Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy.
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!
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!
The dates on the back are confusing: handwritten is 25 - XII - XV. The stamp is Torino, 18-19, 26 . XII, 36 XV. The poststamp is 20 cent? I have a suspicion that it is year 15 of the election of fascists in the parlement 1921 (1936 - 15 = 1921). This should make it the year 1936. Smiley.toerist (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The "Fascist Era" (E.F.) started on 28th October 1922. Then XV E.F.: from 28th October 1936 to 27th October 1937. So 25 - XII - XV = 25th December 1936.--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 17:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
Hi, sorry, I cannot understand why you made category Tatranská Štrba (train station). Oficial name of the station is Štrba. Especially when you moved only some photos into that new category. --PetrS. (talk) 06:08, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The two categories "Štrba (train station)" and "Tatranská Štrba (train station)" already existed. Tatranská Štrba is used for the meter gauge part of the station while Štrba for the mainline part of the station. However there where also meter gauge pictures in the Štrba category wich I moved. I have made Tatranská Štrba a subcategory of Štrba. It is already a subcategory of "Ozubnicová železnica Štrba - Štrbské Pleso" the small track railway line. To avoid confusion the category "Tatranská Štrba (train station)" should be renamed. I wil make a suggestion.Smiley.toerist (talk) 08:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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!
There is no way that a subdivision of the station category like this is warranted - it's not as if the tram part is separate like at Beckenham - it's just another platform. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Any station category can be further subdivided, as an extreme example Category:Antwerp Central Station. These subcategories have to be practical and usefull. In this category there only one picture (File:All change - geograph.org.uk - 225392.jpg) wich is dual tram/train. All the rest have only tram or the rest of the station as subject. I could name the category "tram platform" only this is to specific for some pictures. (File:Tram 2558 at Elmers End.jpg but I classify this one as between tram stops). The big advantage of having this subcategory is that this can be placed under the tram stop categories and other tram categories. There are to many non-tram pictures to classify te whole Elmers End station category as a tram-stop. You can of course classify the pictures individualy as a tram stop but then you mess up the category Tramlink stops where everything is subcategorized by individual tram stops. Eventualy Tramlink stops en trams will have to be categorised by routenumber as most big tramnetworks. For the vehicles I dont suppose you have a problem with "Trains at Elmers End" and "Trams at Elmers End" subcategories. I am aware that the Commons adapts to local taste for categorisations and I respect that. I would like to know how other UK Wikipedians think about these issues. Therefore I would like to discus this in the Village Commons.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ik kwam een Flickr stream tegen met allemaal foto's van treinen en d8 he, dat zijn leuke bruikbare foto's en heb ze vervolgens overzet naar Commons. Ware het niet dat ik geen flauw benul heb hoe ik sommige moet categoriseren. Heb je misschien zin om me met een paar foto's te helpen? Ze staan in Category:Images uploaded by Natuur12 (clcean up2) en wanneer ze in de juiste cat staan kan de categorie "Category:Images uploaded by Natuur12 (clcean up2)" verwijderd worden. Als je wilt helpen graag want volgens mij zitten er best wat waardevolle foto's tussen. Natuur12 (talk) 14:51, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ik heb al een flink aantal Belgische opnames verwerkt. Van sommige kan ik de locatie niet achterhalen. Hij is meer "materieel" man dan een station en spoorlijn liefhebber.Smiley.toerist (talk) 23:23, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dank voor de tip en de hulp. Treinen zijn niet mijn ding maar ik geloof wel dat dit soort fotocollecties waardevol zijn voor de toekomst. Natuur12 (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Het is nu gereduceerd tot 336 beelden. Veel beelden zijn van trein excursies naar bijzondere plekken in het Luikse industrie gebied. Kom je dus niet zo vaak tegen.Smiley.toerist (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alles is nu teruggebracht tot 138 beelden. Ik heb vermoedelijk alle Europese beelden eruit gevist. (misschien nog een paar uit de Baltische staten) Je moet nu nog een Japanner en een Amerikaan vinden om de rest grotendeels weg te werken.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Het zou heel veel helpen als Category:Photographs by Peter Van den Bossche in cronologische zit. Want dan zitten alle beelden van dezelfde reis bij elkaar en is het bepalen van de locatie gemakkelijker. Nu is alles door elkaar volgens de alfabetische volgorde. Voor die 3 diesellocomotieven die in 1999 ergens in het oosten zijn.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for a couple of postcards of my hometown! But I find some problems with Plaza del Caudillo in Valencia.jpg. That square is the main one in the city and it has had many names. Originally was know as Bajada de San Francisco. Later was renamed Plaza de Emilio Castelar. I think that the name was kept during de Civil War, but when the Francoist troops arrived (April 1939) it was changed to Plaza del Caudillo. About 1979 it was named Plaça del País Valencià and in the 1980s it became Plaça de l'Ajuntament. So in the 1930s it wasn't called del Caudillo, as Franco didn't use that title yet. I think that the picture is from the 1950s as the Ateneo Building, which was built in 1953, can be seen. The other picture, the trams, is correctly located (that corner still exists and hasn't changed much) and the date could be right or wrong, I don't have a clue. Other user from Valencia could help you with that (Joanbanjo, for instance). B25es (talk) 05:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The two pictures where joined together so the dating is similar. I based my dating on the cars, but I suppose at that time Spain didn't import many cars, so you could have a Cuba-effect (only old cars in use). The building places the images in the 1950s. These are postcards without any identifying marks so I suppose these where official post office postcards. This classifies them as anonymous but unfortunataly not old enough for the eu-anonymous (70 years) unless Spain has a different PD age. Theoreticaly the tram picture could still be from 1930s as the postcard publication date can be long after the picture is taken. The editors often reuse an old picture collection. User:Smiley.toerist|Smiley.toerist]] (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
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!
Thank you for your wonderful map of the tramlines in Liege in 1939. It is really hard to find enough information or online sources to make a half way decent attempt at a translation based english language entry on the Liege trams before 1967.
(But yes, that is what I have been trying to do. Bien entendu, suis fou.)
PLEASE can you do something even more and tell me what the colo(u)rs means?
Black lines = RELSE (?main line trains)
Blue lines = TULE (?tramlines or ?trolleybus routes)
Red lines = SNCV electric (
Green lines = SNCV non-electric
I tried starting to guess but ... no, I think I've been guessing it wrong.
I am sorry I cannot write to you in Dutch. But I can write:
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!
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!
Betreft: File:Stoomtrein Dort in stoom 2014.jpg
Wat betreft de dubbele tractie: Aan beide zijden van de trein stond een stoomloc omdat op het onderhavig traject geen keren mogelijk was. Sowieso klopt dus het verhaal niet. Bovendien gaat het erom wat op foto staat, er staat waarschijnlijk ook nog elektrisch materieel ergens maar ook dit doet niet ter zake. --Henk Bezemer (talk) 19:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Het kan zijn dat mijn geheugen mij in de steek laat. Wij kunnen beter de tekst weglaten. Het kan ook zijn dat een stoomloc het opgaf en dat men noodgedwongen een dieselloc in zette. Veelal eist Prorail trouwens dat betrouwbare tractie in de buurt is.Smiley.toerist (talk) 20:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mijn geheugen heeft mij in de steek gelaten, de foto's die ik heb met twee stoomloc's dateren uit 2012, in 2014 ben ik niet geweest. Wat de tekst betreft laat ik helemaal aan jou over, nu durf ik niet meer.. :-) Succes.
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!
Hallo,
I cannot understand what should be this "Südtirol Bahn": the railway is usually called "Ferrovia del Brennero" in italian, or "Brennerbahn" in German.--Arbalete (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Its not a railway line and does not pretend to be, but it falls under the category (Rail transport in Trentino-South Tyrol). Maybe better to rename it `rolling stock of Südtirol Bahn`. There are similar categories such as (Rail vehicles of TER Alsace) within (TER Alsace).Smiley.toerist (talk) 23:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
File:River crossing for coal.jpg 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.
Bij mij is het: you see what you get. Het is in 1983. Dat het misschien later hernummerd is is niet van belang. De meeste kijkers die de nummering achtergrond niet kennen begrijpen er niets van. Ik ook niet tot je mij op deze hernummering wees. Zeker als ene een subcategory is van de andere. Is de oude nummering minder waard dan de nieuwe? Waarom geen twee aparte categorieën als er ook een beeld is met de nieuwe nummering? (maar die is er niet --> verwarring)
Het is hetzelfde voertuig, onder en ander kleurtje (maatschappij) en met een nieuw nummer. Een doorwijscategory is niet aangewezen. Daarom maakte is de oude nummering als een subcategory van de nieuwe. Met een beetje text uitleg is het misschien beter. --H2O(talk)14:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Beste Smiley.toerist !
Eerst en vooral mijn dank en felicitaties voor de prachtige netplannen over de NMVB, ik heb ze in mijn opzoekingen al vaak opgeroepen. Daarbij zijn me enkele (kleine) foutjes opgevallen, dit is zeker geen kritiek.
NMBS lijn 124 : Lillois ipv Lillios
NMBS lijn 124 : Baulers ipv Baujers
NMBS lijn 60 : Lebbeke ipv Lebbele
NMBS lijn 60 : Mollem ipv Molhem (Molhem is oude spelling)
NMBS lijn 161 : gezien de kaart in het NL is, zou hier eigenlijk Bosvoorde moeten staan ipv Boitsfort
NMVB lijn AL (Aalst) : de tram kwam niet tot aan de statie van de NMBS. Terminus van de AL was aan de Corneliskaai.
De lijn lijkt achterom het station gereden te hebben: dienstregeling 1933: Asse - Aalst - Oordegem: In Aalst: Overhamme, Zeebergbrug, Dam, Baudewijnkaai (begin/eindpunt sommige ritten), Nieuwbrugstraat, Koophandelstraat, Koolstraat, Paddenhoek. Het lijkt erop dat de tram het kanaal overstak bij Nieuwbrugstraat. Er is daar trouwens een Tramstraat. Ik vermoed dat Baudewijnkaai later is hernoemd naar de Corneliskaai. Ik wacht even met de kaart aan te passen tot dat dit helder is.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:44, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Beste Smiley.toerist ! Ik wou nog efkes terugkomen op de lijn AL. Ik heb vroeger (van 1978 tot 1984) langs deze lijn gewoond en heb meerdere buschauffeurs gekend, die voordien nog trambestuurder of ontvanger waren op de tramlijn AL, die me allemaal verteld hebben, dat de AL zijn terminus aan de Pierre Corneliskaai had en niet aan de statie. Ook de niet geëlektrificeerde lijn naar Wetteren begon daar. Die liep dan effectief door de huidige Tramstraat, dan links in de Nieuwbrugstraat en zo over de Dender. De schuine kant van het huis aan de hoek van de Tramstraat en de Nieuwbrugstraat herinnert eraan, dat de tram daar zijn bocht breed moest nemen. Ik bezit trouwens ook een foto waar men de AL onder de brug van de spoorweg aan de St-Annabrug ziet onderdoorkomen. Wanneer U dit op de kaart verwerkt, vergeet dan niet het ook op de kaart van de NMVB Oost-Vlaanderen te veranderen. Beste groetjes, Spm9153 (talk) 22:57, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
NMVB lijn Leerbeek - Edingen : Kokejane ipv Coquiane (Kokejane is deel van Herne)
NMVB lijn W (Waterloo) : Monument Gordon ipv Monument
NMVB lijn W (Waterloo) : Waterloo, Eglise ipv Waterloo, Kerk
NMBS lijn 147 : Sauvenière ipv Sauveniere
NMBS lijn 142 : Eghezée ipv Eghezee
NMVB lijn Beauvechain - Jodoigne : La Bruyère ipv La Bruyere
NMVB lijn Brussel - Leuven : de verkorte dienst W (Wezembeek) ontbreekt.
NMVB lijn Brussel - Leuven : de Leuvense stadsdienst 2 liep enkel tot Leuven Terbank, niet tot Tervuren. De electrische dienst Vossem - Tervuren had geen nummer, noch letter.
Ik heb het zo overgenomen uit de Rail Atlas vicinal, blad 40, Leuven 1940, De lijn 2 doorstreept rijdt tot Terbank en lijn 2 tot Tervuren.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
NMVB lijn Leuven - Diest : de verkorte dienst T (Tielt) ontbreekt.
Verder stel ik me de vraag of het niet wenselijk zou zijn, bij de electrische lijnen tussen () ook het nummer van het spoorboekje te vermelden.
Ten slotte nog een algemene vraag : waarom hebben de kaarten van Henegouwen andere kleurcodes als die van de andere provincies ?
Beste groetjes, Spm9153 (talk) 19:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
De kaarten van Henegouwen zijn veel later gemaakt met andere technieken. Groen was lastig te gebruiken met Openstreetmap kaarten als achtergrond. Het is de bedoeling de verschillende detailkaarten samen te voegen, de schaal is immers dezelfde. Het is mij alleen niet gelukt om samen te voegen met fotoshop. De kaarten zijn een afdruk van de betrokken fotoshop lagen. De andere provinciekaarten zijn handwerk op basis van een GTF spoorkaart detail fotos. Voor de rest informatie gebruiken van oude kaarten en die intekenen met de spoorlijnen als kader. De namen kan ik redelijk simpel aanpassen.Smiley.toerist (talk) 19:51, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I used the terminusses for this line though the bus only goes to Charleroi-Sud on Sunday.
But if you want to use the official name then it's 365a.
--Dldwg (talk) 16:50, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think I can remove the in-service photos and put them in the right folder: MIVG trolleybus line 3/De Lijn trolleybus line 3/De Lijn bus line 3 ?
As for the photos taken at the depot, we can place them in the vehicle folder or in the line folder. I'd rather place them in the vehicle folder as the photos taken at the depot are not giving much informations on the line, however we can place them in a "MIVG van hool AG280T at nameofthedepot depot" this category would be part of the line folder.
I put the n°3 bus line in this category as well as in the bus category due to it being the successor of the trolley line.
However as De Lijn and the MIVG have only put in service 1 trolley line, I didn't created a MIVG or De Lijn trolleybus lines category and I put them in the bus lines category.
Also, what do you think if we sort the lines depending on their company, line number and length instead of using the Ghent tramline 1 which is vague as the lines have far evolved since the MIVG ?
This would also avoid having all the photos in one folder.
As I did for the trolley line. If we take the 1st Ghent line, we end up with 1 main folder Ghent tramline 1 and different sub-folders:
-MIVG tram line 1
-De Lijn tram line 1 (1991)
-De Lijn tram line 1 (date where extensions were opened)
As for the 3rd line we can place a cat see also in each sub-folder for easier navigation.
2004: The line numbers where reduced to the line number 1 with the use of destination boards
The original tramline 3 (until 1969) was replaced by the buses 30/31 and then in 1989 by trolleybus line 3 until 2009.
Line 4: Before 1984 it was Sint-Pietersstation - Korenmarkt - Muide. From 1984 on it took over the tram line 10 Sint-Pietersstation - Muide (via Rabot) and took over the tram line 1 between Korenmarkt and Moscow. As with tram line 1, this tram line has also known the partial variants 40, 41, 42 and 43.
For the history of line numbers you can consult the Dutch articles: nl:Tramlijn 1 (Gent) and nl:Tramlijn 4 (Gent). The biggest risc of confusion is with tram line 10:
I would suggest to rename (MIVG tram line 10) to (MIVG tram line 10 Sint-Pieters Muide). Trams with line numbers 10, 11 and 12 (after 1984) I would classify as line 1 and explain in the category description wat is going on. As far as I know their are no pictures of these lines, but they my turn up in the future.Smiley.toerist (talk) 14:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Look at this revision, please. I didn't managed this movement. I'm cleaning redirected categories only, because they should be empty. Look at effects of your edit here, please... Is it what you would like to achieve?
There is a major difference between ´in a country´ and ´of a country´. The first one is a pure geografic classification. All vehicles present in the country whatever their origin. The second one means original from that country, but it does not mean it has to be present in the country. The Sovjet Union is no longer, so al pictures taken after 1991 must be ´of the Sovjet Union´ meaning Sovjet origin. Only pictures taken before 1992 taken ´´´in´´´ the Sovjet Union can be classified as such. (Maybe with the exception of out of use vehicles in a museum) You should treat the Sovjet Union the same way as Austria-Hungary or any other ex country. It is preferable to use the Russian categories for most cases of geografic identifation, as their is no posible confusion wathever the date. If the vehicle is of Sovjet Union (built/origin) you can use the category of the Sovjet Union. These can then be photografed anywhere in the world. Aother example: File:Herzele t'Uilekot en buurtspoorwegstation-3.jpg I cant classify this under (Trams in Brussels) as this is in Herzele, but I did put it under (Old and heritage trams from Brussels). The use of the word ´from´ clearer in this case.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:01, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with the redirect, most images should remain in the category of the Sovjet Union see arguments above. I started a discussion in the Village Pump: [3]. Maybe the category should be renamed: Vehicles from the Soviet Union. You really cant have recent images of vehicles in an non-existing country!Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Smiley.toerist: you should talk to User:Verdy p who has moved the category. You can change its placement, but don't put files in redirected categories, please.
I removed the redirect so it is no longer a redirected category. I asked for a rename. In the other category most are old pictures or pictures of Sovjet era vehicles in museums (in ex Sovjet Union).Smiley.toerist (talk) 14:34, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
Is mij ook opgevallen. Maar zie vergelijkbaar [4] De drukker moet in de tijd flink hebben zitten knoeien. Stukken tekst zijn afgesneden aan de linkerkant en de achterkant is ondersteboven als je de kaart links rechts omdraait. Die moet gedacht hebben als de voorkant maar klopt, moet de achterkant alleen bruikbaar zijn. Dordrecht heeft alleen een paardentram gekend. Fouten op briefkaarten komen vaker voor zoals in File:Amsterdam Hoogesluis.jpg. Als je Hogesluis in Amsterdam opzoekt kom je op een heel andere plek uit. Wel in de buurt maar toch. Ik vraag mij trouwens af of de opname aan de voorkant van H.J. Tollens (1864 – 1936) is. www.regionaalarchiefdordrecht.nl. Mijn vermoeden is dat briefkaartpapier is herbruikt voor andere opnames. zie nummer 73 in http://www.dordtsekaart.nl/venvdwd.html.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At the same time in Lille, France the other end of the opened connection: The two flags hung verticaly. The French flag: File:Bandera francesa.jpg, The Dutch flag: File:2008-04-30 oude st mauritius silvolde met vlag.JPG. Both flags have the same colours (Red, white, bleu) but in different order and orientation. (Dutch: Red, white, bleu in higher, lower order) French: (bleu, white, red, from pole end to flag end). In Antwerp both Belgian and French flag are shown in normal position with vertical colours.
Helaas, ik heb volkomen ongelijk :-) Inderdaad heeft de Belgische vlag ook "staande" banen.. Ik zal voortaan wat beter oriënteren. --Bezeh.nl (talk) 15:15, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Smiley.toerist,
I just discovered your Image Alsdorf Poststrabe 2016.jpg. I really like it but I'm nearly 100% sure, it is not taken at Alsdorf Poststraße but at Alsdorf Annapark.--Trockennasenaffe (talk) 12:53, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Re:Motivation for removing dating categories?[edit]
The answer is simple. Before my edits, there was overcategorization. There shouldn't be any images in the categories like Category:May 2017 in Romania while there are more precise date categories. All images should be placed in the Category:May 2017 Romania photographs or even better more precise in the full date category. So I do that. Look now to all date and Romania categories in 2017, from January to December: Category:May 2017 in Romania. Now there is a order. All images are placed in the precise full date Romania categories like Category:Romania photographs taken on 2017-05-23. So that's all. --Halavar (talk) 10:30, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I overlooked the hidden categories. I see now you removed the upper redundant category level. I would be nice if aditional local categories such as '2017 in Focșani' are created, but thats long time work. Such tings need to be done comprehensively. (Then all pictures of Focșani to be year categorised)Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:56, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Horse-drawn carriages in Austria-Hungary[edit]
Hi Smiley.toerist. I see you have created this new category but do you understand that because you have done that you must finish its tree right up to the end. If you cannot do that I plan to revert your edit. OK?
The reason for reverting your edit is that you have broken the system and I am trying - over days of work so far – to put it back together. Please would your revert your edit if you are unwilling to create all the categories for this "new" country. Thank you, Eddaido (talk) 09:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As a rule al South-Tirol images from before 1919 are also put into the Austria-Hungary categories. The regional categories are no problem. South-Tirol was not part of Italy, but of Austria-Hungary empire. After WW I the region was annexed by Italy. I created other Austria-Hungary categories such as Category:Photochrom prints collection (Austria-Hungary). I will look upp the tree to make it complete.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:23, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No because for me a country is also defined by time. In South-Tirol everything from before 1918 is Austria-Hungary and after that Italy. The region switched countries. Otherwise you can use the presentday country. Under wich country wil you classify images of the Crimea? Ukraine, Russia or the Sovjet Union? In most cases one takes the easy way out and just use the local Crimea categories.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't read And understand the last sentence of your last message. (vide "I will look upp the tree to make it complete.") It would be so much simpler to leave the place in whichever nation it is at present. There are so many former arrangements very like Austria-Hungary all round the world recognising them makes this categorising very difficult. I look forward with interest to see what you achieve. If you come up with something rational there's no use in me complaining any further. Lot of typing for you though. Eddaido (talk) 10:40, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is in practice not that great. The number of images/files from before 1919 in the 'annexed' region are limited. All the rest and current images can all use Italy categories.
Yes, good point (time or period) and always well understood. I'd like to see political re-arrangements accounted for but to do so would mean an enormous inflation of categories. e.g. Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia . . . Have you adjusted the categories at issue to suit your views? If you haven't may I suggest you identify but feed back e.g. South-Tirol to Italy just because that is the current arrangement. Otherwise carrying your plans to a logical conclusion means creating a new country for the region of your concern and a large number of new categories - I suspect you are unaware of the sheer volume of categories, I look forward to seeing that. Eddaido (talk) 11:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not American (or European) and there was a chill about South-Tirol that I liked when I've passed through. Do you think this topic should be discussed where a consensus of quite a number of editors can be reached? Eddaido (talk) 11:28, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Sovjet Union, Ottoman empire are not really problematic as they divided themselves up in new countries and the presentday countries can be used. Only really specific things such as maps have to connected to the earlier countries. I see more problems with moving borders such as between Germany, Poland and Russia. There are two separate categories for Category:Königsberg (German period) and Category:Kaliningrad (Sovjet union, Russia, it was attached to Russia in Sovjet times after occupation) Its not even the same population or language, most Germans where expelled. The reality is often messy.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:54, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I quote "Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Sovjet Union, Ottoman empire are not really problematic as they divided themselves up in new countries". I read that to mean Czechoslovakia you want divided up. Your response ("Of course there are Czechovakia categories") leaves me very puzzled. And then at the end you add "There are no hard rules but we do the best we can."?? Eddaido (talk) 11:26, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Lets start again:
In principle the presentday countries in the 'by country categories' are used unless it can cause confusion for historic images. (99 % of cases)
Slovakia was a region within Czechoslovakia. It is stil Slovakia also in earlier times. If you go further back to 1919 it was part of the Austria-Hungary nation. There is no confusion because 'Slovakia' refers in this case to a 'historic' region within Czechoslovakia and Austria-Hungary.
With annexation of a region by another country, there is a clear break in the nationality of the region. After 1919 the South Tirol region is no longer Austria-Hungarian (Austrian part) but Italian.
If a subject is clearly linked to a specific country (also historic) the country category is used. Examples are flags, symbols, maps, banknotes, poststamps, national companies, etc
Within the Commons there is no authority to impose rules. (Wih the exception of the WMF about license matters. Wich files can be uploaded) Rules and practices evolve gradualy as 'best practice' with a maximun of freedom, so there is a lot of variation. When there is a conflict it can be resolved with a voting procedure within the community. But mostly a concensus develops. So the rules stated above is my view of best practice. That is why I wil move the discussion to Commons:Village Pump for the input of others.Smiley.toerist (talk) 18:38, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, (first section) no problem to me, never disputed. Your problem is you (incompletely) re-categorised a historic image of South-Tirol to Austria-Hungary. The principles on which you made that edit is what needs public debate (see my suggestion to you made a long way above) and I look forward to that debate. Eddaido (talk) 11:17, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I asked this question as someone on the T2000-forum asked for it. However you may have made a mistake, as you took this photo in Brussel here. Here is the forum topic.
Dldwg (talk) 13:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dag, ik aarzelde om deze sub-categorisatie te doen, maar het is essentieel. Er zijn echt te veel foto's om te sorteren
... en in waarheid ben ik een beetje lui !! Dank U. Groeten, Julien -- Nanzig (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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!
Hier (Trouw, 9 december 1947) nadere informatie over de twee dan nog te leveren PCC's [in het artikel 'P.P.C.' genoemd], met uitleg over waarom ze juist op lijn 8 en 9 zouden worden ingezet. Als de berichtgeving van februari 1948 juist is, en dus dit bericht daadwerkelijk bevestigt, dan móeten er ergens foto's zijn. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 11:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]
De foto wordt overigens ook in De Waarheid van 3 februari 1948 gebruikt, waar de ingebruikname te Den Haag nog geen feit wordt genoemd. Op 4 augustus 1948 wordt in dezelfde krant in een artikel over nieuwe motorwagens gemeld: "Dit zijn dus nog niet de indertijd aangekondigde P.C.C.-cars", maar dat kan wellicht ook verwijzen naar een bericht over de verwachte 1949-PCC's. Het blijft schimmig, en ik weet niet zeker of die proef daadwerkelijk in Den Haag heeft plaatsgevonden totdat er foto's opduiken of anderszins hard bewijs. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 12:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Dank je voor de informatie. Het beeld moet inderdaad op de tramlijn naar Tervuren zijn geweest. Het Haagse gebeuren is inderdaad nog mistig. Ik ga de 1948 nog eens nalezen. Vreemd dat dit Brussels beeld door journalisten wordt gebruikt. Ik vermoed dat dit beeld de enige gemakkelijk beschikbare beeld was voor journalisten. Ik denk dat er verwarring was met andere tramtypes (de andere bestelling van HTM, die wel is doorgegaan). Hoewel er in 1948 weinig tramhobbyisten waren die ook nog de tijd hadden om foto's te nemen, zou er in de NVBS-beeldbank, toch beelden van moeten bestaan. Mijn voorzichtige conclusie is dat er in 1948 nog geen PCC trams in Den Haag rondreden.Smiley.toerist (talk) 21:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
It took a long time but I have reached the 15 thousand uploads. (There is no cheating with automatic uploads and every file is manualy checked) And there are a lot of scans wich takes a lt off work in image editing and research in finding out what was pictured and dating. The first own slides are from 1979, I did not takes notes and my memory is imperfect.
Would you mind if I re-upload a new version of your map with the same OSM background I used for the other ones and rename it Verviers tram network map + date as for the others ?
I'll keep the SNCV lines on it of course and your author credit line.
'Verviers tram network map 1950.svg' in your style and the SNCV lines. Replacing old version files is not done unless they are absoluutly useless. This way there is more choice.Smiley.toerist (talk) 16:02, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.
As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.
Bedankt. Ik heb even nagekeken voor Haarlem. Het werkt behalve dat ik onder 1993 in Noord Holland ik 1993 in Haarlem niet terugvind. (nu wel: De backoffice heeft even tijd nodig) PS: Niet nodig om in het Engels te corresponderen. Dat kan je aan de taalkennis van de gebruiker zien.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:35, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
J'ai vu que tu possédais l'indicateur SNCB de 1933, est-ce que par chance tu aurais les horaires des lignes du tournaisis et si oui est-ce que tu pourrais les uploader svp ça m'aiderait énormément pour l'article fr:Tramway de Tournai, je met la liste des lignes avec leur n° de tableau de 1931 :
Merci !
Tu n'as qu'un tableau 401 ? C'est bizarre car normalement la ligne est censée aller jusqu'à la Grand Place et le Cimetière Sud.
Concernant la question sur les indicateurs je ne peux qu'être d'accord avec toi sachant même qu'une partie est bilingue de base et comme tu dis c'est le même contenu.
Un énorme merci pour les indicateurs, ceci dit, est-ce que tu pourrais me dire ce qui est marqué sur le tableau 399 en bas à droite stp, si ça t'intéresse par la Gand-Place tu avais avant 1930 uniquement la ligne Tournai - Hertain qui passait, en 1931 il y a également la ligne Tournai - Wez-Velvain qui a été mise en service en 1930 et ces deux lignes ont deux sens de circulation par la GrandPlace dans un sens et par les boulevards dans l'autre, et avec l'électrification de Tournai - Hertain et les autorails sur Tournai - Wez-Velvain le double sens par la Grand'Place es rétabli. Dans Le rail en Tournaisis, Freddy Lemaire et Jean Simonet admettent que c'est à cause de la traction vapeur qui ne savait pas monter la côte de la rue de l'Yser, mais ça ne m'étonnerait pas que ce soit à cause de la fréquence des passages plutôt.
Maintenant aussi le tableau 420. Est que la ligne 411 Mainvault - Quevaucamps n'est il pas Tournaisian? Le tableau 422 est la connection avec St-Ghislain. Je ne retrouve pas Grandglise dans les tableau 411. voir File:Buurtspoorwegen West-Henegouwen.png. Pour un service electrique le service 409 vers Rumillies est tres maigre avec aussies des services de autorails.Smiley.toerist (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Salut, merci pour les tableaux !
Alors étonnement non, on pourrait se dire que Ath - Flobecq non plus d'ailleurs mais dès le début cette ligne partage une section avec Tournai - Ath d'où peut-être ce rapprochement, son exploitant est le même (TUV) et son capital 99 va être fusionné avec celui de Tournai tandis que Mainvault - Quevaucamps semble avoir été conçue comme une ligne Mainvault - Quevaucamps - Quiévrain et la dernière section ne sera jamais réalisée qu'entre Quiévrain et Pommerœul.
Pour le 409 vers Rumillies, il n'est électrifié que le 9 février 1934, la ligne est exploitée apparement en mixte vapeur/autorail et de ce fait l'autorail qui est plus rapide doit attendre un peu à Rumillies Solitude "stilstand" pour compenser cela.
Volgorde van bestanden in categorie via datering[edit]
Dag, Smiley.toerist. Ik zie dat je druk bezig bent bestanden op datum te plaatsen in categorieën door aan de categorietoewijzingen een jaartal toe te voegen, je doet dat echter ook (veelvuldig) bij bestanden waarvan de bestandsnaam begint met dat jaartal, zodat het voor de ordening totaal zinloos is (tenzij je wilt anticiperen op een mogelijke wijziging van bestandsnaam, die echter telkens niet voor de hand lijkt te liggen). Omdat je ook door mij geüploade bestanden zo tagt met een datum, zie ik dat voorbijkomen en ik begrijp dus niet waarom je dat doet: het is nutteloos, en het gaat ook volstrekt voorbij aan de bestandsnaam die ik niet voor niks zo heb gekozen, namelijk om ze in categorieën gelijk op datum te laten sorteren. Mijn vraag is dus: waarom doe je dat en waarom ga je ermee door als ik al eens gemotiveerd heb teruggedraaid? Groet, Eissink (talk) 21:46, 6 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Ik heb trouwens in het verleden al eens gevraagd om de optie om in categorieën te sorteren op opnamedatum (ofwel datum van kunstwerk) en op uploaddatum (zodat makkelijk is na te gaan welke beelden onlangs zijn toegevoegd), een functionaliteit die toch niet moeilijk te realiseren lijkt, maar het is kennelijk te veel gevraagd of anderen zien het nut niet van die superhandige toevoeging. Als die mogelijkheid er zou zijn, dan zou jouw werk helemaal totaal overbodig zijn. Eissink (talk) 21:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
In een categorie zijn er veel bestanden van verschillende bronnen, sommige met datum vooraan of niet. Als er al een jaartal vooraan staat maakt het niet of ik een jaartal er achteraan plaatst. Alleen wil ik wel consistent zijn: overal een jaartal plakken of niet. Dit om uploaders aan te moedigen om het systeem te handhaven. Dat belet niet dat er toch regelmatig onderhoud gepleegd moet worden. Het is mij echter zeker niet de moeite waard om hier ruzie over te hebben. Ik laat in het vervolg de numerieke namen met rust (mits ze met de datum te maken hebben). Op datum is een manier om station bestanden te sorteren, maar er zijn ook andere zoals type treinmaterieel. Zo zou ik wel bijvoorbeeld alle Fyratrain plaatjes bij elkaar willen hebben zelfs als ze niet op dezelfde datum zijn genomen. In het algemeen vind ik de precieze datum alleen van belang als ze met een bijzondere dag (event, bijvoorbeeld marathon) te maken hebben. Voor de sfeer maakt het echt niet uit of het op dag 20 of 30 van de maand is genomen. Daar raakt ik soms lichtelijk geïrriteerd van personen die voor alle opnames per dag willen klasseren. Als je alleen op ongeveer een jaar zit te zoeken is het een ramp als je alle dag subcategorieën moet doorploeteren in plaats van overzichtelijke jaarcategorieën. Gelukkig kan ik dat omzeilen door de bestanden in andere tijdscategorieën te plaatsen, zoals 'jaar in provincie' of 'jaar in rail transport in the Netherlands' i.p.v. 'Netherlands photographs taken on xxxx-xx-xx'Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Misschien reageerde ik wat te gepikeerd, ik wil er ook geen ruzie over hebben. Velen hier hebben een soort ordeningstik, een aangeboren autisme wat dat betreft, anders begin je ook niet aan dit soort verzamel- en ordeningswerk, en iedereen heeft zijn eigen tiks, ook ik. Ik bekijk altijd al de wijzigingen op mijn volglijst en deze begreep ik eigenlijk gewoon niet: ze hebben geen praktische werking, gezien de bestandstitel. Doe het maar gewoon zoals het je goed lijkt, dat doe ik immers ook, en het kan geen kwaad. En gelukkig is er geen maximum aan het aantal toe te voegen categorieën: zo is er toch ook gewoon een Category:Fyra?
Ik zal nog eens nadenken over een goed gemotiveerd verzoek om de bestanden in een categorie makkelijker doorzoekbaar te maken, dat zou toch breed in een behoefte voorzien, dunkt mij.
De categorieën 'Netherlands photographs taken on xxxx-xx-xx' vind ik wel aardig trouwens, omdat het onder meer een mooi beeld geeft van het weer op een bepaalde dag, door het land heen bekeken. En als zo'n categorie werk heeft van vele fotografen, dan kun je er soms bijna zoiets als een tijdsgeest of een algemeen sociaal gemoed van die dag uithalen, afgemeten naar bijvoorbeeld de onderwerpkeuze, maar ook afgemeten naar wie er die dag wel en wie niet heeft gefotografeerd etcetera – beslist niet onaardig. Groet, Eissink (talk) 00:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
De 'Netherlands photographs taken on xxxx-xx-xx' fan gebruikt een script robot en hoeft daardoor niet veel handwerk aan te besteden. Bij sommige Britse categorieën zie ik ook datumsorteervelden die ingevuld worden door scripts. Ik ben met je eens dat er veel verschillende zienswijzen zijn over categorieën zijn. Ik hanteer de principe dat zoals ik er geen last van heb, ik geen actie onderneem of kijk hoe ik ermee kan werken. Helaas stel ik vast dat bij veel zoekopdrachten de bestanden gevonden worden door informatie in de bestandsnaam of omschrijving i.p.v. een categorie. Ik ben veel tijd kwijt, als ik weer een beeld wil toevoegen, om ontbrekende categorieën toe te voegen en ander werk uit te voeren op de plaats waar mijn beeld gaat uploaden. Praktisch kunnen kan de gemeenschap misschien een paar dingen afspreken bij stationsbeelden:
zodra er genoeg treinfoto's zijn een subcategorie aan te maken type: 'Trains at train stations in the Netherlands'. Deze dan liefst sorteren op datum en standaard 'Jaar in rail transport in the Netherlands' categorie toevoegen. Voor de architectuurbeelden over stationsgebouwen en andere niet spoorse zaken is de datum van minder belang.
In de bestandsnaam minstens het jaar te vermelden, tenzij de bestandsnaam voldoende specifiek is. (Ik zet zelf een jaar achteraan in de bestandsnaam en een oplopende nummering om onderscheid te maken. Ik probeer de nummering onder de 10 te houden, door andere elementen te specificeren). Vergeet niet dat bij Google search meestal ook op jaar wordt gezocht.
Zo specifiek mogelijk de treintype categorieën invullen, evenals andere details zoals stationsklokken, seinen, overwegen, treinpersoneel (staff), trappen, fietsrekken.
Indien er voldoende materiaal is subcategorieën voor trams en aanvullende voorzieningen zoals busstations. (kijk naar Amsterdam centraal)
Ik ga hierbij uit van de Nederlandse/Belgische situatie. Bij andere landen volg ik de al bestaande conventies. Bij bijvoorbeeld is Britse stations is de categorisatie zeer uitgebreid en gestructureerd.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
Dag, Smiley.toerist. Ik heb bij de gebleekte versie van een foto van een tram zojuist een sjabloon toegevoegd. Wil je dit alsjeblieft in het vervolg zelf doen? Je herinnert je misschien nog wel de zaak met Arkesteijn die naar eigen smaak Vermeer's en Rembrandts bij ging kleuren – dat alsjeblieft nooit weer, en je weet hoe dat is afgelopen. Zelf ben ik geen voorstander van digitale aanpassingen, want het is vaak niets anders dan de suggestie dat er informatie is toegevoegd, terwijl die feitelijk gewoon is vernietigd: het origineel is in beginsel altijd het beste. De afbeelding van de tram laat dat volgens mij ook wel zien, althans ziet de bijgekluste versie er gewoon niet goed uit, veel te flets en bijzonder artificieel. Maar in elk geval: als je retoucheert, dan daarvan voor iedereen duidelijk melding maken, alsjeblieft. Vriendelijke groet, Eissink (talk) 17:36, 24 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]
P.S. De opmerking van Van Buren als zouden op 'zijn' afbeelding meer details zichtbaar zijn, is zeer relatief: bekijk maar eens de bovenleiding, meer specifiek de stroomafnemer. Het is echt onzinnig om twee verschillende foto's zo met elkaar te vergelijken. Eissink (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Ter info: het is wel een gescande dia, waar naast de stofjes verwijdering ook een lichte level aanpassing is toegepast. De ruimte aan beide kanten van de belcurve weghalen. Daarnaast is bij is standaard bij het scannen de verkleuring zoveel mogelijk weggewerkt. Na 30 jaar is er meestal wel een kleurverschuiving.Smiley.toerist (talk) 23:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In het tijdschrift Grondboor & Hamer (Nr. 1 2020) is een interessant artikel verschenen over de bladspits die gebruikt werd door de Neanderthaler. Ook staat er een bespreking in van dit boek. Misschien heeft dit je interesse. Natuur12 (talk) 12:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quand je trie les photos, j'essaie de rajouter pour chaque ligne un Wikidata, j'emploie l'anglais d'office sur Commons ainsi ça évite les problèmes de bilinguisme, par contre sur Wikidata je les met dans les trois langues en/fr/nl j'essaie de mettre au max en néerlandais mais si tu vois une erreur n'hésites pas.
Je suis en train de finir de numériser le plan des lignes SNCV de la province de Flandre Orientale, est-ce que tu aurais une carte sur laquelle figure la ligne Grammont Flobecq, ça m'aiderait énormément, car je n'arrive pas à la trouver sur les cartes d'époque et j'ai vu que tu l'as représentée.
Regarder sur http://geo.nls.uk/maps/belgium/gsgs4042/googlemaps.html J'ai une ancienne carte de Grammont et environs, mais c'est avant 1927. Sur Google Earth (année 2007) om peut reconstrire le tracé. Commencent par 'Papiermolenstraat' (Geraardsbergen) passant à travers Aldi Geraardsbergen (image GE 2007), de la le long la rue de Meerslos, puis connectant à 'Gemeentestraat' pres de 'Cafe 't fonteintje'. Entre 'Gemeentestraat' et Kastanjestraat à Goeferdinge (50 45 51.38 N, 3 50 21.86 E). C'est une estimation.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Je vois qu'on a les mêmes sources, je suis tombé sur une carte avec le tracé de la ligne qui confirme ton tracé, est-ce que tu serais intéressé pour traduire par la suite les cartes pour le wiki nl ? Pour les lignes j'utilise des modèles de correspondance lié à Wikidata ce qui permettrait d'être utilisé sans traduction resterait simplement les arrêts et dépôts à traduire.
À l'heure actuelle, les cartes du Brabant, de la Flandre-Orientale et du Luxembourg sont complètes.
Je manque Geraardsbergen - Deinze [7], Sint-Niklaas - Doel, Hamme - Linkeroever et Hamme Moerzeke. Ci on prend la date limite de 1950 il reste Hamme - Linkeroever (electrique)Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:37, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tu peux jeter un coup d'œil ici j'ai toutes les lignes de cette province. Selon les réseaux je fais une carte globale pour y mettre toutes les lignes comme tu l'as fais à une date qui permet de toutes les montrer et après je fais des dérivés selon la date souhaitée. Je n'ai pas encore additionné les cartes de 1950 et celles fermées avant 1950 le temps de terminer quelques simplifications dans le code.
Mais n'hésites pas si tu veux qu'on traduises les cartes.
PS : tu aurais une date pour la fermeture de Audenarde - Grammont, j'hésitais à l'ajouter à 1950 justement.
Sur un autre sujet, j'ai relié la plupart des articles fr/nl à un Wikidata. Ceci à l'exception de ces trois articles : nl:Buurtspoorlijn Gent-Nevele-Ruiselede, nl:Tramlijn 377 (NMVB)/Oost-Vlaanderen et nl:Tramlijn N (NMVB)/Oost-Vlaanderen, qu'est-ce que tu penserais de les fusionner car ils traitent de la même ligne Gent - Ruiselede, la partie Gand - Nevele a été électrifiée sous l'indice N et l'autorail donnait correspondance à l'électrique à Nevele Dépôt, il ne s'agissait donc pas de deux lignes mais bien d'une partie restée en traction autonome qui donnait correspondance à l'électrique et de plus ils gardaient le même tableau 377. Cela s'applique à la plupart des lignes de Gand et d'autres réseaux, pour la partie wiki:fr je fais ainsi pour simplifier la lecture et classer les photos et documents.
You requested renaming of a couple of files from Hsinchu to Chiayi station. Did you notice that it still says Hsinchu station in the description? --Stefan2 (talk) 13:47, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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!
Beste Smiley, ik zie dat je af en toe in Den Haag komt (???). Ik ben op zoek naar een nieuw plaatje van de Zonnewijzer van Albert Boeken; die staat bij de ingang van het ANWB-hoofdkantoor aan de Wassenaarseweg 220 (links van de ingang in het parkje). Kan je even berichten of je daarvan een of meerder foto's kan schieten? Ik ga ondertussen een artikeltje schrijven, maar ik heb alleen foto's van dat "ding" in Amsterdam. Bvd,Ceescamel (talk) 09:49, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ik woon wel in Den Haag, maar aan de andere kant van Den Haag. De locatie ligt niet op mijn route en ik bezit geen auto. En er ben er niet aan toegekomen omdat de opdracht een lage prioriteit heeft. Onder tussen denk ik dat er al een mooi plaatje is.Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
Hallo Smiley.toerist, kan je die computervertaling in het Nederlands eventjes nazien? Voelt heel onlekker aan... Thanks. Lotje (talk) 12:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Smiley.toerist, ik zag dat je reeds aan het werk was... De Nederlandstalige beschrijving zou ik anders formuleren. Wat denk je van De overtollige trams van de kusttram werden (in afwachting van de sloop of verkoop) afgevoerd en tijdelijk opgesteld bij de remise van de NMBS bij het Station Diksmuide. Of is dit toch niet helemaal wat bedoeld wordt? Thanks. Lotje (talk) 12:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Klopt maar de remise was wel van de NMVB. De trams moeten wel op meterspoor staan. Waarschijnlijk wel in gebruik voor de bussen, maar er waren nog wel oude tramsporen. Lokaal is de tram afgeschaft in de jaren vijftig van de vorige eeuw.Smiley.toerist (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
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!
Hello. You have said that this photo is at the Eindpunt tramlijn C in Blanquefort, presumably meaning Gare de Blanquefort. However as all your other excellent photographs of the stop show, that tram stop has an island platform, whilst the stop shown here has side platforms. So I don't think this is Gare de Blanquefort. Any idea where it might be?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 12:00, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
I think you are right. The terminus at the other end at that time would have been Lycée Václav Havel (it has been extended since) and if you compare the background of your shot with File:Station Lycée Václav Havel.jpg it looks identical. I have updated the en description and categories. I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave the nl description to somebody who speaks better Dutch than me. - Chris j wood (talk) 15:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hoi/hallo Smiley.toerist, iemand verzoekt een foto van jou te hernoemen. De verzoeker is iemand die massaal dingen wil hernoemen, maar scherp in de gaten gehouden wordt. Wil jij kijken of het verzoek redelijk is? M.v.g. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 13:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC) PS ik kan uiteraard niet voorkomen dat een andere hernoemer/mod het wel hernoemt, maar dit staat er al enkele dagen, dus de kans is klein.[reply]
Ik heb geen bezwaar tegen deze hernoeming. Ik verzet mij meer tegen mensen die hun eigen systematiek willen opleggen en bijvoorbeeld de volledige datumgegevens in de naam willen verwerken.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Waarom Gent? Bij File:Brugge station in avondlicht 2018 5.jpg zie je het rode lange gebouw dat nu aan aan de westkant van Brugge station is. De bomen zichtbaar in File:Brugge station in avondlicht 2018 5.jpg zijn niet te plaatsen in Gent, evenmin als het grasveld in File:Brugge station in avondlicht 2018 2.jpg. De zonnestand zal gezien het late tijdstip ongeveer NW zijn (station Brugge is NNW). Aan de noordkant zijn juist de bomen te zien met tegenlicht (Buitenboeverievest). In Gent zijn er bijna geen bomen (de omgeving is veel stedelijker) en de paar hoge bomen die er zijn aan de oostkant. (Delphine Boelpark bij de Bruggravenlaan). Aan de bestemmingen is het niet te zien. Kortrijk is rechtstreeks bereikbaar vanuit Brugge als Gent. Het enige wat ik niet kan plaatsen is de bebouwing te zien in File:Brugge station in avondlicht 2018 2.jpg, die is in Gent ook niet te zien. Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:41, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Als je het niet ziet dat het Gent is, kijk dan maar even naar de perronoverkappingen en de perrons die in een andere steen werden aangelegd. Gent-St-Pieters is momenteel nog een werf. Xetion40 (talk) 11:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ik heb nog gekeken naar de andere beelden van Gent, helaas zitten daar geen plaatjes van de gemoderniseerde perrons. Op andere beelden van Brugge zijn ook de perronoverkappingen met de glazen randen te zien samen met de donkere tegels. Ik wil geen risico lopen en stel anderen te laten kijken in de Nederlandse Wikipedia Kroeg. Er worden er regelmatig met succes zoekplaatjes uitgezocht.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:17, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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!
Goede nacht Smiley.toerist. I founded this photo from you. I have discovered that it is the RENFE 120-0221 locomotive, currently kept in the Railway Museum of Azpeitia. Your information places it at the Deba station, then from the FEVE company. But in Deba there are only narrow gauge tracks, and this is a locomotive of Iberian gauge. I suspect that the photograph was actually taken at the San Sebastián station. In 1988 the locomotive was there, as you can see here, a location that corresponds to your photograph. Voordat ik de informatie aanpaste, wilde ik deze met u bespreken. Greetings. CFA1877 (talk) 22:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Est-ce toi qui a réalisé les tracés KML présents sur les articles liés à la SNCV ?
Si oui, est-ce que tu m'autoriserais à les importer sur un projet de cartographie openhistoricalmap.org, ceci comme sur Wikipédia sous licence Creative Commons CC BY SA 4.0, c'est un OpenStreetMap dédié à l'histoire, qui te permet de voyager dans le temps.
Je compte faire une demande à Wikimedia pour intégrer une carte basée sur ces données pour montrer l'évolution du réseau vicinal à travers le temps et plus globalement permettre à d'autres d'ajouter des lignes de tramway / bus / trolleybus / train (...).
Pas de probléme. J'ai toujours cherché un moyen de importer des fiches KML, dans un project de Wikimedia. Les URL des tracés dans Google Maps sont peut etre pas permanent. Que se passe t'ille en cas de déces?Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Super merci.
Si tu veux sauvegarder tes cartes sur Wikimedia commons, il y a une démarche :
importe ton KML, tu obtiens sur la droite un long texte, c'est ton fichier KML converti en format GeoJSON un format libre qu'utilise Openstretmap et Wikimedia.
va sur Commons, tape dans la barre de recherche Data:Le nom à donner à ta carte.map, tu clique sur le lien rouge pour créer la page, tu copies le texte au format GeoJSON là où il y a marqué "... GeoJSON ..." et tu remplis les champs en haut (licence auteur), ça devrait donner quelque chose comme ça.
Ces pages ne sont pas catégorisables mais par contre :
elles sont sauvegardées sur Wikimedia Commons ;
tu peux les utiliser directement dans les articles, par contre il faudra demander à transposer ce modèle sur le Wiki néerlandais.
J'oubliais, je te dis ça, mais comme je suis occupé à passer l'intégralité des cartes SNCV de Belgique sur OpenHistoricalMap pour ensuite réaliser une carte numérique que l'on pourra utiliser sur les projets Wiki fr / nl elles seront dans tous les cas sauvegardées.
Sur un autre sujet, sur l'article Buurtspoorwegen van de provincie West-Vlaanderen, est-ce toi qui a écris cette phrase "De opbergruimte voor het smalspoor bestaat in 2019 nog, maar is na allerlei functies nu buiten gebruik." ? Si oui, la source précise t'elle où le dépôt se situe ?
Excuse-moi je parlais de la ligne 21 Furnes - La Panne :
Bijna dezelfde route als de huidige lijn, alleen vertrok de oude lijn vanaf het centrum van De Panne, reed door het centrum, en reed niet achterlangs de bebouwing bij Moeder Lambik en bij Plopsaland langs. De oude lijn lag met enkelspoor gewoon naast de weg. De oude lijn was vroeger een paardentramlijn met een spoorbreedte van 600 mm. Na een periode van stoom- en dieseltractie wordt de lijn omgebouwd naar meterspoor, geëlektrificeerd en vanaf 25 juni 1932 overgenomen door de NMVB . In de jaren 30 heeft deze lijn eerst lijnnr. 13, en daarna 14. [7] De opbergruimte voor het smalspoor bestaat in 2019 nog, maar is na allerlei functies nu buiten gebruik.[8]
À propos de ces lignes, aurais-tu les indicateurs en 1933 des lignes autour de La Panne, Furnes et celles du réseau urbain d'Ostende s'il te plait (tu peux m'uploader les pages entière, je m'occuperai de les trier pour te faciliter la tâche si tu veux). J'ai finis de coder le réseau de Tournai et quelques lignes du Hainaut sur la cartographie dynamique à travers le temps et là je vais attaquer l'encodement de Kortrijk, le Westhoek, la côte et Ostende mais je rajoute avant une fiche pour chaque ligne. On pourra petit à petit avoir une carte des lignes de tramway en Belgique navigable à travers le temps et utilisable sur les articles francophones et néerlandophones.
EDIT et l'horaire de 1937 de Courtrai - Gullegem Izegem Ardoie stp
Amicalement,
LD
J'ai nr 348 Oostende Nieuwpoort Veurne De Panne (stoomdienst en autobusdienst), 348 (lijn 7) Veurne Coxyde (dorp) Coxyde (Baden) De panne, 348 De Panne Adinkerke, via Oostduinkerke (lijn 13)
349 (lijn 2), 350 (lijn 1); 351 Oostende - Dixmuide, 353 De Panne - Adinkerke (dienst 13), 358? Veurne - Poperinge, 360 Veurne - Ieper. Je trouve 358 dans l'indexe pour Veurne, mais pas de d',horaire. Veurne - Poperinge est nr 353. Je crois que il Y a une erreur. Je trouve pas de service local de Ostende.Smiley.toerist (talk) 21:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse-moi du délai de réponse, merci, pour le 353 service électrique 8 De Panne - Veurne, est-ce que tu aurais le terminus stp ? Normalement c'est De Panne Dijk mais est-ce que par hasard il y aurait une précision sur un passage par De Panne Markt ?
Le tram n°8 puis 20 passait d'origine par le dépôt où il y a actuellement le TTO et y terminait son chemin, plus tard il a été prolongé à De Panne Dijk par la Duinkerkelaan et avec l'électrification d'Adinkerque - La Panne n°13 puis 21 il est dévié par l'itinéraire de la ligne 21 par le Markt de De Panne.
Un grand merci, j'ai d'autres interrogations sur ces lignes, je ne sais pas si tu as des infos,
Est-ce que tu aurais le 353 électrique Furnes - La Panne de 1933 ?
Est-ce que tu as dans l'indicateur de 1937 toujours un service passagers 348 Ostende - Furnes ou si pas un service d'autobus 576 Ostende - La Panne, car dans l'Indicateur officiel des autobus de 1938 ce service 576 existe mais il n'est plus fait aucune mention de service par tramway, je suppose que le service passager est déjà supprimé avant 1938.
Est-ce qu'en 1937 les lignes Furnes - La Panne et Adinkerque - La Panne portent déjà les numéros 20 et 21 ou portent-elles encore les numéros 8 et 13 ?
Suite à nos dernières discussions, je fais le point :
pour les tableaux 338, 342, 344 345, tu n'as qu'à uploader la page entière par dessus le fichier du premier tableau (ex. 338 pour la première page) je vais me charger de dispatcher les tableaux.
chaque catégorie SNCV/NMVB !Province! tram lines a son plan le tout est relié par l'infobox Wikidata à la page Wikipédia fr/nl correspondante Buurtspoorwegen van de provincie XX.
Ok pour scanner d'abord la Flandre-Occidentale on attaquera Liège, en parallèle que tu scannes les tableaux, je vais ainsi corriger ou compléter les articles pour chaque ligne. //// Je finis de corriger le réseau de Tournai, ensuite j'attaque la Flandre-Occidentale et ensuite commme tu l'as proposé j'attaquerai Liège. ////
Toujours pour scanner pour te faciliter la tâche je te propose de fonctionner comme cela :
Tous les fichiers de 1933 seront nommés comme ceux que tu as déjà uploadés : SNCB NMBS official timetable summer 1933 XXX p.YY.jpg avec XXX pour le numéro de tableau et YY pour la page, tu peux ne mettre que le premier numéro de tableau de la page ex. s'il y a les tableaux 345, 346, 347, 348, tu peux mettre SNCB NMBS official timetable summer 1933 345 p.YY.jpg je me chargerai de répartir les autres tableaux et créer leur page et ça évite ainsi les renommages.
Pour les description, là aussi tu n'as qu'à mettre que le premier tableau, ça me facilite la tâche pour répartir les fichiers ensutie ex. s'il y a les tableaux 345, 346, 347, 348 tu mets simplement 345 et ainsi je me chargerai de répartir les autres tableaux.
Pour te faciliter le boulot je t'ai fait une page déjà faite que tu peux utiliser pour ta faciliter la tâche, je me chargerai de compléter des précisions pour les lignes au besoin, là tu as simplement à remplacer XXX par le premier numéro.
=={{int:filedesc}}==
{{Information
|description={{nl|1=Dienstregelingen van de buurtspoorweglijnen XXX in de zomer van 1933.}}
|date=1933-05
|source=Belgische spoorwegen, zomerdienstregeling van 1933, privé exemplaar. Meer dan 70 jaar geleden gepubliceerd.
|author={{unknown|author}} Uitgegeven door de Belgische spoorwegen / Edité par les Chemins de Fer Belge.
|permission=
|other versions=
}}
=={{int:license-header}}==
{{PD-old}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:XXX}}
[[Category:SNCB/NMBS official timetable summer 1933 - not sorted]]
Hi, are edits like this one really necessary? It took me an unnecessarily long time to figure out the actual substantive change (adding a sort key to "Trains at Bahnhof Tulln", which is a pretty useless change anyway) from that diff. If you keep a category on the file, it would be nice to keep it where it is in the source code to make things easier for others. There is no meaning to the order categories appear in anyway. Tokfo (talk) 22:21, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I like to put all the hidden and technical categories behind and all the (important) content categories in front. I also like to goup al the date and time categories together.Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:29, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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!
Thanks for uploading File:Taichung station 2014 2.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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.
Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is 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 VRT-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:Taichung station 2014 2.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.
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!
Hi Smiley.toerist. I noticed that you've made malformed deletion requests. Here, {{Delete}} is not for speedy deletion, please see COM:DP. When you want to delete a page by manually using the {{Delete}} template (rather than the automatic Nominate for deletion tool in the Tools menu on the sidebar per COM:DR#Starting requests), you must follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion (or Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually policy), otherwise you will create a lot of work for other people. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me03:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you created this category, 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.
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!
If you created this category, 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.
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!
Cela fait quelques temps que j'ai abandonné la cartographie dynamique en GEOJSON sur Wikipédia face à la complexité du truc et j'ai stocké mes travaux sur un site personnel en attendant (voir particulièrement Charleroi, le Centre et Mons). J'aimerais proposer à terme d'intégrer cette carte numérique dans Wikimedia pour le rendre disponible aux différents projets FR NL EN (....). Qu'est-ce que tu en penses, serais)-tu intéressé pour soutenir l'idée ?
On pourrait à terme aboutir à un projet permettant d'avoir une carte ferroviaire disponible à n'importe quelle date similaire à ce que tu as fait au format papier pour la SNCV.
Je vous soutiens. Je n'ai jamais reussi a faire le pas vers les cartes vectorial (digital). Je remarque que https://www.openrailwaymap.org/ à ajouter des tracés vicinal a leur cartes, (examples: Ligne vicinal 520 a Warnant et ligne vicinal 550 Courrière - Bas Oha) Je connais pas leur criteres pour les tracé historique. Je suppose que le tracé doit etre tres visible.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Salut,
Il s'agit de rails encore existants ou d'endroits où la présence du tram est encore attestée comme un pont, un remblai, une tranchée. La base de données est celle d'Openstreetmap qui n'accepte cependant pas les informations historiques.
Amicalement,
PS : aurais-tu une idée du terminus de la ligne 331 Hooglede - Tielt à Hooglede, les indicateurs mentionnent simplement "Station" comme terminus, par les cartes postales on sait que la ligne empruntait le début de la Hogestraat et il y a ce bâtiment qui m'intrigue, il existait déjà sur les vues aériennes de 71 et il y a une ouverture dans le toit similaire à ce que l'on trouve pour les remises à locomotives SNCV.
Dank voor je uitleg. Duidelijk. Dat is qua categorisering lastig. Dat zou betekenen dat je elk bestand over Zandmotor, in feite dubbel moet categoriseren (zowel Zandmotor als Kijkduin of Westland) en nog eens goed naar de parent categories moet kijken. Of er zouden twee categorieën moeten komen, bijvoorbeeld Category:Zandmotor (Kijkduin) en Category:Zandmotor (Westland), om het netjes te doen. Maar dat kan weer betekenen dat leken/dagjesmensen die het verschil niet kennen er weer niet uitkomen. --JopkeB (talk) 14:24, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ik denk dat wij het simpel moeten houden. Er is geen elegante oplossing. Praktisch zet ik alleen de beelden die te maken hebben met de zandmotor in die categorie. (Zand, water en duinen) Echte strandzaken die zet ik onder beaches en geef alleen als het zinvol is de categorie Kijkduin. Die vallen meestal in de ondercategorie Category:Strandslag 1 of The Hague. Kijkduin is volgens mij een wijk die veel beperkter is dan deelgemeente Loosduinen. Ik denk dat het Haagse gebied ten zuiden van Kijkduin, weer een andere wijknaam heeft. Ik zou het voorlopig zo laten staan. Ik denk de wijk Kijkduin en Ockenburg. Ik ga morgen op reis en ik heb geen tijd om dit allemaal precies uit te zoeken.Smiley.toerist (talk) 20:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Tram_line_12_in_Frankfurt_am_Main 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!
Category:Tram_line_11_in_Frankfurt_am_Main 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!
Je heb gelijk maar bij lokale boten zoals File:Briefkaart Rochers de Neuviau.jpg is de kans erg klein, zeker als ze onder een vergunning varen, dan is een Belgische registratie verpplicht. Bij unidentified ships in Belgium is er geen aanleiding om een buitenlandse registratie te veronderstellen. Dit moet sowieso altijd uitgezocht worden bij onbekende boten.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I moved the file outside the category because all others refer to the station as abandoned, which let me put the category "interior" UNDER "abandoned", and this is wrong for this file only (as far as one can guess from the information given). If the hall WAS closed then, and the information in it no longer up to date, you are right to undo my change, if not, I hope you now see what I meant. Hamlet 570 de (talk) 10:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At that time the building was no longer in use. This was the only place in the building wich looked as still usable. Anyway it still belongs to the interior of the station.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Smiley.toerist, this is about your reversal for my adding Category:Horses of Madagascar to your File:Ranohira THB building.jpg. As you can hardly see on the facade of this building, there are several times the logo of Red TDH, which consists of three heads of white horses. Since photos of horses on the island are almost non-existent on Commons, how then to link this file to the concerned category? Create for example a Category:Three Horses Beer? Ellicrum{bablute [...]} 16:35, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
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!
Si tu devais donner titre à un article ou sur Commons par Groupe d'exploitation en mentionnant SNCV dans le titre, est-ce que NMVB Groep Kortrijk te paraîtrait le plus simple ? Je suis occupé à harmoniser les noms des groupes sur le wiki:fr car tantôt on a Tramway de X ou Tramway vicinal de X.
Hello, Smiley. I was going through some old aerial photographs and found out that we have photographed the same subject probably within minutes of each other, but from rather different perspectives: on 17 Oct 2010 while you were shooting this nice alignment of locomotives, I was flying overhead and doing the same! Anyway I have browsed through some of your work and I like it a lot, please continue the magic. Lieven Smits (talk) 18:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question about street where photo was taken (Athens trolleybus)[edit]
Hello,
I'd like to ask if you have any information about where (on which street) this photograph that you uploaded was shot: File:Athene trolleybus 1979 2.jpg
I am sorry, but this was a long time ago (44 years). At that time I was exhausted from a long train ride from Istanbul (no couchettes, sleeping on the floor, emergency bussing with train failure etc) So I crashed in the hotel room and only in the afternoon did I take a short walk in Athens. The next day I went on to Patras for the boat to Italy. So did not see the parthenon and other sigths.Smiley.toerist (talk) 20:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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!
Hi! I've seen once again your job on Pont de Fusta station old pictures, and I thought that maybe you have pictures of buses in Valencia at that time.
I live in Valencia and I was looking for pictures of old SALTUV buses for some articles. SALTUV was the company running the municipal bus network until it went bankrupt around 1980 and was substituted by EMT. During Francoist times, SALTUV was a showpiece company of the Regime; they even brought Haile Selassie to their premises! Well, it doesn't say much to you, but they had beige and green buses and we cannot find a single pic of them to upload. We are searching our old photo albums to no avail!
I would dearly like to be able to travel back in time to take missing pictures, unfortunatly this is not posible. I have scanned all the slides of this time and uploaded them. My main interest at that time was (old) rail. One had a limited number of slide films, one travelled with and I was very selective. One didnt know the results until the return of the journey. Not as today where one can take a unlimited number of digital pictures. i was aware at the time that this sitaution with old rail vehicles wouldnt last long, so I took more pictures than usual at the time.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Een hoop ontzag voor al je contributie aan Wikimedia en Wikipedia! Na een herhaald bezoek aan de kusttram wilde ik een vraag stellen die ik al jaren eerder had moeten vragen: is het mogelijk om al je deelkaarten van de tramnetten van de Buurtspoorwegen eens te combineren tot 1 landelijke kaart en deze (ook) te uploaden? Willem 90 (talk) 22:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Het is niet zo simpel om kaarten samen te voegen. Ze moeten van precies dezelfde schaal zijn en op elkaar aansluiten. De 3 Henegouwse kaarten File:Charleroi SNCV SNCB maximum extend.png, File:Hainaut centre SNCV names.png en File:Borinage SNCV.png zou je kunnen samenvoegen. Met mijn Photoshop elements 10 (lukt het niet). Deze software is afkomstig van een oude cd-rom en ik ben geen voorstander om de nieuwste Photoshop met verplichte abonnement te betalen/gebruiken.
Ik heb de onderliggende Photoshop bestanden (met de verschillende lagen) beschikbaar voor wie er verder aan wil werken. Helaas laat de Wikimedia Commons geen Photoshop bestanden (.psd) toe, anders had ik die al lang opgeladen.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:11, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is the route Gent-Sint-Pieters to Muide via Rabot. There is a more direct route from Gent-Sint-Pieters to Muide via Koornmarkt, but this was not a used. (combination tram 1 and 4). This route for tram 10 was in use in: (3-1-1932 - 15-11-1933), (in between as tram 9), (2-10-1940 - 29-9-1986). After that the line was combined with tram 4 forming the lines 40, 41, 42 and 43. See nl:Tramlijn 10 (Gent). Later number 10 was also used as a short route of the extended tramline 1. Line 10 (Sint-Pietersstation - Wondelgem-Industrieweg). Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like the OGIS file (with buses). I suppose this has an open license and I would like the source (OpenHistorical data) to mention in the upload. The other key dates are 1981 (before the 1 and 4 switch and the first extentions) and 1962 (before the reduction of the tramnetwork and the first full year of MIVG). You can also upload them yourself and put them in the Category:Tram maps of Ghent
I notice that there is a MIVG bus route 50. It is unlikely that there wil be images, needing the creation of a line 50 busline category, but you never know.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I'll upload the files, you can modify them if you wish. 1962-01-01 ; 1981-01-01 and 1985-01-01. Openhistoricalmap is Creative Commons and every time I add a route I add the link to the Wiki commons album.
50 wasn't a route of its own, at this time 50 was the main route from Wommelgem to Zwijnaarde and 5 was a short route. When tram 1 was extended to Wommelgem Industrieweg, route 50 was cancelled and the short route 5 was again the main route with its terminus at the Beverenplein.
Hello, be careful with putting pictures in this category. The former EBT-EW I did NOT have this door type, which has two wings opening to the side. The EBT coaches have two doors with folding wings. Gürbetaler (talk) 19:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Smiley.toerist, I wanted to ask you about a group of photographs you took in the Alpujarras area: these photos (1), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). The first photograph appears located in Capileira, but the rest have no clear location. However, I have the impression that they are houses and streets in Capileira, too. I'm right? CFA1877 (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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!
First steps tutorial
Getting help
Goodies, tips and tricks
Made a mistake?
See also categories: MIVG tram line 1, De Lijn tram line 1 (1991), De Lijn tram line (extension 1) and De Lijn tram line (extension 2).
... en in waarheid ben ik een beetje lui 
!! Dank U. Groeten, Julien -- Nanzig (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Yours
1884
1912
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Genova_Granarolo_spoorlijn_(3).jpg&diff=200624392&oldid=200408262){kind=link}
![[8]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DenHaagZonnewijzer2020-3.jpg){kind=link}
Lotje (talk) 12:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
_en_341.jpg){kind=link}
_Siemens_Vectron_AC_at_Bahnhof_Tulln_an_der_Donau.jpg&curid=63669869&diff=579011356&oldid=476596059&diffmode=source){kind=link}
nice alignment of locomotives, I was flying overhead and doing the same! 
Anyway I have browsed through some of your work and I like it a lot, please continue the magic. Lieven Smits (talk) 18:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
