User talk:Ssolbergj

Parlamentarium

Home         Talk         E-mail me         Gallery         Contributions         Sandbox         On Commons

Userboxes nb Denne brukeren har norsk som morsmål, og skriver bokmål. en-3 This user is able to contribute with an advanced level of English. es-1 Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español. This user is a member of WikiProject Europe. This user is a member of WikiProject European Union. This user's time zone is GMT+1. ath This user is an atheist. 00:00 This user uses 24-hour time. SI This user prefers the metric system of measurement. VG-3 This user is able to contribute with a high level using vector graphics. BG-3 This user is able to contribute at an advanced level to Bitmap graphics (PNG,...). PH-3 This user is able to take high quality photographs. AF-2 This user is able to contribute with a good level to audio files. This user wants Brussels as the only seat of Parliament. EEA This user is opposed to Fax Democracy Random Acts of Kindness Graphic Designer's Graphic Designer's Graphic Designer's European Merit European Merit ESO's members map Hi Ssolbergj, I wonder if you have to chance to add Brazil on ESO's country members maps? If not, perhaps you can give me some hint so I can do it for you. Thanks a lot. Jmencisom (talk) 12:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC) Brazil's been added. Thanks for the heads up. - SSJ t 17:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC) Ukraine Could you please correct Ukraine's border on this map of Europe which is located on the main page of Europe? It has been cut in the South West and a huge piece of Ukraine's land belongs to Moldova. You have correct borders on this map or on this. Thank you in regards. --UP9 10:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC) I'm sorry, I don't have enough time to do this. You could ask the people at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop. - SSJ ☎ 16:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC) Orthographic projection type map for Norway Can you please make a orthographic projection type map for Norway, its big enough I think. 83.108.194.198 (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC) Not in my opinion. - SSJ ☎ 22:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC) Please explain why. 83.108.194.198 (talk) 22:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC) Norway is not big enough in my opinion. The de facto standard for European countries has been the Europe map. I think that is the ideal solution for Norway. - SSJ ☎ 22:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC) But then again North and South Korea (Norway is three times larger) and other small nations have this map and it makes it look better for the design I think. Besides, the Europe map outlines the EU which Norway is not a member of, and probably never will be. But that's up to you and other technicians to decide :-) 83.108.194.198 (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC) No offence, but I don't care what map is used in North Korea's article. Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. I'm personally certain Norway will join the EU in the future, but that has little to do with this. The Europe map is currently used by almost every European country, not only EU members. I think Norway should be in line with that de facto practice. - SSJ ☎ 00:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC) Help please! Hi, how are you doing? Sorry to bother but I'm afraid I need your marvellous expertise. It seems the labelled map I attempted for Schengen Area doesn't show up at all on IE. Do you know what went wrong? Thanks awfully.- J.Logan`t: 10:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC) Hi JLogan. I don't see any problems with it in IE..(?) - SSJ ☎ 16:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC) Okay, must have been a local problem. Thanks!- J.Logan`t: 17:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC) Quisling coat of arms Hi, I saw that you had added this image as the coat of arms of the Quisling regime. Are you positive, and do you have a source, specifying that Quisling's regime used the Nasjonal Samling's emblem as a coat of arms ? That seems logical, but I'm just trying to be sure. (I'm not doubting your edits, I'd just like to double-check before using it myself on another wiki). thanks, Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 14:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC) In the Coat of arms of Norway article, it says "During World War II the Quisling regime continued to use the lion coat of arms. In 1943 the design of the lion was modified, and the royal crown was replaced with an open medieval type of crown." It's just a wikipedia article, and it has no source, but we now have two conflicting articles, so that leaves the average user (that's me) a bit puzzled. regards, Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC) An article on Norwegian Wikipedia says the NS eagle mark was used as a state emblem. I'm now asking the user who wrote it whether he has any reference. Please wait, I'll find out and let you know. - SSJ ☎ 16:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC) Thanks a lot. That emblem obviously had something to do with the Quisling regime and/or the Nasjonal Samling, but maybe it was actually used as an emblem by a related organization. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 16:25, 24 February 2010 (UTC) He hasn't seen any document specifically stating that the symbol gained the official status of being the coat of arms of the state, but he supposes that would perhaps not be necessary, as Norway was a single-party state. Furthermore, he says the eagle and sun cross emblem was used on the uniforms of the state police ('as seen in this film'), and was also used on the postage stamps of the state service, as seen here. The lion was also used on some stamps, but that wasn't until 1944. One might assume that the NS thought the traditional lion was worth keeping to some extent, because could make it easier to win popular support for the regime in the future. This seems to boil down to the conclusion that both the lion and the NS's eagle symbol were used, but for different purposes and the lion to a lesser extent. The lion wasn't introduced until 1944, and the eagle symbol was definitely used as a symbol of the regime's power throughout the occupation. I think it's safe for us to say that the eagle and sun cross symbol was the de facto emblem of Quisling's regime. - SSJ ☎ 19:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC) Thanks for your answer, that's cool ! The article about the Coat of arms should be modified to include that. regards, Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 09:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC) File:Royal CoA of Norway.svg Hello! Hope you are doing well. I am working on article about Norwegian coat of arms in Russian wikipedia. Can you help me with search of the correct image of the Norwegian Royal arms? See after some analyzing I came to realize what both of the existing images are not perfect. Your image is good, but the lion should not be different with this image. Don't you think? Also in regulations stated "purple" mantle, not red, and the disigne of the mantle shoul be something like that. Hope you can help to find the truth. --Kwasura (talk) 02:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC) The 1924 drawing was made long after the royal coat of arms was introduced. Besides, in heraldry, any design is valid as long as it follows the heraldic description. The same goes for the mantle. Where does it say "purple"? Can you provide a reference link? - SSJ ☎ 16:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC) Lex building Why are you lower casing the name of the building? Woogee (talk) 21:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC) On English Wikipedia, "building" is added to the names of the buildings for practical reasons. "Building" is not part of the name of the Commission's Berlaymont building (in french it's "Le bâtiment Berlaymont"). - SSJ ☎ 21:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC) I'm not a native English speaker, but I think that's what grammatically right too, in this case. But in any case, most of the EU's buildings are named after historical people, therefore the article name of the EU Council's headquarters can't be just "Justus Lipsius". The only alternative to "Justus Lipsius building" would be the cumbersome and impractical "Justus Lipsius (building)". - SSJ ☎ 21:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC) Empire State Building. In English, "Building" is capitalized. I notice on Google that the hits are about equal both ways. Woogee (talk) 21:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC) Building in that case isn't a proper noun, there is no reason for it to be capitalised. Lower case is correct. Unless of course it is the first word in the name. So List of Byzantine emperors is capitalised as it is a proper noun, where as List of baseball jargon (S), baseball is common noun so it is in lowercase. Building is a common noun and thus should be lowercase.- J.Logan`t: 22:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC) Maps of Belgium. Hi. It's been pointed out that your map File:Flanders in Belgium and the European Union.svg has an error, and the Wallonia one does to. You missed the exclaves shown in Communities, regions and language areas of Belgium. Could you fix that? Thanks, Oreo Priest talk 21:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC) File:Signing of the Maastricht Treaty.jpg listed for deletion A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Signing of the Maastricht Treaty.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 11:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC) WEU Wow, they didn't make much noise about that did they! Good catch, how on earth did you hear about it? I'll deal with the updates to the WEU article.- J.Logan`t: 21:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC) It's really weird; I suddenly started thinking about the WEU. It's been weeks since i last googled for WEU updates, but when I did it this evening, a 3 hour old article popped up in the search results: "Western European Union dissolved". It just had to happen sooner or later: a completely meaningless organisation with a €13.4 million budget. - SSJ ☎ 21:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC) UEFA Euro 2008 logo I'm not arguing that SVG logos aren't allowed. However, you need to compare the quality of the SVG version of the logo with the PNG version. When you have done that, I doubt that you will want to replace the PNG version again. – PeeJay 19:34, 4 April 2010 (UTC) I don't see how the quality is better or worse on either of them. The resolution is by the way irrelevant when it comes to SVG, as those images are scalable. SVGs are in fact preferred for logos. - SSJ ☎ 19:39, 4 April 2010 (UTC) Do you not see the artefacts in the SVG version? They are at the top of the image and are extremely visible here. Furthermore, the PNG version has some subtle variations in the colour of the word "EURO" below the graphic portion of the logo. – PeeJay 19:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC) Oh, now I see why you're so het up over this. You uploaded the SVG version, so you're taking it personally that I've removed it. Well don't forget that you don't own either the image or the article, and try to look at this objectively. – PeeJay 20:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC) Have i not argued objectively? Accusing me of having "bias" is not very constructive. Some would perhaps instead say that I'm "trying to follow the SVG policy of Wikipedia". I uploaded a new version of the SVG without the ugly raster elements. - SSJ ☎ 20:39, 4 April 2010 (UTC) That's far better. I have no objections to the SVG version now. – PeeJay 21:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC) Military of the EU The current budget charts are totaly wrong. The USA is too low and Russia and Chinas budgets are too high. Plus we are trying to compare the military budget of the EU with military powers. And as it stands the 5 United Nations Security Members (Russia, UK, USA, France and China) are todays only military powrers. I also updated the chart to SIPRIs latest figures. Recon.Army (talk) 10:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC) I'm not discussing whether or not the figures are right, I'm saying that it doesn't make much sense to compare the EU collectively to two of its member states. - SSJ ☎ 11:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC) I dont realy care, as long as the figures are correct. before you had The USA at only around 500 billion, China at aprx 100+ billion and Russia was also far to high. Now those figures are correct. With China at 84 Billion and Russia at 58 billion. The USA at 600+ billion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Recon.Army (talk • contribs) 17:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Then why did you revert me like this? - SSJ ☎ 17:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Graph To be honest I think it needs to be done as a percentage, or each year can't actually be compared. Also, if you don't mind, I don't think it fits on the EP page itself due to its size - but we should make wide usage of it elsewhere.- J.Logan`t: 21:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Fantastic! Looks great. Though we could do with linking the names, do you think it would be best to link to the current or latest group in that category or to the section o the political groups page?- J.Logan`t: 08:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC) I'm not sure. Linking to a good table overview of historical groups would perhaps be the best thing. I haven't yet managed to turn the legends into wikilinks; I'll have to find out how. - SSJ t 19:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC) Edits to Template:Referendum I noticed that you made some major edits to Template:Referendum. While I understand that your edits were in good faith, I have reverted them because they have completely altered the format and the purpose of the template. I do think your edits do have value however, and I would like to suggest that you make a new template for generating graphs related to referenda. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please open up a new discussion on the template's talk page. – Zntrip 02:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC) I made Template:Referendum graph. Though I still think the normal infobox style would be the most meaningful solution for Template:Referendum. - SSJ t 19:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC) EU map brown Hello Ssolbergj, Would you remember the source you used to create EU map brown.svg? Given that this map is used a lot – both directly and as map background – it would be great to know its source. Thanks, Pethrus (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC) File:Blank map europe.svg I think. - SSJ t 20:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC) Pillars The pillar articles are divided according to their formal names. The European Community is the EU pillar and the Communities are the three pillars together (the other two were outside the EU, but the institutions held the plural in their name as they controlled them also). In usage the names are interchangeable due to the large amount of confusion in EU naming but the articles are divided along those lines in order to give a clear distinction between content. It is actually the image that has the error, not the articles and indeed if we changed the articles around it would get messy and inaccurate to be honest.- J.Logan`t: 07:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC) I'm confused. This ena.lu chart shows that the European Community isn't the only part of the first pillar. Can we then start by sorting out Three pillars of the European_Union#Chart, in a way which Informatico agrees with? I think that article should reflect a consensus. - SSJ t 12:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Renewable energy image Hey Ssolbergj, I recently took notice of your Wind turbine icon. This icon however seems to be used in the renewable energy template, as the main image; see [1]; since it doesn't belong here, I was wondering perhaps a new image could be made for this template ? Perhaps it's best to have an image showing a leaf being blown over a water mass. The leaf would signify plant matter (also = energy, ie using microbial fuel cells), some stripes behind the leaf can signify wind power, the water mass (with some small waves) can signify the water power. The image isn't totally complete (there's eg also geothermal energy, ...) but atleast it will be much better than the current image, which only represents wind power. Thanks in advance, KVDP (talk) 06:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC) PS: Is it also possible to update the factory.svg image; see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Howcheng#Factory.svg_image Sorry for butting in, but I recommend that the discussion on the wind turbine should continue at Template_talk:Renewable_energy_sources#Template_image and the discussion on the factory picture should continue at commons:file_talk:factory.svg. --Slashme (talk) 15:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC) Image Holy Roman Empire Hi! I got a bit confused by your image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holy_Roman_Empire_ca.1600.svg, which in the article Holy Roman Empire has the correct under title (ca 1300) but the image itself has title ca 1600. May be clearer to correct the title. Thanks, Joost 99 (talk) 19:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC) Hi! Thanks for the heads up. It's based on File:Holyromanempire.png. I don't know if it's wrong, or what I should correct. - SSJ t 20:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC) I came upon it because of a discussion I'm having with someone who referrs to the Netherlands in 1618 as The Holy Roman Empire in stead of the Dutch Republic. I based myself on the Netherlands being removed from its rule in the Pragmatic Sanction of 1549, and the rule of the Netherlands going to the Spanish Empire. But the Netherlands still had (in name) a link to the Holy Roman Empire, so the image itself is not incorrect, I found out. I might start a discussion on the page itself to see what other people have to say. Thanks, Joost 99 (talk) 14:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC). Nomination for deletion of Template:Thumbs up Template:Thumbs up has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Another one God I am sick to death of deletionists. Who on earth spends their time on WIkipedia going round looking for things to kill off? Obvious copyright violations are one thing, people thinking they're lawyers seeking out pictures that may violate this law or that is just vandalism. Not as bad as those looking for whole articles to kill of course. These days you create an article and within 5 minutes there is someone wanting to delete it. I can't believe there are actually people dedicating all their time to that. How long has it been do you think that those people actually added something to Wikipedia? Not much we can do about this though, they've made up their mind. At this rate there won't be a single photo of a modern building on the whole of Wikipedia.- J.Logan`t: 17:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC) Flanders map Can you please correct File:Flanders in Belgium and the European Union.svg? Voeren is part of Flanders, and should be shaded. Thanks, Hayden120 (talk) 15:07, 14 May 2010 (UTC) He's right. But could you also unshade Comines-Warneton? It's part of Wallonia. And can you do the same for File:Wallonia in Belgium and the European Union.svg? Thanks a bunch. Oreo Priest talk 17:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC) Ah, thanks for pointing that out, Oreo. I didn't notice Comines-Warneton. Also, should Brussels in File:Wallonia in Belgium and the European Union.svg be shaded with both colours as it is in File:Flanders in Belgium and the European Union.svg? As far as I know, it does not belong exclusively to one region over the other. Thanks, Hayden120 (talk) 04:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC) Not a Belgian I see. In short: no. For Flanders, it's the Flemish Community, whereas for Wallonia it's what until recently was known as the Walloon Region. Brussels is part of the French Community, but not of Wallonia. See Communities, regions and language areas of Belgium for details. Oreo Priest talk 06:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC) Okay, thanks for the clarification. Nope, not a Belgian, and my knowledge of this topic is a bit flimsy, sorry. It is confusing when the files have similar names; labelling them 'Flemish Community' and 'Walloon Region' would probably make things clearer. Hayden120 (talk) 06:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC) No problem. And just saw the maps now. They look great! Oreo Priest talk 23:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC) Sorry Oreo Priest...Brussels Capital Region (simply Brussels) is a bilingual city which is part of both communities. Maybe you've mixed the situation that the 'capital of the Flemish community' is situated in Brussels but this is not for the French-speaking community, it is the city Namur if I'm not wrong. The map of BCR (Brussels) has to be shaded with both colours like mentioned earlier by Hayden120. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.219.143.66 (talk) 12:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC) Kalmar Union I'm not sure if you're still replying to your talk page... but would you be able to remove the border from File:Kalmar Union ca. 1500.svg? I tried making the border white and it broke the image; tried opaque and that also broke the image. I don't really think the image needs a border, but it is quite stubborn and apparently won't let me remove it. Thanks, Hayden120 (talk) 16:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC) Is it the current country borders that you want to remove? - SSJ t 21 13, 4 June 2010 (UTC) Oh sorry, I should have been clearer. Nope, they're fine – just the black border around the image. Cheers, Hayden120 (talk) 22:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC) Too busy? Don't care? Nevermind, I'll ask someone else for help. Best regards, Hayden120 (talk) 00:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC) I included a border on the map because Infobox Former Country doesn't allow for wikitext borders around maps. IMO, the map looks ugly when it doesn't have a border and is placed on a light gray background. - SSJ t 00:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification, and sorry for bothering you. Hayden120 (talk) 00:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC) :) I'm the one who should say sorry for not having responded sooner. - SSJ t 00:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC) M-U border Hi, just a small issue. The southern part of the Moldovan-Ukranian border appears to be missing on this map. Thanks.- J.Logan`t: 13:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC) Done. - SSJ t 17:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC) You are now a Reviewer Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010. Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages. When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here. If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC) "EU power over its members" Thank you for your comments. The discussion continues on my talk page. --Red King (talk) 22:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC) Orthographic projections Could you point me to the source vector map used to create orthographic projection? In either SVG or AI format? Thank you. --Jpark324 (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Venstre logo.svg Thanks for uploading File:Venstre logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). PLEASE NOTE: I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page. If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page. Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC) File:European Parliament in Brussels.jpg The colours of the image File:European Parliament in Brussels.jpg are so unreal. Could you please also reupload the original image under the filename File:European Parliament in Brussels (not retouched).jpg. Thank you! --ALE! (talk) 14:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC) Military of the European Union Sorry for wiping out your recent edits on Military of the European Union while trying to restore the table, it was not my intention and I should have been more careful but please do not be obtuse with your response... it was far from my intention to be rude. G.R. Allison (talk) 03:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks. I should probably not have used the word "rude," sorry. One should of course always assume good faith, though when I revert something, I try to use my eyes - so I guess I expect other people to do the same. But no worries :) Sorry for saying that what you did was rude, and again, thanks! - SSJ t 13:34, 30 July 2010 (UTC) Don't worry about it my friend, lesson learned by me about reverting. G.R. Allison (talk) 23:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC) Fair use rationale for File:Hog2warts.jpg Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Hog2warts.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC) New picture for Brussels Hello again. As you might have noticed, the copyright paranoiacs at Commons have deleted the Brussels collage picture that you made. It was very good, and what's there now is a sorry substitute. Would it be too much to trouble you to make another with PD buildings? (Just typing that makes me cringe!) In addition to the town hall and the palace, some ideas I had were File:HortaELWI.jpg, something from Cinquantenaire, File:Bourse Bxl 01.JPG and File:ULB 20050712.jpg aren't bad, Manneken Pis is a classic and would give a break from just buildings. Anyways, these are all just ideas, and if you decide to do it, I'm sure you'll do a good job and pick whatever works best. Cheers, Oreo Priest talk 23:17, 15 August 2010 (UTC) Well, that might be a good idea. I might do it, but really, the pathological amateurs hunting for possible "Freedom of Panorama" infringements really represent the biggest turn-off I've ever experienced on Wikipedia. I'm not sure if I'd like to touch this subject again - It's just too annoying that the wikimedia categories of countries (such as France and Belgium) that allegedly don't have "Freedom of Panorama", are filled with images of office blocs which sporadically are deleted, citing FOP law. Brussels is also a modern city, this is crazy. It would be a bit misleading to just have images of medieval Brussels in a collage - perhaps having no image in the infobox would be better then. - SSJ t 17:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC) I know, I 100% agree with you, and it's exceptionally frustrating. Still, the previous image was very good, and quite frankly you have the graphical talent and know-how to do it right, so it'd be great if you could. Oreo Priest talk 17:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC) File:Dagsrevyen.JPG listed for deletion A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dagsrevyen.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC) Multi-speed Europe Have you got a watch on this article? I'd rather that a neutral editor had a look at the debate at talk:Multi-speed Europe and work towards a consensus on what can go in the article without breaching OR and SYN. I shall ask JLogan too. --Red King (talk) 22:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Coats of arms of Luxembourg Hola, te escribo es español porque para mi es más fácil. He estado revisando varios escudos relacionados con la categoría "Coats of arms of Luxembourg" en commons, corregiendo fallos con los colores, ya que el usuario Fry1989 había utilizado el blanco para representar el esmalte plata/argén (argent) y el dorado para representar el oro (or) y esa combinación no es posible, o utilizas el blanco y el amarillo o utilizas el plateado y el dorado. Venía a comentarte que el león que aparece, creo que obra tuya, le falta el sexo. He revisado el blasón y no dice nada de un león evirado (emasculated lion), por tanto, debería estar representado. ¡Saludos! --Xavigivax (talk) 08:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of Arms of the European Union Military Staff.svg Thanks for uploading File:Coat of Arms of the European Union Military Staff.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). PLEASE NOTE: I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page. If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page. Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 30 August 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of Arms of the European Gendarmerie Force.svg Thanks for uploading File:Coat of Arms of the European Gendarmerie Force.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). PLEASE NOTE: I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page. If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page. Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Eurofor coat of arms.svg Thanks for uploading File:Eurofor coat of arms.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). PLEASE NOTE: I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page. If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page. Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC) Energy Community map Hi, Ssolbergj. I understand you are the author of the Energy Community map. Could you please update it as Moldova became the full member of the Energy Community on 1 May 2010. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 17:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC) File source problem with File:Coabuca.png Thank you for uploading File:Coabuca.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Airbus Logo.svg Thanks for uploading File:Airbus Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). PLEASE NOTE: I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page. If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page. Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:36, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Eurocopter logo.svg Thanks for uploading File:Eurocopter logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). PLEASE NOTE: I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page. If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page. Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC) constituion He Ssolbergj, Just saw you changed some text and redirects of EU constitution related pages from Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe to Treaty of Lisbon. I think that was incorrect. The Constitution treaty was never accepted (following referenda in France and NL) and was signed in Rome (thus could be called Treaty of Rome, but it never is...). One of the things politicians emphasized with the newer version (Treaty of Lisbon) was that it was not a constitution, but just a new treaty. Although I think the 2 treaties have much in common, I think it is not correct to call/link the EU constitution to Lisbon. What do you think? (PS: for the sake of stability, I will not revert your actions any furhter, until we have discussed this...) Rgds! L.tak (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC) I have never redirected anything to Treaty of Lisbon. I am completely aware of what happened to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (TCE). The constitutional basis of the European Union is however something else, which isn't dependent on this abandoned 2004 proposal. The constitutional basis of the EU comprises the consolidated founding treaties of the EU as well as the charter of fundamental rights. In fact, these documents are being published together in an official document by the EU, with a symbolic illustration of Europe on the front page. The Constitution of the United Kingdom is for example also a set of separate documents, instead of one core text. I know that this isn't an easy issue when it comes to the EU. That's why I made this disambig page. JaGa was the one who redirected it to the article about the constitutional basis of the EU. But that is still correct. The fact that the content of the TCE and the changes Lisbon brought about do amount to pretty much the same, is irrelevant. In fact, the Treaty of Lisbon has got nothing to do with this, other than the fact that it underlined that the cooperation revolves around the European Union per se, by abolishing the European Communities, renaming the Rome Treaty "Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union" and giving the EU a consolidated legal personality. The EU had a constitutional basis before the Lisbon Treaty. Btw thanks for not going berserk reverting, I'd also like to discuss this. - SSJ t 19:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC) (edit conflict)x2 (thanks for explaining how the DAB became a redirect, I had indeed missed the involvement of JaGa, I'll notify him/her of this discussion). I agree that the EU has a basis in a set of treaties and that this set of treaties might be regarded a constitution as well by some. I would also agree that those treaties constitute the legal basis European Union. However, to call those constituting documents a constitution is a bridge to far for me. That might seem semantics, but the term constitution is very heavy and it is emphasized in the discussions that with Lisbon, that we have not such a document. I think interpreting it would be WP:OR... L.tak (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC) I'm not dead set in favour of a full redirect to Treaties of the European Union. I made the disambig page for that reason obviously. I agree that this issue might be sensitive. But still, we're not talking about renaming the Treaties of the European Union "The Constitution of the European Union". There is a clearly visible and descriptive redirect note on the top of the article saying ""Constitution of the European Union" redirects here. For the 2004 abandoned proposal, see Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe." I would be OK with the separate disambig page, but I'm against a total redirect to the TCE article, as the constitutional basis of the EU looks likely to remain in force in the foreseeable future, and the TCE will be increasingly forgotten and irrelevant. - SSJ t 19:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC) Indeed, the unratified constitution iwill become less and less important. What about placing 'your' DAB page back (I don't think it is a double redirect anyway); but replacing the constitution of the European Union to simply Treaties of the European Union? L.tak (talk) 20:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC) Yes, sure, let's restore the DAB page. It might however be useful to also point out on the DAB page that the reason for us linking "Constitution of the European Union" to the article on the various treaties, is that three of those documents (namely the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Fundamental Rights Charter) aren't just any old amending EU treaty, but collectively form a de facto constitution. - SSJ t 20:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC) Arctic map Hi! May I ask you to create Arctic location map in projection similar to Location Antarctica.svg (with North Pole in the center) for Grey-green orthographic projections maps, as Arctic (orthographic projection).svg not good at all? --Conung (talk) 18:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) License tagging for File:Schuman Declaration 2.jpg Thanks for uploading File:Schuman Declaration 2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC) Translation of Logo? Hi, could you create your great logo in German? "Wikiprojekt Europäische Union". I will post it on the German project sight de:Wikipedia:WikiProjekt_Politik/EU Merci! --Ngowatchtransparent (talk) 21:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC) Image Rome Treaty The File:Rometreaty.jpg is put on speedy deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.187.76 (talk) 15:49, 26 November 2010 (UTC) File:Signing of the Maastricht Treaty.jpg listed for deletion A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Signing of the Maastricht Treaty.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC) As for this, you appear to completely midunderstand the role of that speedy deletion template. You can't write any old thing, call it a rationale, and then demand the image is run through procedure x. That template exists for when the rationale is not valid. However, I will nominate it at FFD if you think it's completely necessary... J Milburn (talk) 18:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC) File:Schuman Declaration 2.jpg listed for deletion A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Schuman Declaration 2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC) 145.97.241.117 (talk) 11:05, 27 November 2010 (UTC) European Union map Dear Ssolbergj, For some time now I have wondering why the map ("Global_European_Union.svg") of the EU has been coloured green on the English (and some other) language wiki? Is that for a particular reason? The colour most often associated with the EU is, as you probably know, blue ("http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/graph/embleme_en.htm"). Many other languages actually use blue (French, Italian, Spanish) for their maps. Mightn't it be more consistent to use blue instead of green? I know this might come across as a small detail, and in some way it is, but then, when trying to justify the link between a wiki and the world (e.g. how things are, or are being used, or the facts etc.), isn't the actual world our measure rod? Well, I hope you had a great holidays, and also hope to get a response from you when you find the time to do so. Sincerely, Golfo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.97.241.117 (talk) 10:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC) Coa. of Morocco Hi, i'm contacting you randomly because I saw what you did in Coa. of Sweden.svg and it seems you can contribute with very high level of SVG. So my question is if there's any possibly you can change the 'Supporters' of File:Coat of arms of Morocco.svg so they can look more gold-alike (adding shadows). If you do this for me I would be very gratful. cheers! --Xiquet (talk) 00:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:EUAIRGROUP.png Thanks for uploading File:EUAIRGROUP.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC) Hello, I work for EAG and I am trying to put a new article on EAG on wikipedia. The article whre you you edited the coat of arms is not up to date and far from complete. Besides that the crest that you published is not the correct version of the EAG crest. The correct version is the crest as it was there before it was edited.Keesbleijerveld (talk) 09:31, 5 January 2011 (UTC) Coat of arms of Narvik Kommune As far as I know, this is not the official coat of arms of Narvik kommune, and therefore you should not portray it as such. I will revert it an image of the official coat of arms if you don't have any sources that say that the coat of arms has been changed. —stiaand (talk) 23:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC) Hei, jeg går ut ifra at du snakker norsk. Takk for at du spurte meg først. Et grunnleggende prinsipp i heraldikken er at en fremstilling av et våpen er fullt ut gyldig, såfremt våpenets heraldiske beskrivelse (blazoning) er fulgt. Det er dette som er helt vesentlig, og som skiller f.eks. en moderne kommersiell logo fra et heraldisk motiv. Ingen stilisert versjon er mer korrekt enn en annen. Dette faktum blir muligens ofte oversett av den gjennomsnittlige nordmann fordi Hallvard Trættebergs stiliserte utforminger fra 1950-tallet er veldig vanlige i Norge. Men byvåpen-fremstillingen du sikter til er altså i tråd med beskrivelsen av Narvik kommunes våpen: "et opprett gull anker mot en rød bakgrunn". Skjoldets form er også ivaretatt (noe som egentlig heller ikke er heraldisk påkrevd). - SSJ t 22:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC) F.eks.:  : 100% gyldig;  : 100% gyldig. - SSJ t 22:57, 10 January 2011 (UTC) Portugal on orthographic projection Europe Hi Ssolbergj, the File:Portugal (orthographic projection).svg (based on your very nice map "orthographic projection Europe") needs to be modified to also include the Portuguese islands. Can you help here better than other graphists could? commons:Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop#Portugal .28orthographic_projection.29 Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC) Escudos de Luxemburgo Buenos dias, he visto que tienes un nivel básico de español, así intentaré comunicarte contigo en español, si no, ya escribiré en inglés. Quiero preguntar porqué en tu versión del escudo de Luxemburgo File:Armoiries Luxembourg Bourbon avec ornements.svg eliminastes el bonete rojo de las coronas reales. Según toda la información de la que dispongo, las coronas reales tienen bonete rojo (gules) y antes de redibujarlo, quería preguntar tu opinión. ¡Saludos! --Xavigivax (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2011 (UTC) The source of this change is at File:Coat of Arms of Luxembourg.svg, where Poznaniak introduced the "empty" crown, probably inspired by File:Coat of arms of Luxembourg.png. As far as I know, Luxembourg doesn't have an actual, physical crown, and therefore it's not easy to decide what's correct. But you're right, e.g. this 1899 version shows a more traditional crown. I just haven't been that interested in starting a discussion on this topic before. - SSJ t 14:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC) I don't see any technical reason why Poznaniak erased the red cap. In heraldry the royal crown has a red cap. All the sources in Catalan, Spanish, French and English ( http://books.google.es/books?id=0EBiwcy4x5EC&lpg=PA359&dq=royal%20crown&pg=PA359#v=onepage&q=royal%20crown&f=false the cap of the heraldic crown is always represented as of crimson ) that I read, say this. I'll restore it in brief. Thank you for your answer. --Xavigivax (talk) 22:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC) Done! --Xavigivax (talk) 15:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Nice work! - SSJ t 20:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Oh shit! I've new documentation: [2] where it says: Timbre: La couronne grand-ducale non doublée. It's the first time that I read that there is a crown that is named couronne grand-ducale and it specifies that is non doublée (without cap). I'll change it. --Xavigivax (talk) 11:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC) Now that we have a valid reference, I've fixed the problem with the crown's design. I also use the same design to draw the mantling crown and the shield crown. File:Armoiries Luxembourg Bourbon avec ornements.svg and File:Coat of Arms of Luxembourg.svg. Thanks for your help. See you. --Xavigivax (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Thanks. It's always nice to see people doing a thorough job, especially since there's so many people around who don't care a bit about consistency between SVG files on commons. - SSJ t 20:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC) laugh The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar You made me laugh here lol ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC) Parliament composition image Hello - I'm looking to make a graphic illustrating the composition of the houses of the Irish Oireachtas, similar to this great image which you made for the European Parliament. I've already made attempts at these diagrams (see the Oireachtas article), but they are misleading, as the seating arrangements for the houses of the Oireachtas are "in the round" (like the EU parliament), not with two separate benches like (for example) the UK House of Commons. So what program did you use to make your image, and how did you get the squares to pack together neatly in arcs? Any advice would be welcome. Cheers. --Kwekubo (talk) 15:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC) Hi. I used the array function ([3]) in AutoCAD, and had to spend quite some time finding the ideal density of squares for each circular row. Finally, I exported it as a PDF and imported it into Inkscape, in which the colouring etc. was done. - SSJ t 19:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Coat_of_Arms_of_the_Bagrationi_Dynasty.svg Email me regarding about this. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC) Hi! As you хаве drаwн the COA of Bagrationis on Commons, can you please add the mantle to it? The COA is not finished without it :)--Diaoha (talk) 18:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC) Fry1989 Please, look at the behaviour of the user Fry1989 concerning the files: Military Roundel of Finland pre-1944.svg, Mannerheimkruis.svg (also .jpg) etc. Sincerely, --WPK (talk) 21:08, 25 February 2011 (UTC) EU_Flag_specification.svg It seems that ratios in file EU_Flag_specification.svg are wrong. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EU_Flag_specification.svg I think that radius of 1/3 should be changed to 2/3 . Also ratio of 1/9 applied to the diameter of single star seems to be not correct (by 2 factor also for that?) . Thank you. Luca —Preceding unsigned comment added by 57.78.11.41 (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC) The numbers are entirely based on the numbers in the old version of the image, which is based on the EU's official guidelines. The old version had 1/18 as the radius of each star. The new version measures the diameter of each star: thats (1/18)*2=2/18=1/9. The radius of the entire circle of stars was 1/3 in the old version and still is so in the new image. - SSJ t 20:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC) In my opinion Luca is right, because the length of the hoist in the guidelines is 1 but in the svg it is 2. Yours sincerely Jörg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.224.134.38 (talk) 00:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC) Alright, I've fixed it. Ok? - SSJ t 15:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC) Orthographic maps Sorry to bother you, but you seem to know about these. How do you create these maps rotated? Be nice to get one for Malaysia, following the example of the map in the FA Indonesia, especially as I'm not that sure ASEAN is important enough yet to be noted on country maps. Current File:Malaysia (orthographic projection).svg is just a map of China with Malaysia off to the bottomright. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC) Norske adelsvåpen Goddag! Det er hyggelig å treffe på en annen nordmann som i tillegg befatter seg med heraldikk. Jeg fikk kjennskap til deg gjennom brukeren «Fry1989». Du later til å være nokså opptatt, men skulle du ha tid, så er du herved velkommen til å bistå med å illustrere norske adelsvåpen. Jeg skriver om adelige slekter, og i særdeleshet små og ukjente slekter som forlengst er døde, ønsker jeg å få frem i lyset. Et tilfelle er slekten Gyldenkrantz, hvis fargerike våpenskjold du finner her. Vet du om andre heraldiske grafikere fra Norden her på Wikimedia Commons? Jeg lurer også på hvorvidt dere har et slags torv hvor man kan fremlegge sine ønsker. --- Aaemn784 (talk) 23:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC) Hei! Jeg lastet opp File:Coat of arms of the Gyldenkrantz family.svg nå nettopp. Det er flere andre nordiske heraldikk-interesserte her. Særlig svensker tror jeg. Lokal Profil er f.eks. veldig driftig. Det nærmeste du kommer er "torv" for heraldikk må vel være [4]. - SSJ t 00:18, 16 April 2011 (UTC) Det var litt av en overraskelse da jeg gikk inn på Gyldenkrantz og fikk se våpenskjoldet. En flott illustrasjon gjort på bare et blunk. Jeg kommer sikkert til å stikke innom med liknende oppdrag, og så får du utføre dem hvis du har tid og ork. Det er snakk om et lite antall våpen med simple motiver à la Gyldenkrantz. Gyldenkrantz-våpenet er forresten så godt utført at jeg nesten ikke la merke til at det viser to stjerner over én, og ikke motsatt. --- Aaemn784 (talk) 00:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC) File:Location NATO.svg Hi. I'd like to know which file you made this one with. Is there any world map that is like that one? I mean, that shows a "flat" northern region (including Canada). Because I just find maps that don't show it like that, e.g. File:BlankMap-World8.svg. Please answer on my talk page. Nihon-no-fan (talk) 12:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Eurogamer logo.svg Thanks for uploading File:Eurogamer logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:14, 24 April 2011 (UTC) File:Greater Coat of Arms of Brussels.svg The new form of the of escutcheon is correct, but according to the website of Brussels the former crown was the correct version. The city of Mechelen also has a similar countly crown. Adelbrecht (talk) 16:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Hi. Yes I've noticed this. I chose the version listed as official on Crown (heraldry)#Belgium, due to the fact that so many of the heraldic images around have erroneous details. Belgium clearly has had a given set of heraldic crowns. I don't see how the crown shown here fits in, if it isn't simply a distorted rendition of the Belgian "older count crown". We probably should send an email to the City of Brussels and ask what crown it is. Its design surely isn't random. Do you have any more information? - SSJ t 23:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC) It is possible that David's version isn't correct. I have no exact sources, but Mechelen and Izegem andeven Dutch villages like this one seem to use this form. I have this book by Carl-Alexander von Volborth, and it shows the Belgian countly crown like David's, but very short 'spikes'. So it's possible that David's version was too long, and that many artists have made the spikes disappear completely. These are just guesses though. Adelbrecht (talk) 10:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC) This page features the countly crown as the crown of the Anciens Pays-Bas catholiques, so the Spanish/Austrian Netherlands. This could be the answer we are looking for? Adelbrecht (talk) 14:24, 27 April 2011 (UTC) BTW, David's image was based on this one from "Hugo Gerard Ströhl: Heraldischer Atlas, Stuttgart 1899." The text reads "In Frankreich und Belgien legte man früher der mittleren und den beiden Seitenzinken (Anm. der Grafenkrone) je drei Perlen auf (Fig. 48.)"- SSJ t 14:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I have no idea whether the current greater version of the coat of arms of the City of Brussels was devised in a period of French or Dutch domination. - SSJ t 14:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Well, the current arms were granted by the government of Belgium. A previous grant was by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, it lacked the current banners. According to NGW, the Dutch goverment approved the supporters. We can conclude that the escutcheon and (a?) crown were granted in the Ancien Regime, during the Austrian or Spanish rule, or even during the Burgundian rule. I think it would be save to assume that the crown that you first used, the one without the pikes, is the correct one. Another Belgian coats of arms that show this design: Province of West-Flanders, To confuse us even more, this thimble shows the princely hat or crown. :-p Adelbrecht (talk) 15:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Alright, I've fixed the crown now. Thanks. - SSJ t 17:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC) POTY voting Please either convert your account into a global one at Special:MergeAccount or link the user page here to an eligible account's user page on another Wikimedia project, and a link to your Commons account from your eligible account's user page. Note: The linking edits at each userpage MUST be performed by the account owner, to be considered valid). – Adrignola talk 15:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Actually, it looks like you have enough edits on Commons alone. But it still might be beneficial to get a global account for easy login anywhere. – Adrignola talk 16:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Belgium Dear Ssolbergj, the maps (e.g. File:Communities of Belgium.svg) you produced and are displayed on the Belgium article are criticize in the FARC process because their description does not mention the original map on which your maps are based on. Could you please change this. Tahnk you very much. Vb (talk) 16:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Reviewers have also expressed similar concern with respect to File:Greater Coat of Arms of Belgium.svg. Thank you for your help. 16:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Energy Community map Could you please update the as Ukraine is a full member now. Beagel (talk) 14:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC) Nytt våpen: Baron von Westervick Hei, og takk for sist. Klarer du å gjenskape dette våpenet? Det har forsåvidt ingen hast, for jeg har ikke engang skrevet artikkelen. Joachim Irgens, het han opprinnelig. Han ble adlet i 1674 under navnet Baron von Westervick. --- Aaemn784 (talk) 00:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Hei igjen. Jeg kan gjøre det, men jeg tror at jeg i alle fall venter til en artikkel er lagd. Jeg er en smule opptatt med eksamener for tiden. - SSJ t 21:31, 31 May 2011 (UTC) For all del. Også jeg har eksamener, og i dette henseendet er Wikipedia en farlig tidstyv. Lykke til. Joachim Irgens von Westervick --- Aaemn784 (talk) 23:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Hva er i feltet nede til venstre? Tulipaner på vann? Hvit jord? Og vet du hva pryden rett ovenfor hjelmen skal forestille? To halvmåner? - SSJ t 23:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Nei, det var ikke så lett å fastslå. For meg virker det som sjø. Kanskje viser tulipaner og sjø til Nederland. Hjelmtegnet er nok to halvmåner. --- Aaemn784 (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC) File:Coat of arms of Joachim Irgens baron von Westervick.svg - SSJ t 19:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Det er bare supert. --- Aaemn784 (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC) File:Ecofin euro presentation.jpg listed for deletion A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ecofin euro presentation.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 16:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Request! Hello I would like to request the vectorization of this flag please: http://flagspot.net/images/f/fic%5Egeas.gif — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drax90 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC) What is it? - SSJ t 21:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC) it is a flag — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.239.11.239 (talk) 06:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Well, that is obvious. What flag? - SSJ t 15:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC) http://codegeass.wikia.com/wiki/File:Britannian_flag.svg here you go,please if you can revectorize it since its full of mistakes in line depth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drax90 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC) I don't think I'll spend time vetorising this fictional flag, sorry. - SSJ t 10:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC) Speedy deletion nomination of Historic Hotels of Europe If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article. You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles. A tag has been placed on Historic Hotels of Europe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC) File:Greater Coat of Arms of Belgium.svg Hey, I changed the Greater Coat of Arms of Belgium to the Sodacannic style, using a mix of your elements and those of Katepanomegas. I assumed that you wouldn't really mind the switch of style, because you use it too these days. But, to be sure, I'mm letting you know. Just revert if you don't want it in that style. It's kinda crude now, but I'll update it in the future. Adelbrecht (talk) 12:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC) Better-looking lion (another sodacan piece, from Danish heraldry)? Hi. Yes, the "sodacannic" style does look nice in general. But I'm not sure whether the new version of this file in total looks any better (at the moment): the size of the flags and banners at the top in relation to the mantling looks a bit disproportionate IMO. The ideal thing would probably be to make a fully-fledged sodacannic version of the mantling from the old version (it's exact shape). Furthermore, a couple of details actually aren't in line with the blazon: the lions are supposed to be proper, not Or. And the compartment should be a pedestal, not the motto itself. I also don't see why the shield shape used in Sodacan's UK heraldry would be a very natural choice here (though I support the right to choose any shield shape in heraldry). The shields displayed on the flags should at least have the same shape as the one held by the supporters in the middle. The lion that is copied from the scottish quartering of the UK CoA does of course look great in that particular, characteristic quartering, but would you agree with me that the lion shown to the right here looks better as the sole centrepiece of a shield? Thanks for giving me a notice about your revision. The sodacannic style can clearly represent an improvement and I'm sure all the issues can be easily fixed. - SSJ t 01:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Another tip: the flag poles and flag shape used here. And as I'm sure you've noticed, the belgian tricolour split banner needs shades. - SSJ t 01:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC) I do agree with this. I was thinking about it lately. Technically, I think any lion would be right, but it is indeed a more English style. It does lack the manes. I have seen the supporters being portrayed and described as both proper and Or. But yes, now that I do think about it, proper seems to be the right thing. I am going to copy the relevant parts of this discussion to the talk page of user Katepanomegas. I think he should probably oversee this needed correction, because he has made most of the arms of Belgium. That way, our styles can remain unified. Adelbrecht (talk) 07:06, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Skiens byvåpen Jeg ser at du har oppdatert Skiens byvåpen på Commons til en versjon med ny krone. Den ser veldig flott ut, men det er ikke den som er det offisielle byvåpnet per i dag (se nettsidene til Skien kommune). Kunne du tilbakestilt til forrige versjon, og lasta opp ditt bidrag som en alternativ utgave av byvåpnet? --Bitjungle (talk) 10:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC) "The accuracy of this coat of arms is disputed" Where is the gold and black mantling? Just some minor errors. The lew texts says the 'mantling' (don't know the specific word) of the helmet should be Or and Sable. The red ribbon on which the motto is written should have a black outline. Adelbrecht (talk) 11:41, 26 June 2011 (UTC) The motto already has a dark outline (similar to the one shown here), but I'll make it more visible. Is it the mantling that is attached to the helmet? In the historic raster file, everything looks like or. - SSJ t 14:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Officialy, according to the blazon as written in the law, it should be or and sable. And generally, we should follow that. Adelbrecht (talk) 20:44, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Of course. I didn't dispute that. I only asked where a black and gold mantling is supposed to be. It may either be the one attached to the helmet, or the big ermine mantling which surrounds the whole thing. Or both; I don't know, since I don't speak french. Google translate isn't particularly good when it comes to heraldic language. - SSJ t 21:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC) The mantling attached helmet. Didn't I say that in my first sentence? :-p ('mantling' (don't know the specific word) of the helmet) The file by Katepanomegas has this correctly. Adelbrecht (talk) 07:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC) Oops, my mistake I didn't see that. I'll upload a version with fixes soon. - SSJ t 18:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC) Great! Adelbrecht (talk) 07:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC) Arc Manche - image upload Hi, I'm currently working on the Arc Manche wikipedia page, and I would like to upload logos of the organisations mentionned in the article. Unfortunately I haven't been a user for a long time, and I don't seem to understand very well how it works with logos on the English wikipedia. On the French one a specific category is dedicated to them and to uploading them, is it the same here ? Or do I have to be an auto-administrated user to upload them anyway? Do you think I can ask you to do it? The logos are all official ones so I don't think it brings up any issues but maybe I'm wrong. Thanks in advance, Tetley Arche — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tetley Arche (talk • contribs) 13:14, 8 July 2011 (UTC) Coat of arms of Belgium Really appreciate the work you have done on the greater coat of arms of Belgium. There remain, however, a few details that have to be corrected. 1. The provincial flag of Limburg contains a mistake. It shows the new provincial arms, not the one blazoned in the official decree. The new arms have the lion of Limburg with an escutcheon of Loon (or Looz), e.g. barry of ten or and gules. That escutcheon is not in the blazon of the greater coat of arms of the kingdom. Hence the banner should be: argent, a lion (with forked tail) gules, crowned, armed and langued or. 2. The lions in the provincial arms of Limburg and Luxembourg have forked tails. See the blazon: 2° Limbourg, d'argent au lion de gueules, à la queue fourchue en sautoir, armé, lampassé et couronné d'or. 3° Luxembourg, d'argent, à cinq fasces d'azur, au lion de gueules, à la queue fourchue, couronné d'or, brochant sur le tout. It would be great if you could make these last corrections.Richardot (talk) 13:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks. I've uploaded a new version. All fine now? - SSJ t 15:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Fine by me. Richardot (talk) 12:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC) German Empire arms I appreciate your efforts, this is the best SVG Version of these armes so far, but: -The Breast shield has a completely wrong Prussian Eagle -The Eagle on the Standard of Brandenburg is wrong -And there are Text Errors on the Collar of the Black Eagle. For Austrian and German arms deriving from the 19th century, please stick as closely as possible to the designs as seen in Ströhls depictions. I'm already busy with these group of arms, (beginning with austrian crown lands) trying to be as exact as possible not only to the blazon but also to Ströhl's designs, but it is still a long way to go: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/Scimitar/Unbenannt-1.png Please, take a closer look to the things I pointed out, if you need further help, just ask me again. --David Liuzzo 14:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Liuzzo (talk • contribs) The Prussian Eagle on the Breast shield wears the Prussian crown, has a Hohenzollern shield and the Prussian sceptre and orb. The Eagle of Brandenburg doesn't have a Polish Eagle on his breast, why should he!?. The SVVM CVIQVE is inverted on some parts of the collar. --David Liuzzo 14:53, 28 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Liuzzo (talk • contribs) Orphaned non-free image File:European NAvigator screenshot.png Thanks for uploading File:European NAvigator screenshot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 21:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC) Nytt våpen: Tordenstjerne Hei, og vel møtt etter en forhåpentligvis avslappet sommer. Har du mulighet til å lage Tordenstjerne-våpenet? Det har en nokså enkel utforming. Det står forresten i adelsbrevet at hjelmen skal være hvit (sitat: en hwiid hiellm), så du kunne kanskje farge hjelmen hvit og ha rød innside. I tillegg foreslår jeg et vanlig, avrundet skjold. Artikkelen er her. --- Aaemn784 (talk) 15:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Request Please vectorize as "FESFUT logo.svg". A bigger logo can be found here. ← Please use that image for editing. The image at Elsalvador.png has a bad edge cut. Please render into different sizes, add transparent background (obviously), and keep same rationale as File:Elsalvador.png. Regards. Jaime070996 23:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC) Heads up Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Justus Lipsius building. - J.Logan`t: 10:19, 1 November 2011 (UTC) Otium How do I go about getting Otium reassessed to possible B-Class and getting a higher assessment of "importance"?--Doug Coldwell talk 16:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC) Non-free rationale for File:Phare2.jpg Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Phare2.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale. If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC) Could You make an vector image of one-class seating Airbus A380? Similar to the one, on the airbus site. It is still the biggest passenger airplane in the world(and there is a lack of 853 seating "sky" image in article). Of course would be nice if You can make science-fiction goose, and biggest antonov images to, counting possibility of maximum seats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.75.70.254 (talk) 02:54, 30 November 2011 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Dow Jones logo.svg Thanks for uploading File:Dow Jones logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:09, 13 January 2012 (UTC) Swedish heraldry FAC I recently nominated Swedish heraldry for WP:FAC, and we need knowledgeable editors to comment on the article. Since you have been a contributor to that article, I hope you will take some time to look it over and leave your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Swedish heraldry/archive1. Thank you for your time and your contributions! Wilhelm Meis (Quatsch!) 14:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC) File:Diesel logo.svg listed for deletion A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Diesel logo.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 06:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Historic Hotels of Europe Dear Ssolbergj, congratulations on your article about Historic Hotels of Europe. I work at Hoteis Heritage Lisboa, wich is a Portuguese member of the HHE. As so, I tried in the past to write an article of the HHE but it was deleted, so we are happy now to see this information on Wikipedia. I also would like to add an article of the Hoteis Heritage Lisboa as Pousadas de Portugal and other members have. Could you please help me on this? Thank you and best regards. Rodriguesa (talk) 15:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Community Fisheries Control Agency logo.svg Thanks for uploading File:Community Fisheries Control Agency logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC) Map for Kyrgyzstan Hello, You can make a map of Kyrgyzstan. (Kyrgyzstan (orthographic projection).svg) Thank you. Maksat (talk) 13:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.113.195.248 (talk)