User talk:Place Clichy

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Babel user information
fr-N Cet utilisateur a pour langue maternelle le français.
en-4 This user has near native speaker knowledge of English.
el-3 Αυτός ο χρήστης μπορεί να συνεισφέρει σε προχωρημένου επιπέδου Ελληνικά.
de-2 Dieser Benutzer beherrscht Deutsch auf fortgeschrittenem Niveau.
it-1 Questo utente può contribuire con un livello elementare in italiano.
Users by language
Wikisource-logo.svg
Wikisource has a page about this at:

I am Place Clichy from fr.wiki.

















Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Place Clichy!

Autopatrol given[edit]

Commons Autopatrolled.svg

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. odder (talk) 17:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Foreign" churches in Paris[edit]

Merci Place Clichy! La religion est toujours compliqué avec moi. Mais est-ce que on peut changer le nom pour garder la catégorie? --Paris 16 (talk) 14:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Côte d'Ivoire at the 1981 North-South Summit in Cancun[edit]

Hello,

Yes, it took me some time to find-out who every person in the photo was. Here is a link [1] confirming that Foreign Minister Simeon Aké attended and not President Félix Houphouet-Boigny (see second link here).[2] Cheers. Aquintero82, (talk), 13:17, 10 May 2017, (UTC)

Hi,

I found this picture of Reagan with "acting" President Abdus Sattar [3]. He looks very much like the photo from the summit in 1981. Cheers. Aquintero82, (talk), 13:53, 12 May 2017, (UTC)

Orthodox / Eastern Orthodox[edit]

Are you sure this is what we want to do? And so sure that it doesn't need discussion? What about Oriental Orthodoxy, which is distinct from Eastern Orthodoxy, but also falls under the broader heading of Orthodoxy? - Jmabel ! talk 22:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categorization[edit]

Hi. First you add Category:Barbary Corsairs to the cat Slavery in Algeria, then you begin to add the same former cat to the files within the latter cat... Any idea how to make categorization or just a small confusion? Best. --E4024 (talk) 08:49, 17 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@E4024: It's debatable, really. In the absence of a cat dedicated to the w:Barbary slave trade, I thought that some files in Slavery in Algeria, but probably not all, desserve presence in both categories. However, the concepts of Barbary Corsairs and Slavery in Algeria are connected enough imho to justify the category inclusion. I wouldn't go as far as to remove slavery-related files from Slavery in Algeria to put them only in Barbary Corsairs. This would be category diffusion, which is not our case. So I guess it's one of those exceptions where the general rules for category diffusion just do not work. Place Clichy 09:02, 17 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it's debatable then I will revert you and you can open a debate in our Categories for Discussion forum. Bye. --E4024 (talk) 09:05, 17 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@E4024: Which part do you find appropriate to revert? The category inclusion or the file inclusion? Place Clichy 09:29, 17 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Harbourmaster's_offices_and_port_captaincies_in_the_United_Kingdom[edit]

Category discussion warning

Harbourmaster's offices and port captaincies in the United Kingdom 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!


Rodhullandemu (talk) 09:43, 12 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Men of Austria and Men in Austria[edit]

Hi Place clichy, sorry, but wether my french not my english is very good, but it's a difference between People in Austria or People from Austria - the images have all the location in Austria, but it's not sure that the people is coming from Austria - it's only working here - and so the Category:Men of Austria by occupation is so not true. True would be Category:Men in Austria by occupation - or what's your sense about this matter? --regards from Austria --K@rl (talk) 16:34, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Karl Gruber: Hello! I know the difference, and I created People in Austria. However, People by country categories are most often organized in People of XXX (instead of People from XXX or People in XXX) precisely because it would be too complicated to know the nationality of everybody picture in a photograph. In short, it does not matter if they are Brazilian or not, you do not have to worry of calling them "of Brazil". The worldwide renowned café waiters of Vienna are definitely an Austrian landmark, and it is perfectly fine to call them "of Austria" without asking them their ancestry. Place Clichy 16:44, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Category:People from is only correct, if you have a especial people with name, like an actor or a painter or a politician - all the other is not true. A People from can work also in an other country - so it's not good, if we continous the nonsens. --regards K@rl (talk) 16:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Karl Gruber: "People from XXX" is what you say. "People of XXX" is a lot more generic. Adding "People of XXX" to people working in XXX, for instance, is not nonsense. Place Clichy 18:59, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
with People of XXX" to people working in XXX is correct, but not one waiter in the Catgeory:Waiters in Austria‎ must be of Austria, but it's possible, that theare from weach other country. --K@rl (talk) 19:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Same problem here. The images in the category were photos of people taken in Levico Terme, not people of Levico Terme. I've re-created Category:People in Levico Terme and moved the photos back here. I've also put Category:Cecilia Vettorazzi in Category:People of Levico Terme (she was born there) so it's not empty and we don't have to be deleted. Consistency is great but (1) first of all we need consistency between the name of a category and its content and (2) there are a lot of "People in" categories (Category:People in New York City). Both categories can exist. --Jaqen (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jaqen: If you look closely, you will see that I personally created Category:People in New York City yesterday, and many other categories e.g. People by city of location, in an attempt to organise these People in... categories which I found in a very anarchic state. In the process, I have found several People in... categories in the main People by location category tree, which otherwise uses People of... or People from.... It is not always easy to draw a clear line between these categories. You are of course welcome to suggest any improvement to this work. Place Clichy 20:55, 5 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 01:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Subject by century[edit]

I just tried using {{Subject by century}} here: Category:18th century gallery pages by year. I can't seem to make it work. Thoughts? Evrik (talk) 17:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Evrik: 2 things are needed:
  1. You need to remove the century number from the subject parameter: {{Subject by century| subject = gallery pages by year | image = | mothercat = Gallery pages by century | nobc = 1 }}
  2. You need a hyphen in the category name (all of them): Category:18th-century gallery pages by year. I believe that this can be quickly implemented on a large number of categories with a bot work request, as this renaming seems pretty uncontroversial.
I believe that with these corrections the template should probably work better. Place Clichy 21:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's late here. I'll look at this in the morning. Evrik (talk) 04:21, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks![edit]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at Wikimedia Commons.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bilingual Croatian-German signs[edit]

Hello Place Clichey, I removed the cat Relations of Croatia and Germany from the cat Bilingual Croatian-German signs because there are two different things. The plaques are situated in Austria and have nothing to do with croatia ond no less with germany ;-) --regards -- K@rl (talk) Mid Abstond hoidn xund bleibn 09:48, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Catégorisation des sous-catégories de Category:Trilingual signs et autres[edit]

Un panneau indicateur italien-frioulan-allemand-slovène en Italie.

Bonjour, Place Clichy. Je tenais avant tout à vous remercier pour vos récentes contributions aux catégories des divers signes et enseignes multilingues. J'aimerais cependant souligner que les signes trilingues ne sont pas un sous-type de signes bilingues (ni vice-versa) et devraient plutôt être catégorisés sous Multilingual signs. Nous tâchons également d'éviter ce type monstruosité catégorielle, puisqu'une telle surabondance nuit à la navigation. Je propose traiter les signes bilingues et les signes trilingues comme des concept distincts, mais tous deux sous-types de signes multilingues. Nous aurons ainsi nettement moins de catégories à créer et à surveiller. Pour simplifier, accélérer et systématiser la catégorisation de ces nombreuses catégories, j'ai créé le modèle {{Cat multilingual objects}}. Il n'est pas tout à fait terminé, mais sa syntaxe peut déjà être disséminée et nous pourrons ajuster la catégorisation d'un point central par la suite. --Iketsi (talk) 10:55, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Iketsi: Bonjour ! J'ai effectivement essayé de catégoriser un certain nombre d'objets multilingues en fonction des langues. C'est évidemment un premier jet, que j'envisageais de modifier par la suite, par exemple en supprimant plus tard certaines catégories parents qui ne seraient plus nécessaires. Je suis d'accord avec votre idée d'essayer de conserver une structure commune et cohérente entre ces catégories. C'est une bonne idée d'utiliser un modèle pour le faire. Par contre je pense que des panneaux trilingues, par exemple allemand-italien-slovène, méritent d'être considérés aussi comme des panneaux bilingues italien-slovène ou allemand-slovène. Cela m'a l'air plus utile en terme de navigation, et aussi parce que l'utilisation du modèle {{GeoGroup}} dans ces catégories permet de générer des cartes incluant les sous-catégories. Si l'on génère une carte des panneaux utilisant l'italien et le slovène, il paraît utile que les panneaux utilisant aussi une troisième langue y figurent aussi, ce qui n'est possible que s'ils sont dans une sous-catégorie. Par ailleurs, pour certaines langues relativement rares, il me semble plus utile d'"ignorer" ces langues dans la catégorisation : par exemple, ce panneau routier en quatre langues est, à mon avis, plus utile dans une catégorie comme Category:Trilingual German-Italian-Slovene road signs que dans une hypothétique Category:Quadrilingual Friulian-German-Italian-Slovene signs.
Après mûre réflexion, je dois vous donner raison. L'argument {{GeoGroup}} est plutôt convaincant. Je vais ajouter les catégories supplémentaires au modèle afin d'uniformiser la catégorisation. --Iketsi (talk) 12:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
N.B. J'ai remarqué qu'il y a souvent des légendes multilingues sur des cartes postales, comme celle-ci par exemple, quadrilingue italien-français-anglais-allemand. Pensez-vous qu'il soit intéressant de catégoriser ces légendes par langue ou combinaison de langues ? Il existe déjà Category:Multilingual postcards. Place Clichy 10:49, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excellente suggestion : {{Cat multilingual objects|4|postcards||English-French-German-Italian}} --Iketsi (talk) 12:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"other version"[edit]

Please be careful how you use "other version". It is for different versions of the same photo (e.g. a different print from a negative, or something lightened, or color-shifted), not for a similar but distinct photo. - Jmabel ! talk 14:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jmabel: are you sure? For instance, when there are several photos of the same painting or work of art, I believe they are really other versions of the same thing. Users will probably benefit from being proposed links to other (sometimes better) versions to illustrate their articles. Place Clichy 15:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Arguably for a work of art (though even there I would consider making a category instead). But definitely not for two different pictures of a building. - Jmabel ! talk 18:27, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Iranian culture in the UK[edit]

Category Iranian culture in the United Kingdom is not necessary related to Iranian diaspora, it includes Iranian art in British museums, Iranian cultural and art exhibitions in the UK, showing Iranian movies in British cinemas, etc. So please stop with irrational changes. --Orijentolog (talk) 12:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Orijentolog: Thank you for your input. It is in general a good idea (and common practice) to bring together all aspects related to heritage of one country (Foo) in another country (Bar), in order not to keep them mixed with the rest of the bilateral relations category (e.g. Category:Relations of Iran and the United Kingdom) which has plenty unrelated stuff. That's why the best place for Fooian culture in Bar is probably as a child category of Fooian diaspora in Bar. It may not be optimal, but it's not irrational changes. Place Clichy 14:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now I understood that irrational may also be offensive, no hard feelings please, it's just my donkey English. :) Regarding the issue, my plan is to open Cultural relations of Iran and the United Kingdom in few minutes, to include Iranian culture in the United Kingdom and categories like Anglican churches in Iran, etc. I'm aware that not all belong to Cultural diplomacy, but still I find it useful. What do you think? --Orijentolog (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Orijentolog: That's not a bad idea, but it would be strange to treat Iranian-British relations differently from other cultural bonds throughout the world. I don't think there are other Cultural relations of... and... categories. You are correct to say that not all cultural links between two nations and peoples go through organized diplomacy. I suggest you to have a look at Category:Foreign cultures in the United Kingdom for inspiration. Place Clichy 15:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm aware of it, but I still believe that it's a good solution and a fine example for future recategorization of other relations. Take a look at it now: Relations of Iran and the United Kingdom, and compare it with stuff like Relations of the United Kingdom and the United States and Relations of France and the United Kingdom. The former look much better and compact, thanks to two by subject categories. Beside military and cultural relations, it's also possible to further open economic and sport relations... --Orijentolog (talk) 16:23, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What clogs the two categories you mentioned is in great part the categories of Politicians of country A with politicians of country B, or more widely People of country A with people of country B. If we managed to organize these a little bit better, that would definitely be an improvement. Place Clichy 16:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's for sure. By the way, opening economic and sport relations isn't my original idea, for example English Wiki has en:Category:China–United States economic relations and en:Category:Bilateral sports relations of France. --Orijentolog (talk) 18:28, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Funny thing is I actually created en:Category:Bilateral sports relations of France and en:Category:Bilateral sports relations some time back, precisely as a way to populate bilateral relations categories in an organized way. There are also a lot of military relations categories too. Place Clichy 22:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Haha, I didn't notice that before. :) Now as a Croat I'm becoming frustrated... three World Cups and Wikimedia categorization - always a step behind France. ;) --Orijentolog (talk) 18:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]