File:PaulAMiller1970.png 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.)
This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Techmila 1970 has a copyright notice on page 3, so the "no notice" license does not apply.
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!
Why introduce a category with exactly one (subcategory) member?
Half the parent categories don't exist.
Neither of those nonexistent parent categories would apply to the one subcategory (almost all Pike Place Market stalls are permanent, and virtually none are street stalls. A few days a week, they set up a handful of temporary street stalls, but there are over 100 permanent, non-street stalls). - Jmabel ! talk14:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Let me point out that you should have been able to answer all of these questions by yourself by browsing the parent category Category:Market stalls in the United States and its ancestors.
Your question
My response
Why introduce a category with exactly one (subcategory) member?
Also, are you claiming that nobody ever will upload images of market stalls at Spokane's Riverfront Market, Tacoma's Farmer's or Night Markets, Vancouver's Farmer's or Night Markets, etc., etc., etc?
Neither of those nonexistent parent categories would apply to the one subcategory (almost all Pike Place Market stalls are permanent, and virtually none are street stalls. A few days a week, they set up a handful of temporary street stalls, but there are over 100 permanent, non-street stalls).
In fact, when you created Category:Market stalls at Pike Place Marketback in 2017, you were the one who placed it in Category:Market stalls in the United States which had been created in 2014 with the same categories that you now find objectionable in 2022. You had no problems with the categorization of Category:Market stalls in the United States then or now, but somehow now that I've started to diffuse market stalls in the United States into state-level subcategories, it all "seems weird" to you. Is it really "weird", or do you just maintain a double standard: one easy standard for yourself and your cadre and another "must be 100% perfect" standard for editors who aren't part of your clique?
(Generally)
If you really find the categorization of the state-level market stalls that offensive, then why don't you take the constructive approach and differentiate between temporary and permanent (or more accurately semi-permanent) market stalls starting at Category:Market stalls and working down through its subcategories? Why not differentiate between indoor and outdoor market stalls, again, starting at Category:Market stalls? Why continue to ignore en:WP:SOFIXIT?
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!
I think it was not a typo, but a copypaste error (unless you were using the ten-key section of the keyboard). And I was just worried you might have made that sort of mistake with other files that day. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 21:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please indent your replies per COM:Talk page guidelines. Why are you so concerned? Reviewing my changes for that day is easy--see [1]. That edit doesn't look like any of those adjacent, so thank you for nitpicking my characterization of it as a typographical error. Also per WP:Be bold, "If you notice an unambiguous error or problem that any reasonable person would recommend fixing, the best course of action may be to be bold and fix it yourself rather than bringing it to someone's attention in the form of a comment or complaint." Are you looking to "punish" me for a simple error? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 23:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why on Earth would I wanna punish you for it?
By the way, that particular photo is one of my "prized" Commons files. See, even though I did not upload it, I did find the relevant news articles about the girl it depicts. (It surely wasn't easy to find the Newspapers.com clipping of that article without a Newspapers.com account, but I managed!)
Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2023[edit]
Hello! In 2021, you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Thanks to people like you, it was a great success with over 500 people contributing over 5,500 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage. You can see the top-ten winners of the US competition here.
While the United States did not participate in Wiki Loves Monuments in 2022, I'm pleased to say that we're back for 2023 through the month of October! I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our 2023 event page for more information.
Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2021, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you have any questions, please leave them on the event talk page.
So what's the rule you're using? If the photograph is taken from an upper floor of Boston City Hall, it's not a "view of Boston from above" if Faneuil Hall's third floor is roughly at eye level? Does that make any photograph of Faneuil Hall from street level a "view of Boston from below", for example ? Does that make any photograph of any multistory building from street level a "view from below"? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for refusing to COM:AGF. The edit in question is actually this one, not the one you cite. I was unaware until your inquiry that I had inadvertently added newlines to my update. I can't believe it rises to the level of "crime" worth whatever punishment you appear to intend to mete out. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 23:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, thank you for making that template. :) I find it very useful. Guidelines on template/doc are also yours, but I disagree about such narrow usage. Which "trade" and "international politics" topics can template connect? Nothing crosses my mind. I prefer it for three reasons: first, it's a little bit "tribal" that we use only country-related templates for global cities. It's not that much big, on computer it produces very few lines on top. Secondly, it helps with general categorization, it's easier to jump around the world. Thirdly, and strictly personally (ILIKEIT), I adore to compare many topics, from architectural details to many bizarre things. Nowhere else it's possible. That were my reasons, but I'm leaving the final decision to you. Take care. :) --Orijentolog (talk) 10:33, 13 December 2023 (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!
_-_Budapest_-_Hungary_(4109723951).jpg){kind=link}
