User talk:Nakonana

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Nakonana!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions 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 (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 03:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Finnish war children

Hello Nakonana,

Thanks for creating Category:Finnish Children of the Second World War. I changed the category order so that Category:Finnish war children is a sub-category of that, instead of the other way around. In Finland and Sweden sotalapset refers specifically to the children evacuated from Finland to Sweden during World War II. MKFI (talk) 08:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

ah, I see, thanks for changing the order, I didn't know about the Finnish terminology! In English it sounds like "Finnish war children" would refer to all sorts of wars, like, WW1 + WW2, etc. that's why I assumed that Category:Finnish Children of the Second World War would be a sub-category of that. It might be worth to add a note to the page maybe? So that other people won't change the order of the categories again based on the same misunderstanding as I did.

Given the Finnish terminology here, how would you name the hypothetical parent category of Category:Finnish Children of the Second World War and Category:Finnish Children of the First World War? Asking in case I decide to go on an image hunt of children in WW1, too. Nakonana (talk) 15:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

I have added a description to Category:Finnish war children. You will probably want to look for examples from other countries if any exists, but something like Category:Finnish children in war might work as a parent category. A see also cat hatnote will help. MKFI (talk) 18:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Sakurako Miki categorization

You have done some good work on the Sakurako Miki categories, but I noticed that you, along with another user before you, incorrectly categorized 2015 shaped sunglasses (15827579308).jpg in Sakurako Miki in 2015. It seems you were just working from the categories: the file was correctly categorized in 6-year-old human females, which contained the category Sakurako Miki in 2015, so you just moved it to the more specific category. In fact, when that photo was taken, it was the end of 2014 but Sakurako, who had just turned 6, was wearing glasses that celebrated the upcoming new year.

It seems other year categories work the same way, which means other files may have the same problem; I have not checked.

I am not sure what should be done about this. There does not seem to be any guidance at Commons:Suggested category scheme for people or any relevant discussions there. Have there been any previous discussions? Brianjd (talk) 07:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Brianjd Ah, I see, the file is in the Category:Sakurako Miki in 2014, I missed that as I was indeed working from the categories.

I'm not aware of any previous discussions, which doesn't mean that there weren't any, I just don't hang out much on discussion sites, that's all.

I worked off two considerations:

1. There are several individuals by name in the Category:6-year-old human females, but it's very unlikely that anyone of them was born on 1 January exactly, so it's very likely that several files in said categories are miscategorized if we are being strict about using the birth date as a cut-off between 5-year-olds vs 6-year-old vs 7-year-olds. Judging by all the other individuals in the Category:6-year-old human females, it's obvious that the cut-off was not strictly applied. So, my first rationale to move File:2015 shaped sunglasses (15827579308).jpg into the more specific category was basically "when in Rome, do as the Romans do", i.e. don't be too strict about the exact birth date.
2. My second rationale was that it felt inappropriate to "flood" the Category:6-year-old human females with photos of Sakurako (and her sister Sakiko). If someone is trying to get a general idea of what 6-year-old human females looks like, then it would be rather unhelpful to click through 200 photos of a 6-year-old Sakurako. The viewer would only learn how Sakurako looked like at age 6, but not how 6-year-old human females look like in general or what range there is in the looks of 6-year-old human females. Of course there are also other photos of 6-year-olds in that category, but the viewer might get tired clicking through Sakurako's photos before even reaching the other photos. Or, after clicking through 100 photos of Sakurako, the viewer might start to assume that there are no photos of any other 6-year-old girls in that category at all, and won't bother to click through the rest of the photos in that category. So, I felt that photos of Sakurako shouldn't dominate the Category:6-year-old human females too much. It would potentially overwhelm a viewer and that would render the category useless. That's why I think that with such a massive amount of photos from a single individual, it's probably best to put them in a sub-category of their own and to not be too strict about the exact age of the individual, but rather categorize by year. Or, alternatively, one could create a separate Category:Sakurako Miki at age 6 or Category:6-year-old Sakurako Miki in addition to the categories "Sakurako Miki in 2014" and "Sakurako Miki in 2015" to be accurate about putting all photos in the correct age category without flooding the Category:6-year-old human females with photos of Sakurako. However, while the latter suggestion would be more accurate, the question is whether it is worth the trouble, especially since we don't exactly know the birth date. I know that I created added an infobox to Category:Sakurako Miki with a birth date, but it took some detective work to figure out her birth date (and in the end, I don't completely remember whether the process did not involve some "educated guessing" at some point). EDIT: ok, it looks like I had found the birth date somewhere in the end [1] [2]

Nakonana (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I think it is well-established that creating specific categories for Sakurako (and other subjects with many photos) is a good idea. The only question is how those specific categories should work.

I understand what you said about the existing categorization system, but I cannot get over the fact that 5-year-old human females indirectly contains 2015 shaped sunglasses (15827579308).jpg, even though the latter clearly says that the subject was six years old. Perhaps a wider discussion is necessary. Brianjd (talk) 02:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Brianjd No objection from my side to having a wider discussion. The relevant part for me was that the category is not cluttered with Sakurako photos. There are several different ways to achieve that and I don't have any particular preference or strong opinions which of those ways should be used :) Nakonana (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

Hello! Often in entertainment, men have worn women's dresses. Please acquaint yoorself with an image description before you change any category, for example like this. Best wishes, SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@SergeWoodzing, sorry I was only looking at the images and I guess it wasn't obvious from the thumbnail or because of the light conditions. Nakonana (talk) 16:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Pls read image descriptions before you consider making such changes! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@SergeWoodzing, regarding File:Jennifer Garcia & Steve Vigil "Trouble" Wild Side Story 1979.jpg — if it's not a dress, then does it belong in the Category:Red dresses? Or should it rather go into the Category:Red clothing / Category:Men wearing red clothing? Nakonana (talk) 09:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Red clothing. One can clearly see that it's a top and a skirt, not a dress. No need to mention gender since Garcia was going through a slow anatomical sex change procedure at the time. I do not know if it was complete yet. --83.255.123.140 16:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

File:St. Paulus (Bochum) 6.jpg

File:St. Paulus (Bochum) 6.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Calreyn88 (talk) 06:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment about deletion request

Hi just an FYI, but in reference to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Мемориальный комплекс воинам 28-й армии .jpg while I agree that image should have been kept I've done some research on similar monuments and a lot of times the vehicles are models, not originals. Like with monuments of planes it seems like they are usually models. Which makes sense because you can't just put a 20 thousand plane on a pedestal in a random park somewhere. It's a little different with tanks of course, but some of them are clearly not original. So I wouldn't make blanket judgements either way. At least not without researching it. Although you could maybe argue models aren't original works to begin with but that's another discussion. Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 06:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, planes are sometimes models. But especially tanks are oftentimes just "gutted" old tanks with only the carcass still in place. Those tanks are almost a century old and quite useless by modern standards that's probably why they are just retired as monuments (saves resources to disassemble and recycle them in other ways, I guess). The description of the mentioned monument says that it's a T-34 tank, so I'd say that this one is safe. As for other such monuments, if they are 1:1 replicas (in form and size) then I'd also say that they are safe to keep because they lack any creative input from the sculptor. Nakonana (talk) 17:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Process to appeal a category discussion decision

I saw that you commented on the closure of the Ivano-Fransk discussions with the closing Admin. Can you advise how to appeal such closures in Commons? Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Laurel Lodged I'm not really familiar with such processes on here. My conversation with the admin was about the usage of Template:Closed, because I thought that they missed to add one of the template parameters. So, it was just about technicalities rather than contents. I don't think that an appeal would really lead to a different outcome in this case (you know my stance from the discussion), however, if you still want to try, then there's probably some kind of administrator noticeboard for such appeals somewhere, but I really don't have a clue where or which noticeboard it is. Maybe there's someone at Commons:Village pump who would be able to refer you to the right noticeboard / procedure? That's the place for all sorts of questions as far as I know. Nakonana (talk) 18:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I have gone to the Pump now. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. Kadı Message 00:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kadı thank you for your trust :) Nakonana (talk) 22:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Logos under copyright

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2025/05#Etienne_Robial's_graphic_creations_and_logos_(2)

Following your message there :

• They may have been "avant-garde" for the area of logos, but ultimately it's just text and the font isn't particularly artistic or unusual. There have been court rulings that logos that consist of simple text are not copyrightable. The only thing I can think of that might justify a deletion based on the precautionary principle is that the logo is from a country where simple text logos are copyrighted and/or a country with a very low threshold of originality, so that even simple designs are copyrighted, for example a simple Black Square. Nakonana (d) 17:28, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Beyond the font topic, the originality of the Canal+ logos created in 1983-1984 is clealy notorious, according to several sources about Etienne Robial's works : Eg, these sources [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] about special exhibition and retrospective highlighting the originality of his creations. So, this work is not as simple as a "black rectangle" but an elaborated conceptual work and very special graphic design [8]. Comparing to anonymous works, these logos must be considered as piece of art or at least, creative work under copyright. And if Commons precautionary principle rules applies[9], these files has to be only uploaded on fr.wikipedia.org. And in fact, yes, a "black rectagle" can be a piece of art and copyrighted (eg:Malevich) : [10]. Tisourcier (talk) 10:30, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Tisourcier I'm not a copyright expert, so you'll either have to convince the courts or at least the Commons admins who make decisions on deletion requests in cases of copyright concerns. I'm just an average editor without any special user rights and admins can disregard my comment if they think that it's incorrect. I don't doubt that the work in question might be notorious and avant-garde, but I'm not sure whether being avant-garde is relevant for receiving copyright protection. Different countries have different definitions what they consider to be copyrightable, and I'm aware that the black rectangle meets the copyright criteria of Russia, however, if Malevich's had been a work from the United States then it would have likely not met the threshold of originality of the United States and thus would have not qualified for copyright protection. So, the question is whether the logo meets the criteria for copyright protection in the country of its origin. Nakonana (talk) 20:53, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

I understand that you're not a copyright expert. ;) To differentiate a graphic work subject to copyright, the notion of originality in European and French law has nothing to do with avant-gardism but rather concerns the innovation of this creation at the time it was created and published. Étienne Robial's artistic work concerning these creations cannot be called into question. So a general rule can't be applied for logotypes and graphic creations. We must consider and respect laws and Court decisions. Regards. Tisourcier (talk) 09:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2025 Deutschland

Hallo Nakonana,

Sieger 2024 – Verladeturm Oderhafen

bald ist es soweit: Vom 1. bis zum 30. September 2025 findet zum 15. Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments (WLM) statt. Dabei können Bau-, Boden- und Kulturdenkmale fotografiert und die Fotos hochgeladen werden. Du hast an einem der vergangenen Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen. Deshalb laden wir dich gern wieder ein, dieses Jahr mitzumachen. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos!

Vergangenes Jahr hat GPSLeo mit dem Verladeturm Oderhafen Groß Neuendorf während eines Hochwassers gewonnen. Welcher Fotograf oder welche Fotografin tritt dieses Jahr die Nachfolge an?

Nach WLM 2024 sind wieder zahlreiche neue Denkmallisten entstanden – zum Beispiel in Greiz in Thüringen oder in Königslutter am Elm in Niedersachsen. Nachdem es in Thüringen über lange Zeit nicht überall Kulturdenkmallisten gab, ist dieses Bundesland jetzt fast vollständig abgedeckt und die Listen freuen sich über Fotos. Hier findest du einen Einstieg in die Thüringer Listen.

Für die Suche nach Motiven gibt es bei Wikipedia zahlreiche Listen und Karten. Als Einstieg hilft diese Übersichtsseite. Weitere Informationen erhältst du auf der Mitmach-Seite.

Für das einfache Auffinden haben wir eine Upload-Karte erstellt, in der viele aber leider noch nicht alle Kulturdenkmale angezeigt werden können. Das Laden der Objekte dauert dort etwas.

Wir haben dieses Jahr drei Sonderpreise für Bilder zum Thema „Bauernhöfe und Bauernhäuser“ ausgelobt.

Damit es ab 1. September mit dem Upload schnell geht:

Upload your photos via the new Upload-Map 

Upload your photos for the special price 

Außerdem laden wir Dich ein, ab Anfang September 2025 an der Vorjury teilzunehmen. Diese bewertet die hochgeladenen Bilder und ermittelt so gemeinsam mit der Jury, die Anfang November tagen wird, die Sieger von Wiki Loves Monuments 2025 in Deutschland. Das Vorjurytool ist hier bald freigeschaltet. Du benötigst dafür nur deinen Benutzernamen und das Passwort.

Vorjury-Tool 

Für Fragen steht das Organisationsteam gerne auf der Support-Seite zur Verfügung. Falls du im nächsten Jahr keine Einladung für Wiki Loves Monuments Deutschland haben möchtest, trag dich bitte hier ein. Wir würden das natürlich schade finden, da wir uns auf deine Fotos freuen.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg beim größten Fotowettbewerb wünscht dir im Namen des Organisationsteams --Z ^thomas 19:05, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Cultural heritage monuments in Russia

Hello! I noticed that you were doing various edits related to Russian cultural heritage. Therefore, you may be interested in this discussion. Thank you! -- Alexander 06:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for informing me! Nakonana (talk) 15:47, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Comment

Hi. Just an FYI, but this is a comment made by Ymblanter earlier on Wikivoyage about the Village Pump thread "it doesn't matter. As long as there are only two of them, they can't do anything. But if they start shouting and bring someone there, a different situation could arise. There's no need to draw a conclusion at all, it will go into the archive without a conclusion." So the idea that they weren't, and still aren't, actively ignoring the discussion so they can just do whatever they want regardless is laughable. That was, and still is, clearly their game plan. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:25, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

If that was the plan, then they would have done that when the initial discussion was running. Why should they have waited until after changes were implemented? What if there would have never been a second discussion? Sounds like an unnecessary risk to wait for things to break and for a second discussion to happen, when they could have just blocked the change right away. Nakonana (talk) 22:08, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

It's a pretty common tactic on here to temporarily stop doing something (or to not do it to begin with) until enough time has passed for people to forgot about it and move onto other things. It happens all the time. If I were to guess, they assumed enough time had passed for no one to notice. I only happened to because I saw one of the new categories while doing other edits and Andy Mabbett is only aware of it because I notified him. Otherwise it would have continued completely under the Radar. I appreciate that you want to assume good faith but it isn't a suicide pact. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

If you have read discussion over there then you surely have also noticed that the introduced change here broke quite a number of things on ruwikivoyage. I don't understand why you insist on such a damaging change when the previous status quo had no negative effect on Commons. No harm was done by the status quo, so why are you so against it when the new approach has such a clear negative impact on a wiki project? Nakonana (talk) 22:49, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I read it. Apparently it was such a huge problem that they waited for a year to do anything about it. Regardless, I don't care either way about it except that the way its been handled on their end is a farse to the process on here. They haven't really helped themselves with the lame insults and non-arguements in the meantime either. Even if they are correct why would I side with a group of people who can't make an arguement outside of spending a year putting me down on another project? --Adamant1 (talk) 22:58, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Apparently it was such a huge problem that they waited for a year to do anything about it. No it took a year for the change to be implemented (see Andy's time line on VP). The change went life in June 2025, that's when they started to see the damage happening and this is when they started to act. I mean, there was a chance that the change wouldn't do any damage, so there was no immediate need to interfere with it until it became clear that it is damaging. Even if they are correct why would I side with a group of people who can't make an arguement outside of spending a year putting me down on another project? So your opposition isn't even for the benefit of Commons or any other wiki project but simply a case of retaliation due to hurt feelings? In that case you should report their conduct to the admin board instead of supporting something that is detrimental to a wiki project. Nakonana (talk) 07:19, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

No it took a year for the change to be implemented Still, they implemented the system with the external database and the bot last year, if not years ago. They should have known at that point what edits on our end would screw up the system and done it in a way that followed the guidelines and/or would account for edits on Commons. Say I create a bot that uses images from Commons on an external site somehow. People raise issues with how I implement it, which I complete ignore and throw insults instead. They then take steps to fix the issues (that again I totally ignored) leading to more issues. Is that my problem or theirs? Should they be reverted or should I adjust my bot to account for the changes they made instead of just continuing to act dismissive?

But simply a case of retaliation due to hurt feelings? No, that's why I said "if they are correct." I don't think they are. They should have either participated in the first discussion, accounted for changes on our end when they created the bot, and/or just adjusted it when the categories were redirected. That's how it works on here. You don't get to create a bot, ignore issues people raise about it, and then smear those people on other projects while reverting the changes they make to fix your mistakes. Sorry. That's not how it works. They had about 15 chances to deal with this in a proper, guideline based way. They didn't. So that's on them. Stop treating me like I'm the issue here just because I have an opinion. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:15, 29 August 2025 (UTC)