User talk:MPF

Useful tags

• {{rename|Bettername.jpg|filename mis-identifies species}}
• {{low quality}}
• {{Category redirect|Correct cat}}
• Category renaming and pic moving at: User:CommonsDelinker/commands

Archive

• Old stuff up to end 2007
• Old stuff up to end 2008
• Old stuff up to end 2009
• Old stuff up to end 2011
• Old stuff up to end 2012
• Old stuff up to end 2013
• Old stuff up to end 2014
• Old stuff up to end 2015
• Old stuff up to end 2016
• Old stuff up to end 2017
• Old stuff up to end 2018
• Old stuff up to end 2019
• Old stuff up to end 2020
• Old stuff up to end 2021
• Old stuff up to end 2022
• Barnstars

Wiki Loves Folklore 2023 in India is on!

Hello MPF,

Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore India Team!

Wiki Loves Folklore is an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons, this campaign invites participants to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folktales, folk games, folk religion, mythology and many more. Let's help to protect and develop our intangible Indian culture, which consists of customs or active expressions that we have acquired from our ancestors and passed down to our offspring.

How to Contribute?

The dates for the submission in the photography contest on Wikimedia Commons are from 1 February to 31 March 2023. Probably you are wondering how you can take part. It’s simple: grab a camera, record an image, video or audio under the folklore theme, create a Wikimedia account and start uploading! To learn more about the rules, check out our Project page on Wikimedia Commons.

Below are the exciting prizes which you can win internationally an locally. (Contributors can win both International and Local Prizes as well )

International Prizes

• 1st prize: 400 USD
• 2nd prize: 200 USD
• 3rd prize: 100 USD
• Top 10 consolation prizes: 10 USD each
• Best Video prize and best Audio prize: 25 USD, 25 USD (each)
• Top uploader prize for images: First Prize 100 USD, Second prize 50 USD
• Wiki Loves Folklore Postcards to top 100 Uploader's

Local Prizes

• 1st prize - 15000 INR + WLF Goodies
• 2nd prize - 10000 INR + WLF Goodies
• 3rd prize - 5000 INR + WLF Goodies
• Consolation : Top 5 winners - 1000 INR each + WLF Goodies
• Wiki Loves Folklore Certificate for Winners

(Disclaimer : The above prizes for International and Local Contest will only be disbursed in form of gift card or voucher format only)

If you are interested in participating in the photography campaign, start photographing and collecting media of your local culture and upload them on the photo campaign happening on Wikimedia Commons.

For more information about rules and prizes of the contest, refer the project page. For any questions, reach out to us via support@wikilovesfolklore.org.

You have been sent this message because you have been a part of Wiki loves Folklore in its journey in the past 5 years, lets continue to embrace our folk culture and drive through the path towards creating the largest database collection of folk Images on the internet

Warm regards,

Gaurav Gaikwad (User:Rockpeterson)

Coordinator for Wiki Loves Folklore India.

museum specimen

Hi, about this; as the description says, it was not a museum specimen, it was a specimen I personally found dead (like on the ground, during a walk). Syrio posso aiutare? 18:01, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

@Syrio: Thanks! I realised you had found it dead, but assumed you had preserved it as a specimen for the photos, from the way it is presented. I have made a new category for them, which I hope is OK! - MPF (talk) 00:19, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I just took the photos! (well actually I kept it for a while along with other dead bugs because I wanted to encase them in resin, but then I couldn't manage and it was too expensive and they got mold so I gave up and threw all out of the window XD

Yes this is fine, thanks! -- Syrio posso aiutare? 08:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Aquila chrysaetos

About your changes to Aquila chrysaetos and Aquila chrysaetos in Sweden. Bengt Nyman (talk) 01:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Bengt - I fear they were all misidentified! Two were Buteo buteo, identifiable by their wing pattern, and the rest were all juvenile Haliaeetus albicilla, identified by their heavy bills, and wing and tail structure. Let me know if you need any more information. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

All four pictures are of the same bird. Buteo buteo is not a possibility. Juvenile Haliaeetus albicilla is a possibility but unlikely based on the wing shape. Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC) Bengt Nyman (talk) 01:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

P.S. The older Buteo buteo photos were mislabeled and I trust that you have recategorized them. The Aquila chrysaetos photos is another story for which I wish you could present better comparisons. Bengt Nyman (talk) 00:57, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bengt Nyman: - apologies for the delay in replying!

First, yes, I did recategorise and reformat the two Buteo buteo files (File:A7R01076 (51398263346).jpg and File:A7R01099 (51399000599).jpg) to add the correct names. You can check my edits by looking at the file histories for the images.

Second, I can assure you, the other four (File:NZ8 1228 (52947948471).jpg, File:NZ8 1212 (52947352002).jpg, File:NZ8 1227 (52947351857).jpg, File:NZ8 1229 (52948092059).jpg) are very definitely young Havsörn, most likely two years old (third calendar year, i.e., hatched 2021). There are several plumage and structural details that confirm this:

(1) The axillary ('armpit') feathers are pale/white. This applies to young Havsörn up to 4 years old; they are always dark brown in Kungsörn.

(2) The tail feathers are pale/white with dark fringes. This applies to young Havsörn up to 3 years old. In Kungsörn, juveniles have a white basal half and dark brown outer half (see e.g. File:AguilaReal4.jpg), while adults have an all-dark tail (e.g. File:AguilaReal4.jpg)

(3) The body feathering is mottled with white. This is a feature of young Havsörn 1.5 to 3 years old; it is not seen in newly fledged, nor older Havsörn, and never (not at any age) in Kungsörn.

(4) The tail structure, shortish with a triangular tip, fits young Havsörn. In Kungsörn, the tail is longer (equal to the wing width), and square-ended (when closed) to rounded (when fanned), never triangular-tipped.

(5) Less easy to visualise in all circumstances, but the wing is approximarely equal width along its length (roughly straight trailing edge), as is typical in Havsörn. In Kungsörn, the wing is narrower at the base, and broader at the outer secondaries, giving a gently curved trailing edge.

I hope this will help you understand why I changed the identities, and remain convinced your photos show a Havsörn! Best wishes, MPF (talk) 23:59, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:Requests for unblock

I noticed that some of the Unblock requests did not count as the templates were placed on the user page rather than the talk page which seems like an oversight

I have moved these unblock requests onto the talk pages of the users in question. A lot of them never seen to never have been blocked in the first place so its just a matter of procedure for someone to decline them Trade (talk) 13:23, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Bark

Why https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Maryhill_Museum_-_Kwakiutl_headring_01.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=780256947 ? That is the material this is made of, and there is no more specific subcat available. - Jmabel ! talk 16:43, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

It's not cedar bark; that's a translation error. I'll add the correct identification and find a more appropriate category when I've got a bit of time later this evening - MPF (talk) 17:44, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: - since there wasn't a suitable category, I've created Category:Thuja plicata (bark) for it - MPF (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

File:MSU V2P2 - Felis silvestris caudata drawing.png

File:MSU V2P2 - Felis silvestris caudata drawing.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Yours sincerely, Komarof (talk) 06:45, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Komarof: - agree, it was a copyvio; I've deleted it now. Thanks for spotting this! - MPF (talk) 10:47, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt action. I'm afraid, Category:Mammals of the Soviet Union with all its subcategories consists entirely of images from the same non-free source. --Komarof (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Komarof: Thanks! I've deleted all the ones you tagged as speedy delete; the ones you put in for deletion review I've left for now, in case anyone else wants to comment. - MPF (talk) 15:05, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Ara macao head

Please do not add incorrect categories to my images. You added captive to my image for some unknown reason. Have you changed categories on any other of my images? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Charlesjsharp: Which image are you talking about? Please add a link to it, so I know which one you are referring to. Categories are refined all the time, as the ever-growing number of files need to be re-sorted to finer scales of detail; sometimes errors can be made given the scale of the task. I need to see the individual case to see if it is an error or not. - MPF (talk) 10:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

This one. I guess it was a good faith edit, but am cross as it is not an isolated incident: You've made an error before]. I pride myself on not taking images of captive animals, so please take more care editing the categories on my images. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Charlesjsharp: - thanks! Yes; but as before, there is no way to tell (and particularly not from the filename or thumbnail) that it is a wild bird: as a general rule, wild parrots are timid, and won't allow approach close enough for a head-shot like this. Yes, I am aware you don't take images of captive animals, but when dealing with a category with 200+ images, how can I know which are yours, without opening each individual image separately, and each time scrolling down to see the photographer's name? With now 95 million files on Commons, there just isn't the time to inspect every single one in that detail. That's why Cat-a-lot exists, to help categorise large numbers of files quickly. The overwhelming majority of close-up bird head-shots are of captive birds, except for a few human-habituated species like Mute Swan. So while unfortunate, occasional categorisation errors like I made here are incredibly hard to avoid completely. The best way to avoid them is to use more informative filenames; if it had been e.g. "File:Scarlet Macaw (Ara macao cyanopterus) head, wild, Copan.jpg", that would have been enough to make me pause and not use Cat-a-lot, but inspect the file individually for any subcategorisation. - MPF (talk) 13:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure you try to do good work, but you musn't make naive assumptions like this. Experienced wildlife photographers can often get closer to an animal than in a zoo and use bigger lenses. It amounts to vandalism; not good behaviour for an admin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Charlesjsharp: - I do try to, but it just isn't feasible given the volume of work that needs doing; it has to be semi-automated, or nothing would get done at all. Do please remember, one has to rely on the thumbnail and filename to make decisions. How am I supposed to recognise your wild photos among a sea of hundreds of pet and zoo shots, with nothing in either the filename or thumbnail to distinguish it? We are all volunteers here, and do our best in stretched circumstances, with new images pouring in far faster than can be dealt with individually. Take a look at Category:All media needing categories as of 2021, Category:All media needing categories as of 2022, Category:All media needing categories as of 2023, - 650,000 files from just the last 2½ years with no categories at all... how will they get categorised? - MPF (talk) 15:10, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Most images without categories are not worth your effort. Just leave them Who cares? Commons should ignore the junk and not antagonize those of us who spend hours identifying, editing, uploading and categorizing images. Write a bot that ignores images that already have a binomial species name and some location category. Ignore all images with FP, VI and QI assessments - then your work will be less disruptive. I now have no idea how many of my categories you have changed in error. I use cat-a-lot all the time and it is time-consuming when I create a new category and recategorize images. And I have to check each one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Charlesjsharp: Hi Charles - I wish I could "ignore the junk"! I can't, as other editors don't, so it ends up in the head species categories, and needs to be moved on to appropriate subcategories. Same goes for files with a scientific name and location, too - as just one example, one of the most frequent edits I do is moving files labelled "Columba livia" from Category:Columba livia into Category:Feral pigeons as they are not wild Rock Doves. And excluding FP, VI and QI doesn't work either, as captive birds frequently get those awards too - for many species, more often than wild individuals do (I have in the past made the suggestion that wild + geolocated should be a condition of eligibility for awards for bird, etc., pics, but others rejected that proposal). Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 14:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ardeotis nigriceps, Desert National Park, Rajasthan, India 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Michielverbeek 05:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Cortex Frangulae

Hi! You moved File:Cortex Frangulae by Danny S. - 001.JPG and File:Frangulae cortex 060103.jpg from Category:Frangula alnus to Category:Frangula alnus (herbarium specimens). I thought that "herbarium specimens" refers to herbarium vouchers collected for scientific (botanical) purposes. These photos shows imho dried cortex used as a medicine, I think better category would be something similar to Category:Uses of Berberis vulgaris. Regards, Salicyna (talk) 07:04, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Salicyna: - a herbarium is a repository for any preserved dried plant material for any purpose; that is the original sense (in late mediaeval times, primarily for medical use, as in these examples), it doesn't have to be specifically for modern botanical research purposes. If there were more files, then a 'Uses of' category might be worth making; with just 2 files, I didn't think it was worth subdividing, but go ahead if you want to. - MPF (talk) 08:50, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Adamawa Turtle Dove, Fulladu West, Gambia 04.jpg

File:Adamawa Turtle Dove, Fulladu West, Gambia 04.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Chamaemelum (talk) 21:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Adamawa Turtle Dove, Fulladu West, Gambia 06.jpg

File:Adamawa Turtle Dove, Fulladu West, Gambia 06.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Chamaemelum (talk) 21:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

File:African Green Bee-eater, Fulladu West, Gambia 2.jpg

File:African Green Bee-eater, Fulladu West, Gambia 2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Chamaemelum (talk) 21:43, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Sitka spruce

... would have been my guess just based on location, but I figured I wouldn't be doing anyone a favor with a guess. Thanks for confirming! (File:Water droplets on spruce.jpg)- Jmabel ! talk 02:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Glad to help! I did at first think Picea × lutzii (the hybrid between Sitka Spruce and White Spruce), but while it does show possible signs of some White Spruce characters, they're not strong; for this one you need to go a bit further inland to the north/northeast (around Skagway) with a more continental climate, to see it as a significant component. - MPF (talk) 10:13, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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. 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!

Affected:

• File:Aquila (1960-1961) (19752839491).jpg

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:47, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Helmeted guinea fowls in Black Muscat park

Just an FYI - those are wild guinea fowls - Black Muscat park isn’t a zoo. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 07:11, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Can you pinpoint the precise location of Black Muscat Park within the green area on this map, please? I think you'll find that they're not wild ;-) - MPF (talk) 08:26, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, you are correct - they are an introduced species but they are living in Black Muscat Park. They aren’t part of a zoo. Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 14:25, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Can I ask why you define them as domesticated? They are not looked after by anyone. They aren’t part of a zoo and look after themselves in the park without any assistance from people. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 14:31, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Because they originate from escaped domesticated birds; they're not a naturally occurring wild species in the region. I checked a couple of Australian field guides too, and they only cite established feral populations for a few Great Barrier Reef islands off the Queensland coast, no mention of any feral populations anywhere around Sydney; apart from the Queensland birds, they only cite e.g. "Domestic escapes may persist here and there" (Simpson & Day 8th ed.). If these had been part of a documented established feral population, then a new category for feral populations could be created, but they don't even appear to be that. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 16:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see! Thanks, I had a feeling I had missed something. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 18:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Author request

Hello MPF, I am requesting the deletion of User:Judekkan and have it redirect to this userpage as that account has been abandon, and have Category:Barnstars made by Judekkan deleted; files have been migrated to Category:Barnstars made by Jerium. Category:Barnstars made by Jerm can also be deleted as those files have been migrated, User:Jerm is already a redirect to User:Judekkan. My identity has already been confirmed via checkuser, see link: [1], thank you and my apologies for the inconvenience. - Jerium (talk) 14:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Done! I've also moved the two relevant user talk pages to User talk:Jerium/Archive 1 and User talk:Jerium/Archive 2; I'll add links to them to your current talk page - MPF (talk) 14:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Jerium (talk) 14:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Pericrocotus flammeus & Pericrocotus speciosus combined distribution map.png

Hello! You changed the file and its name. I have two questions:

1. You gave no source for your changes. The only source in the file description is IUCN which is correct for the older version. This irritates any user and especially me as you are an administrator and should know better.
2. Why don't you just ask me to correct the map with a better source? I'm an active user, I correct maps all the time. I don't want to be treated as if I wouldn't be there or approachable. NNW 11:01, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi NNW - the source is IOC, which is the avian taxonomic authority followed by Commons, Wikispecies, and most wikipedias. The split is from several years ago, you can see mention of it at e.g. en:Orange Minivet and en:Scarlet Minivet. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 13:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Now I know what your source was but no other user of this file. You still gave no explanation for not mentioning this in the file description or the file disk or giving me a note before you changed everything so that I could correct the map. And (new question on my side) why is this map an "outdated bird distribution map" although you changed it? You see: The main problem is a lack of information and communication. This whole discussion could have been avoided if you just have contacted be before. NNW 12:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I get where you are coming from on contacting – but if everyone stopped to ask permission of original authors before doing any modification, and then waiting days / weeks / months / years for a response before being able to carry out an edit, nothing would ever get done. It defeats the whole purpose of a wiki, which is that things can be changed as and when needed, without having to ask or wait. Even just stopping to check if the original uploader is still active or not, adds substantially to scarce editing time. My own experience of asking original authors for extra information (typically asking for essential information on locations of photos where the uploader gave no details), is that in the great majority of cases, there is never any response at all, that asking is too often just a waste of time.

Of 'outdated bird distribution map', it means that it does not show the distribution of one currently accepted taxon, but a combination of two (or sometimes more) taxa that have been found not to be the same, perhaps not even each others' closest relatives. Quite often, species are split when they are shown to be paraphyletic, with one or more former subspecies being shown to be more closely related to other species, than they are to the species they were formerly included in. This makes these maps rather useless, as they don't show the relevant taxa on their own, and misleading when used in wikipedia articles where their mapping of two or more possibly unrelated species isn't conspicuously obvious in a small thumbnail. - MPF (talk) 16:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the spirit of a collaborative project: Don't waste time on other users. Like naming sources is a waste of time, too. Sorry, that's too much ignorance for me. Bye. NNW 18:38, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I've added the source update (yes, I should have added that before! Apologies for omitting that before) - MPF (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Science Competition 2023

Logo for Wiki Science Competition

Dear uploader of European Science Photo Competition 2015 and Wiki Science Competition 2017, Wiki Science Competition 2019 and Wiki Science Competition 2021, we would like to remind you that Wiki Science Competition 2023 has started in almost all the countries.

If you want to take part in WSC2023, please consult this page. Only some national categories are associated to competitions with local prizes.

If you are an expert user, we remind you that images uploaded within the deadline can be included in any case in their national category even if not uploaded with the main interface.

If you already took part in a country that has completed its upload phase (such as Russia), please consider improving the description in English of your files (click on the edit button), since such description is what the international jury will use to evaluate them. World finalists will be finalized after March 2024.

Sorry for bothering you and have a nice wiki.

---

Message discussed here. If you do not want to receive these messages in the future, please unsubscribe from this list

---

Social media: Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Wiki Science Competition
Hashtag: #WSC2023 #WikiScience #WikiScience2023

---

Alexmar983 (promotion team and academic committee) using MediaWiki message delivery--19:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Why renamed?

I'm certainly not going to undo [2], but what permissible criterion for a rename did this (and other similarly-named files) meet? I see nothing actively inaccurate about the initial name. - Jmabel ! talk 21:59, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel - it fits under criterion 2, "To change from a meaningless or ambiguous name to a name that describes what the image particularly displays" (my italics); generic gulls to naming the individual gull species gives greater precision. See also criterion 2 note 2.5, 'Including ... Generic category rather than specific item'. I will admit it is perhaps a borderline case, I very nearly didn't bother (and don't always in similar cases). Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

FWIW, I would not have moved in this case. If you look at the examples on the page you linked, none of them approach this. - Jmabel ! talk 01:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Cyanistes_caeruleus_(low_quality)

Cyanistes caeruleus (low quality) 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

What has happened to the images that were categorised in it? Have they been deleted (I don't recollect seeing any deletion requests?), or recategorised out of it into cluttering up other subcategories that they were originally removed from so weren't "in the way" of other better quality photos? - MPF (talk) 09:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) probably better asked on the CfD, or at least with a ping. - Jmabel ! talk 18:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

File:Dead Stream Swamp MI.jpg

File:Dead Stream Swamp MI.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 23:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)