User talk:JopkeB

Archive: User talk:JopkeB/Archives

Autopatrol given

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 and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hedwig in Washington (talk • contribs) 6 jan 2019 16:58‎ (UTC)

Category:Streekbezoek_Juliana_aan_Voorne-Putten_en_Rozenburg_26-4-1951

Streekbezoek Juliana aan Voorne-Putten en Rozenburg 26-4-1951 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!

Themightyquill (talk) 14:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Category:Anonymous_people_of_Spijkenisse

Anonymous people of Spijkenisse 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!

Brianjd (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

---

Hi JopkeB, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Groet, Ellywa (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For all your contributions, ordening the mess FotoDutch (talk) 07:38, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Koninklijke familie

Beste JopkeB, Ik zie dat jij bij diverse "Oranjes" een categorie toevoegt "Royal Family of the Netherlands". Ik ben geen expert op het gebied van koninklijke families, maar bijv. over Christina staat in NL-Wiki: "Voor het huwelijk was door de regering - conform de wens van Christina - geen toestemming aan de Staten-Generaal gevraagd. Christina werd daardoor uitgesloten van erfopvolging en was vanaf haar huwelijksdag geen lid meer van het Koninklijk Huis." Maar goed, zij was ooit wel lid, dus die categorie past bij haar. Maar zijn haar kinderen dan nog wel "Royal Family of the Netherlands"? Vysotsky (talk) 13:38, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Beste Vysotsky, ja, ik ben inderdaad aan het proberen de categorieën over de familie Van Oranje cs duidelijker te stroomlijnen en aan te vullen. En ik denk eenoog in het land der blinden op dit gebied te zijn (geen super-expert, maar weet er wel het één-en-ander van). Mijn toelichting op je vraag/opmerkingen: Er bestaat verschil tussen de Koninklijke Familie en het Koninklijk Huis en het Huis van Oranje-Nassau.

• Tot de Koninklijk Familie behoren alle verwanten van de familie Van Oranje-Nassau, ook zij die niet tot het Koninklijk Huis en/of het Huis van Oranje-Nassau horen. Dus ook de prinsessen Christina en Irene en hun nakomelingen. Net als bij een "gewone" familie.
• Het Koninklijk Huis is zeer strikt bij wet geregeld: alleen de huidige Koning (of regerende koningin), diens echtgeno(o)t(e), zij die gerechtigd zijn tot de troon tot in de tweede graad, plus zijn moeder.
• Het Huis van Oranje-Nassau bevat in feite alle nakomelingen van Willem van Oranje en hun echtgenotes, die de titel Prins(es) van Oranje-Nassau mochten/mogen dragen. Tegenwoordig wordt deze titel nog mondjesmaat verstrekt, alleen aan hen die bij hun geboorte gerechtigd zijn tot de troon.

--JopkeB (talk) 14:12, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:Flickr images by location

Flickr images by location 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!

--Multichill (talk) 20:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Grey or gray?

I noted that you have changed the spelling of grey to gray in a category. Both spellings are used in different parts of the world and there is no general agreement that the US spelling has to be preferred against the UK spelling. Although I have no preference in this specific case, I recommend that you do not spend to much time and effort in americanising Wikimedia Commons, because this will not be useful for those who prefer the British spelling. NearEMPTiness (talk) 05:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear NearEMPTiness, there was a discussion about harmonization categories with grey and gray in the name, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/01/Category:Gray. The result was, that:

1. There should be one word for all categories about gray/grey, in accordance with the rules for categories, see Commons:Categories#Universality principle.
2. The name for the main category stays Gray. That means automatically that all subcategories should have "Gray" in the name and not "Grey".

So I now am changing all categories with "grey" in the category name into "gray".

By the way, I would have preferred "Grey" as well, as you can read in the discussion, but there was no majority for. Perhaps next time the British spelling will prevail in a discussion.

--JopkeB (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply and clarification. I agree that harmonisation is an important benefit to all users.

• This is a terrible change. WP:ENGVAR is a much more sensible approach. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

  What do you mean? "Consistency within articles" would mean for Commons that all subcategories of -in this case- Gray/Grey should have the same word in the title, see also Universality principle. That is what I am doing. How would have liked to do it otherwise? JopkeB (talk) 02:49, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

• Maybe read ENGVAR and the backstory to it?

The point of ENGVAR is to avoid ping-pong edit wars as to which spelling is "right". So it says that strong national ties can be followed (You renamed "Grey vehicles in London" anyway) and that most of all, don't make gratuitous changes just for the sake of doing it, because that just encourages edit wars and bad feeling. As you've done here.

Here's a clue as to how MediaWiki works (because so many people still keep arguing the opposite): it doesn't care about string-matching between members of a category. There is no need whatsoever to arbitrarily rename things, just so that they all "fit" in a parent category, or as matching siblings. This is also against most policies (like ENGVAR) and most factors of usability. The "grey/gray" distinction is tied far more closely to the origins of each specific term (i.e. "Grey vehicles in London"), not some invented need for consistency. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

• This is Commons, not EN-Wikipedia. Commons has its own set of rules and one of them is the Universality principle: all subcategories should have identicial names, in this case "gray" and not "grey". Unlike EN-WP, the rule on Commons is: "local dialects and terminology should be supressed in favour of universality".
• I did not rename all those categories on my own, but there was a discussion preceding it, open for over three years, so not overnight. And the outcome was that the spelling on Commons should be "Gray" and not "Grey". Consequently all subcategories with "grey" in the title should be renamed. So why would there be a edit war? I expect this is a once in a lifetime change, because it is a lot of work and there alway should be held a new discussion.
• All those people who still take offense of "Gray", should be aware that there are a lot of not-native English speakers on Commons (perhaps the majority), who not only have to put aside their own native language on Commons every day (not only for gray, but for all words and terms, so I think complaining about one word shows that those native English speakers are not aware of their privilage position), but also are not caring a bit about one or the other spelling, just wanting one spelling for all categories involved. Because it is very handsome to have one spelling when you are searching for categories, parent categories and so on, and not frequently have to try whether you should use a parent with the other spelling. I guess this is one reason why the Universality principe was implemented.

JopkeB (talk) 11:20, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

A section added by one editor. The same editor who wanted to replace "aircraft cockpits" with "driving cabs of aircraft" and then rewrote the whole category policy page to justify his invented and undiscussed "universality principle". Because some people just can't realise that the whole world doesn't speak German. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

That was 9 years ago. And untill now this principle is still valid. Untill it is legitimately removed, I shall keep this rule. JopkeB (talk) 12:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Category:Surnames from Belgium

Surnames from Belgium 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!

You specifically created Category:Surnames from the Netherlands which is related. --Ricky81682 (talk) 07:49, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Public Transport

Hello, Strictly speaking the images that are in Category:Public transport need to be in "Public transport in X" however moving them all to "Buses" is nonsensical and could be seen as vandalism, Please be careful and please seek consensus before making such huge changes, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

No, this is not nonsensical. I saw well over 1.000 files in Category:Public transport, most of them buses, so far too many. Since Category:Buses is a subcategory of Category:Public transport, I moved them there. I think that eventually they need to be categorized in "Buses in X", which will be a subcategory of "Public transport in X". I did not mean to do vandalism at all. JopkeB (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi JopkeB, I'm struggling to put it into words but imho public transport and buses are generally 2 different things but either way I think it would be better to seek a community consensus on this, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I rely on the category structure in this kind of cases. Otherwise I can ask permission for every edit I make for overcrowded categories.

In this case "Buses" is a subcategory of "Public transport" (via Category:Public transport by mode and Category:Bus transport). For me this makes sense. I see only files that are about buses used for public transport. It is very rare that a bus is owned by a private party and only used by that members that private party, I can only think of the bus of the royal family of the Netherlands and I cannot even find a photo of it in Commons.

If you think the category structure is not right, please make a discussion page for it, and if you are right, the files in "Buses" will get extra parents. For now, I leave it as it is. JopkeB (talk) 15:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@User: Davey2010, I just checked my mail and saw that you reversed over 3.000 of my changes. I was stunned. I made the changes in good faith and with good intentions, to relieve Category:Public transport, a main category that was (and is now again) overcrowded. Is your behaviour constructive? Do you own this category and may no one else touch the files in it? Then you'd better put a note in the category to first contact you about intended changes that someone wants to do. JopkeB (talk) 17:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

" Is your behaviour constructive? ", Yes - I disagreed with your changes so reverted as I am entitled to do so, The onus is now on you to seek consensus for your changes. –Davey2010^Talk 18:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

This discussion is being continued on Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/04/Category:Public transport. --JopkeB (talk) 08:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Verwijderen van categorie

Dag JobkeB, ik zag dat je de categorie 'Jazz musicians from France' bij David Texier hebt verwijderd. Ik had met opzet die daar gezet omdat hij niet alleen pianist is maar ook o.a. componist. Ik heb het nu opgelost door er twee categorieën aan toe te voegen. Wouter (talk) 09:04, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

OK, Dank voor het herstel, mooi opgelost. JopkeB (talk) 09:07, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at 18 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)