User talk:Andy Dingley

2007 2008 October, 2009 April, October, November, December, 2010 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December, 2011 2011 January, 2011 February, 2011 March, 2011 May, 2011 June 2011 * 2012 * 2013 * 2014 * 2015 * 2016 * 2017 * 2018 * 2019 * 2020

Discussion Category:Monochrome pictures Kurpark Bad Mergentheim

Hi, you started a discussion at March 8th. There have been no more contributions in the discussion since March 9th. Everything necessary is said. It's required, to get a clear state. You initiated the discussion, it's still your turn! HubiB (talk) 18:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• That's not really how Commons DRs work. There's no time limit, thus they tend to wander on aimlessly for years. If no others, or no admins, happen to take a passing interest. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, that's obviously an easy way to disturb and and run off, not caring about your own action leading to an unresolved state. No, that's not how Commons DRs works, it's maybe how you work without following the obligation of a user feeling responsible for his results! HubiB (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• This is just the way it is. I have no magic ability to summon other editors to comment or resolve it. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, the discussion seems to be ended without further comments. This should be a reason for you to remove your "needs discussion" entry from the category to avoid this blocking like item from existing needlessly over time. Otherwise: It's you who intended to rename, I agreed. So do it! HubiB (talk) 14:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• Commons' poor responsiveness for DRs is a problem, but it's not going to become an excuse for closing DRs how you feel anyway. If you want to get some further opinions on this, I'll ping @Themightyquill: and @Tuvalkin: who are regularly active on DRs and might have time to comment. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Gongs

Dear Andy Dingley, Today you changed Category:Gongs of the Netherlands to Gongs in the Netherlands. That seems odd, because there are 8 similar categories Gongs of [country name], and because of your reason for renaming: "They're located in the Netherlands, but they have no distinct origin, nor cultural connection there." That's simply not true. One of the gongs is used at the Tata Steel Chess Tournament. There is a Tata Steel plant in the same city, Wijk aan Zee. The other 3 photographs are depicting a modern gong, and the photos were made in the Netherlands in 1965. Do you have any evidence to link these two gongs to other countries? If not, I would like to keep both categories as separate entities, and move these 4 photographs back to the old category. Vysotsky (talk) 22:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• there are 8 similar categories That's not how MediaWiki categorization works, by pattern matching. It works by parent categories, which these categories all have in common.

You might also note that the other countries have specific national types of gong, often with specific subcategories, because they each have a long and distinct tradition of using gongs. The Netherlands do not. If we had images of the Rank Pictures gongman Bombardier Billy Wells, or of Pink Floyd's Nick Mason, then they too (famous gongs though they are) would be "gongs in the United Kingdom" rather than of. The UK has no gong tradition either. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Informative. I am glad you're an expert on Dutch gongs. I didn't know the Netherlands had no tradition on using gongs. Thanks! Vysotsky (talk) 00:10, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

• 

  Euwe 1956

• 

  Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands in 1968

• 

  Willem de Koning in 1911

• 

  Adriaen van Ostade (1650s)

• If you're seriously equating the musical traditions of Bali with a town crier's simple noise-maker, then there's little point in discussing this. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm not equating or comparing. This is not about the quality of gong traditions. I'm quoting: "They're located in the Netherlands, but they have no distinct origin, nor cultural connection there" -which is simply not true. I just wonder why you ever started to make a difference between of and in. And I will stop banging on this gong. Vysotsky (talk) 00:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

• The "of" / "in" distinction is a perennial issue. Typically for cars and the like, where there's a clear and obvious distinction between origin and present location. DAF vehicles (as a group) are car makers of the Netherlands, but a photograph of a single DAF in Warsaw is a car in Poland. If I eat haggis in Antwerp, that doesn't make it Belgian. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

That's interesting. So a gong made in the Netherlands, located in the Netherlands, would be a gong of the Netherlands? (Last time I ate haggis was in Edinburgh, 2019.) Vysotsky (talk) 01:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

See you're from Cymru. Love Blaenau Ffestiniog! Vysotsky (talk) 01:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

• That might depend. If we associate "of" with a concept of "origin" (this is largely supported on Commons), then what does "origin" mean? And does that change with the nature of the object? Is a Volkswagen car still German if it's a Czech design, built in Spain? Do the Netherlands have vast gong factories? Turkey does, because they might not have them as part of their musical tradition, but they do have a considerable manufacturing history for hand-worked cuprous alloys (most of the world's cymbal makers are in Turkey, or have their origins in Turkey). But in this case, I know of the Netherlands neither having a musical tradition based on gongs, nor a tradition of making them, so neither would apply. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

• Nor for that matter am I from Cymru. I'm in Cymru, not of it. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

File tagging File:EAW plug wiring teatowel.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:EAW plug wiring teatowel.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:OP}} on file description page. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own. The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:EAW plug wiring teatowel.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Roy17 (talk) 10:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Please

Do not consider my reverts as edit war or any kind of confrontation. If you open Category:Iron beam bridges, in the "blank area" you'll see iron beam bridges sorted by country‎, function and type. The "A-Z area" is for named bridges, hence, Cast-iron beam bridges should go in the middle (at least temporarily). The same principle exists in tens of other similar cases related to the categorization of bridges. If you have any objections or suggestions, please just leave me message instead of making improvisations which make things messy. I'm doing it for days and it's not easy at all, and I don't say everything I did is without a mistake. --Orijentolog (talk) 10:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

It was already sorted to the start (had you not looked and seen this?) Cast iron is not spelled with an asterisk.

Also please don't change the name of template parameters to non-existent values. Even if that value "makes more sense", it's not what the template uses. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

"photographs of Netherlands"

Dear Andy Dingley, Six newly constructed categories have a red link Category:Historical photographs of Netherlands. I'd rather not clean it up, because you constructed it in a very elaborate way. See Category:Photographs by Bert Verhoeff in the Netherlands etc. Could you have a look at it and improve the build-up? Vysotsky (talk) 14:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

It's just a caching issue. If you go to Category:Photographs by Herbert Behrens in the Netherlands you'll see that it links (correctly) to Category:Historical photographs of the Netherlands, even though the (non-existent) category Category:Historical photographs of Netherlands shows it as if there's a link. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2020 (UTC)