpg at 9.41 hrs on the 15th of january. I started it as there was the message
- "This category has become too crowded. It should list very few images directly." I thought I might help, but it seems people prefer a mixed-bag of 500+ pictures to some searching by themselves. I for one will not try to clear it up. I thought that, with a main category "Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedächtniskirche" its history pictures and exterior might be considered to be in the same category. Dosseman (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I just reverted a bunch of these to my photos, which left the photos uncategorised in the main category tree. Rolling back all of these edits makes sense to me. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for doing so. I asked if A.Savin would kindly roll-back all edits to this church. I hope he'll do so. As I wrote above I started it all as there was the message"This category has become too crowded. It should list very few images directly." I thought I might help, but it seems people prefer a mixed-bag of 500+ pictures to some searching by themselves. In my mind the category ís overcrowded, but I do not have the wherewithal (or, now, the inkling) to do something about that. I often find that "exterior" is taken rather wide, with pictures of an object taken from several streets away included. For me it rather is a close-up of a building. Dosseman (talk) 17:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Done. Please note an exterior is not only a remote view, facade details are as well. --A.Savin 18:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. And in an answer to Mike Peel (above) I wrote "I often find that "exterior" is taken rather wide, with pictures of an object taken from several streets away included. For me it rather is a close-up of a building." So there we do agree (I take many pictures, precisely of details, and found the richer Berlin houses have lovely (if somewhat bourgeois, Biedermeier) decorations. Dosseman (talk) 18:48, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
|
File:Kaiser Wilhelm Gedächtniskirche 0665.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:18, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
|
|
Pictures of little relevance to the main 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! |
Kadı Message 11:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
|
|
Pictures of little relevance to the town 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! |
Kadı Message 11:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
You can do better than this![edit]
Thank you for your uploads from the Alte Nationalgalerie. But filling out the Information-Template like this
| Description |
English: I have no information. |
| Date | |
| Source | Own work |
| Author | Dosseman |
should be below honor of an active Commons Contributor. If you photograph in a museum there is always an information plate right next to the painting. Just photograph it and you don't need to claim that "You don't have information" You are also not the author of the artwork. That is the painter! Have you ever heard about Artwork Template, or Template Art Photo? If you use it you can add the information provided by the museums and you can also differentiate between the copyright status of the artwork and the one of your photograph of this artwork. I am looking forward to more uploads from you. Keep up the good work, but try to do it better! Wuselig (talk) 19:45, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
- I did not realize I had a personal coach in matters common. I find I'm about 10 years older than you, and want to spend my time on sensible things. If you think I'd spend it on filling out silly forms like the ones you suggest, you can wait forever. It would have been nice if you’d taken the trouble of informing me you complain about my treatment of the “Träumerei” picture. I have uploaded its “information provided by the museums” so you can see there was not that much. I do not understand your statement “You are also not the author of the artwork. That is the painter!” . The museum would have stopped me if I started painting on or in it. Or is this a statement of a fact, so obvious, that I knew it before I even entered a museum? The “you can also differentiate between the copyright status of the artwork and the one of your photograph of this artwork” keeps me non-plussed. Luckily my pictures are in well over 120 books, magazines and so forth without my running into trouble with the law, so I guess I knew that part. As for your looking forward to my uploads, it may surprise you I have over 127.000.000 views on a private site, so I do not care a bit about your approval. Please enjoy my work in the future, but don’t ever bother me again. Dosseman (talk) 22:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
- No, you don't have a personal coach. And from your reaction I would recoil if anybody should offer me that job. I see you don't want to bother to understand what I am trying to convey to you. I did change the description of Träumerei according to the information available to you. So yes. I still stand with my statement: "you could do better!" But of course you can also leave the job of improving the description of your uploads to others. I will do so, if I come accross them in my line of work, because I also want to spend my time on sensible things. Wuselig (talk) 11:12, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good division of labour. I sometimes go to extremes to get proper information, but not if I feel the information is widely available. And what I feel relevant obviously is not what you want. So be it. My greatest irritation is that “You can do better than this!” is one word removed from “You must do better than this!” C’est le ton qui fait la musique. Dosseman (talk) 11:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Well, you seem to be enjoying museum photography, so yes, I think it is kind of sad, that you care so little about also labeling these museum photos better. Look at Träumerei once more. I just added the Wikidata entry to the description and see how much more information is automatically added. I also added your image to the Wikidata-item, which makes your image even more easily findable across more Language-wikis. Just think about that. Wuselig (talk) 17:13, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good division of labour. I sometimes go to extremes to get proper information, but not if I feel the information is widely available. And what I feel relevant obviously is not what you want. So be it. My greatest irritation is that “You can do better than this!” is one word removed from “You must do better than this!” C’est le ton qui fait la musique. Dosseman (talk) 11:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- No, you don't have a personal coach. And from your reaction I would recoil if anybody should offer me that job. I see you don't want to bother to understand what I am trying to convey to you. I did change the description of Träumerei according to the information available to you. So yes. I still stand with my statement: "you could do better!" But of course you can also leave the job of improving the description of your uploads to others. I will do so, if I come accross them in my line of work, because I also want to spend my time on sensible things. Wuselig (talk) 11:12, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
|
|
File:Homs Khalid Ibn al-Walid Mosque 3052.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
A1Cafel (talk) 09:26, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi Dosseman,
do you have an possible explaination, why the above metioned image was uploaded by User:Utancan in 2012, while you uploaded the same photo in higher resolution as File:Artvin provincial government 3989.jpg in 2020. Was Utancan your former account? --Túrelio (talk) 08:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Túrelio,
- First let me thank you for the many times you helped me out when I had created a wrong category or a similar problem. As for the duplicate: at my own website, at https://pbase.com/dosseman/image/63525508 , I have shown this picture for many years. The site is popular, and pictures can be downloaded without trouble. I always ask people to indicate I took them, but Utancan seems to think that copying a picture makes it his own work. In some way he did "work" on it. To stress I took it I just uploaded a full size version as an improvement on my earlier Wikimedia Commons upload. I think the Utancan version can be deleted.
- Kindest regards, Dosseman (talk) 10:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. I've tagged the other image as copyvio. In case you felt compelled to upload the high-res version of your image for forensic purposes, but didn't actually wanted it, feel free to revert to the original version. Could you eventually check whether other uploads by Utancan (talk · contribs) were also taken from your website? --Túrelio (talk) 10:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I did not feel compelled, rather, I am uploading full versions of all pictures I published on commons as small size earlier (today doing Malatya). The reason is that they show much more detail.
- I checked the production of Utancan (talk · contribs) at https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages/commons.wikimedia.org/Utancan/all#6 . Luckily his production was small. I found one more picture I took and is claimed to be his own work, i.e. File:Artvin Merkezi Camii.jpg. I did publish my version in commons also, and the two are next to each other at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Artvin_Central_Mosque. Unfortunately his version is used repeatedly, deleting it would kill many links. Could you switch the links that now exist to my (full size, again) version, and delete his version?
- I found other versions, using TinEye, a picture Reverse Image Search engine, wanting to check where he might have found the picture. It is used on several other sites, I very often find my pictures on blogs and such. But due to the size I think he must have taken it from mine. Dosseman (talk) 11:04, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I've duplicate-processed it, which changes at least all on-wiki links and leaves a redirect for eventual external re-uses. --Túrelio (talk) 11:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I saw it, you work very fast (and Wiki seems to have some tools beyond my ken). Thanks. Dosseman (talk) 11:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I've duplicate-processed it, which changes at least all on-wiki links and leaves a redirect for eventual external re-uses. --Túrelio (talk) 11:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. I've tagged the other image as copyvio. In case you felt compelled to upload the high-res version of your image for forensic purposes, but didn't actually wanted it, feel free to revert to the original version. Could you eventually check whether other uploads by Utancan (talk · contribs) were also taken from your website? --Túrelio (talk) 10:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Klazomenian sarcophagi in Istanbul Archaeological Museums[edit]
Hi! I added a few pictures to justify the cat rename. Thanks for checking. file:Sarcofagi, in terracotta dipinta, VI-V secolo ac., da clazomenae (urla, izmir) 01.jpg Sailko (talk) 10:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
_01.jpg){kind=link}
- Hi, I was convinced you were right from the start. To improve things I put in my full size edits, just that extra bit of detail. I have loved this type of sarcophagus ever since I first saw some in Izmir. Dosseman (talk) 10:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
about Ane Hatun Tomb[edit]
Hello Dosseman, I saw your photo uploads about Muratpaşa Camii in Erzurum [1] and I want to ask you this, do you have any photographs of a tomb named Ane Hatun Türbesi in the yard of this mosque? And could you upload here if its possible?
(We wrote an article for Turkish wikipedia titled "Ane Hatun Türbesi" [2] but we have no photos yet here. Ane Hatun or with her original name Ana Saakadze was a daughter of Georgian politican Giorgi Saakadze at 17th century. And they are important figures in Georgian history). Thank you. Rime (talk) 09:22, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Rime, I checked my originals and found I did not have a picture as requested. I usually publish all pictures I take, unless they are duplicates or just bad. I like türbes and Erzurum has some fine ones. Though I might have overlooked this one, an open air type. I see you mention the Erzurum Ansiklopedisi article, which has a picture. Maybe they are willing to share that? Good luck, sorry I could not help you. Dosseman (talk) 09:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello again and thank you for your reply, thanks. Rime (talk) 10:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Dosseman. Just a quick note to let you know that your photo listed above is misidentified. It is not any part of the theater; it is instead the interior of the burial chamber of the Hellenistic heroon on the hillside east of the theater (usually called Heroon I by the excavators, to separate it from the other heroa down in the center of the city). Compare File:Miletos Heroon I interior W wall (1991).jpg. I've moved your photo into the proper category, but I haven't edited the description, since some users are touchy about other people doing that. And of course the file name is also wrong, although as the uploader you can request a rename if you like. It's up to you. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 22:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- I have made the proper changes, and requested renaming. I can be touchy, but mainly when people feed me wrong information. This info obviously is superior to what I knew. So thanks for informing me. Dosseman (talk) 09:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Please do not overwrite files[edit]
--A1Cafel (talk) 08:55, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I was trying to overwrite my own pictures that I earlier published in low resolution with a full size one, as that will provide more detail. I sometimes mistakenly publish another picture, and try to correct that when I find out. In this case it seems I did not notice. I just uploaded the full size version, adding fullsize to the name. As all pictures were my own from the start I think that solved the problem. Thanks for informing me. Dosseman (talk) 09:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
_0143.jpg){kind=link}
Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you![edit]
|
The Photographer's Barnstar |
| Thank you for your uploads about Türkiye! You are making Commons great! Kadı Message 13:37, 3 June 2023 (UTC) |
- Thanks for that (my second) Photographer's Barnstar and your kind words. I have been to Istanbul a month ago, after years of Corona-fear that, however, made me upload lots of pictures to Commons from some of my former Turkey visits. Having lost my fear I hope to both take more pictures and add old ones, touring the country to some extent anew. As I have pictures from 30 years ago many changes become visible, which may be a further attraction. Dosseman (talk) 19:04, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you![edit]
|
|
The Photographer's Barnstar |
| Thank you for taking photos of Türkiye and for presenting the picture of pride in the state institution Anadolu Agency. If you go, we are waiting for you in Sivas too :) --88.236.188.202 19:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC) |
- Careful. Too many barnstars might weigh me down. Dosseman (talk) 07:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
When nominating as duplicate ...[edit]
Hi. When nominating a file as duplicate, please leave the existing {{Information}} template and information intact. Rather than removing the templat, simply adding the {{Duplicate}} request is preferred so administrators have full data available for processing the request. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, Thank you for informing me on a subject I never quite understood. One thing though: I scanned rather than read the information you refer to (partly provided by myself when publishing the original small size). And I noticed that the pictures seemed to be in too many categories. I feel there are people who will put a picture in any category they can think of, and so create a warren of routes to a picture or rather away from it. Categories like Women in Turkey (I think that was with the File:Istanbul Köprülü Complex in 2004 4756.jpg, maybe slightly different text). I find that most annoying. I have seen a picture with a cat (the animal) somewhere in a corner, completely indifferent to the main subject, and promptly someone put it in a some cat category. In particular there are the “city X in march 2021” categorisation I find useless. An example I saw was a 10.000 years old statuette that happened to have its picture taken on a certain date and went into an “Ankara in 20… “ category. For such reasons I tend to delete all and may indeed overdo that. I sometimes move (well, copy-paste) valid categories or text if I think they improve the information content, but if I remember correctly the pictures you refer to were in categories without much value.
- But indeed, I will be more careful, and with interest see what happens when I use the method you propose. So, thanks. Dosseman (talk) 07:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Archiver[edit]
|
Turkish Archiver |
| What a precious archive! It is great to find open access photos of the past ten years of the distinguished buildings of the Turkish homeland. Thanks for sharing. Bjelica (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
File:Ceyhan Azerbaijan friendship monument 5760.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
QazyQazyQazaqstan (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
|
|
File:Ceyhan Azerbaijan friendship monument 5759.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
QazyQazyQazaqstan (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
_0154.jpg){kind=link}
Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 02:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
|
|
Roman theatre building and podium, Side has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
Jmabel ! talk 06:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
|
|
File:Schwedter Straßé 5-7 7879.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
