User talk:Borvan53

I've noticed that you have uploaded a lot of maps of the Maginot Line from cartomaginot.com. While cartomaginot uses a Creative Commons license, it's a no-commercial-use license, which isn't compatible with the Commons CC-by-SA, which permits any use, provided attribution is given. Please review the license at cartomaginot.com and compare it with Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. The Commons liscense states that "commercial use must be allowed. The cartomaginot copyright specifically forbids commercial use.

I mention all this because I'm writing a series of articles on the English Wikipedia about Maginot fortifications and almost used the maps until I looked at the source. They would not be usable on the English Wikipedia, which has less stringent rules than Commons, so I don't think they can remain on Commons. You may wish to ask a Commons administrator for advice. Acroterion (talk) 04:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

see my explanations at User talk:Acroterion#Maginot Maps

Salut j’ai vu que tu es l’importateur de ce fichier File:Éléments chevalement.svg, peux-tu réimporté une version sans les légendes de ce schema sous le titre File:Winding tower void schema.svg ? Ainsi les autres projets pourront la légender facilement dans leurs langues et je pourrais utiliser le nouveau fichiers comme planche illustrative sur le Wiktionnaire dans le thésaurus. Merci beaucoup d’agréer à ma requête ;-) . V!v£ l@ Rosière ^{/Murmurer…/} 21:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Il ne te reste plus qu'à traduire en anglais les termes, si tu le souhaites. Je peux compléter avec d'autres indications si tu veux (pont roulant, éléments constitutifs du puits, ...) Borvan53 (talk) 22:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oups excuse-moi de la réponse tardive, c'est la rentrée universitaire du coup j'ai couru un peu dans tous les sens. Merci beaucoup, c'est nickel ! Cette planche me va déjà très bien. Mais je ne refuse absolument pas une planche plus complète si ça ne t'ennuies pas évidemment, ainsi ça fera plus de lexiques techniques illustrés sur le Wiktionnaire. Je m'occuperais de tout ça en octobre. Merci beaucoup en tout cas. V!v£ l@ Rosière ^{/Murmurer…/} 14:46, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

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. INeverCry 21:42, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merci, je prends ça comme une reconnaissance de mon travail sur commons Borvan53 (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hveragerdi Leirgerdur panoramic.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Minor overexposure, but ok overall --Poco a poco 21:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cap Vestrahorn from Vikurfjall Ring Road.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think it's slightly tilted clockwise. V-wolf 06:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]  Done but all horizontal lines are not perfectly parallel. Borvan53 07:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply] I think it fits the QI criteria now.--V-wolf 22:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Helo! Please, look on this foto File:Lower bell Blast furnace Völklingen Ironworks.JPG. Are you sure that the bell showed on it is a "small bell" as you have wrote in the description of the foto. As I understend a lower bell should to be a big bell but not small bell. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Up to this bell, there is another bell, which is pictured in File:Upper bell Blast furnace Völklingen Ironworks 2.JPG (in this picture, the upper bell is only 15 cm high and I took the picture through this small opening, but the upper bell can be lifted to 2 meters high, please look at here). And it seems that the lower bell is smaller than the upper one, isn't it?

I don't have any cross section or information about that design Völklingen BF top. Do you have something? It will be welcome to check that point! Borvan53 (talk) 19:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am no great expert on late 19th century blast furnaces. The bell was used to close the top of a furnace, except when it was being charged. This had the effect of directing the hot waste gases into a Cowper stove, a form of heat exchanger, so that the blast into the furnace could be heated. Opening a single bell had the effect of directing the whole blast into the open furnace. A number of systems were apprently devised to deal with this. One with two bells would solve the problem: skips with the charge were hauled to the top of the furnace and tipped into a hopper; then the upper bell was lowered dropping the charge inot the space between, while a lower bell kept the furnace gas-tight; finally then the upper bell being raised (closing it) and the lower one opened, so that the charge entered the furnace proper. (based on line drawings in G. Reginald Bashford, The manufacture of Iron and Steel: 1. Iron production (3rd edition, Chapman & Hall, London 1964), pp 21-31. I would be surprised at the upper opening being as small as 15 cm. The book just cited refers to diamenters for the bell - the lower bell of 13-15 feet (foot = about 30 cm). One system illustrated had an upper bell descending 2.5 feet, and I measure its diameter as double that. Unfortunately, I do not read German and the article cited by Borvan would not transalate. Nevertheless, a newspaper is far from an ideal source. The system at Völklingen does not seem quite like any of the illustrations I am looking at, but the upper bell was clearly smaller than the lower one. 94.171.107.65 16:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC) -- Peterkingiron of English WP[reply]

Please only look the picture on the newspaper, and don't read the german text. You will notice that the bell-tops of Volkingen Ironworks are not from Arthur Glenn McKee (I have written the article), but have a very different design. And the lower bell is the smaller because its role is the same than the upper bell of a McKee top. You can also read the book Blast-furnace construction in America to have more details on late 19th / early 20 th century blast furnaces. Borvan53 (talk) 16:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your uploads of these amazing 1500s engineering drawings/artworks. Do we have all of them? And is it possible to get best quality? I would like to try to get one to FP on EN-wiki. Probably the smelting one (for EV) or perhaps the underground burning one (or another) just because of sheer coolness.

TCO (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shame on me!!! I cannot remember the url of the place I have uploaded these pictures (it was a thesis published on-line). I only remember that I uploaded them only because of their rather good quality. I also remember that the site do not publish other good quality pictures of Agricola. Borvan53 (talk) 20:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See here: [1] TCO (talk) 21:05, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Since, you are French, any chance you can get a high res upload of the Moissan picture or his cell illustration? I would like to take one or the other through FP.

See here: [2]

TCO (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice title!

Good quality is difficult to define. You can get some poor pictures here, on wikisource (there are many, but it seems that you have ever looked there), try also a pictures search engine like this. About higher res pictures, I found this one and this (click next picture). Some portraits can be found there. But I am unable to provide you FP for Moissan's cell. I think the only way is to go to La Sorbonne, and take a shot! Borvan53 (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I actually have what I need (for articles) in terms of having useful images. I am interested in getting something FP-worthy because the subject deserves it and also because I think it is beneficial to Wiki to see some different sorts of subjects and image types. Appreciate all your links. I really lack the ability to take it further myself though. I don't mind paying for an image, either. Just the one you showed is his electric arc furnace so off my topic.TCO (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Affinage convertisseur Bessemer.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 05:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Your authority should be "Basforth, G. Reginald" not as set out. 94.171.107.65 16:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Borvan53 (talk) 09:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jökulgil from Skalli.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sky is blown out, but I'm not horribly bothered by it in this case. --King of Hearts 03:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please have another look to the latest version. I edited your image a bit with Gimp. You can revert it, if you are not happy with the result. Regards, --Ivar (talk) 18:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abbaye de Silvacane Facade panoramic.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Nice light and contrast. --Iifar 06:04, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lisbon is in Portugal (and the capital) and not in Spain! Thank you. Tm (talk) 16:00, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Borvan53 (talk) 17:32, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dont worry, everyone can and will make mistakes. ;) Tm (talk) 20:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tongariro alpine crossing Ngauruhoe behind volcanic mouth.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, though somewhat strong noise reduction. --Smial 11:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/Borvan53⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

Dear Borvan53,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

• In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
• In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

Vos graphiques sur ce sujet sont très bons, seulement je recherche les sources chiffrées... et elles ne sont plus accessibles depuis que vous les avez utilisées... Les auriez-vous encore ??

J'ai encore les chiffres initiaux. Mais il me semble que les sources sont accessibles, il suffit de consulter chacun des rapports annuel de l'Iron and Steel Institute Borvan53 (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

J'ai essayé, mais c'est super fastidieux... Si vous pouviez me communiquer les chiffres de vos graphiques ce serait super sympa... D'ailleurs c'est dommage que sur Wiki on ne puisse pas accéder aussi aux chiffres ayant permis de dresser un graphique... Merci d'avance !

Ça fait longtemps que je m'étais planifié la chose, mais faire des tableaux sur wiki est également fastidieux. C'est urgent? Borvan53 (talk) 14:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non plus maintenant... C'était pour un usage en classe... j'ai fait mon cours le SVG modifié... Mais ça pourrait me resservir ! Merci quand même ! --RomGuig (talk) 11:07, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sveinsgil 2013 06.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 21:20, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View on Landmannalaugar area from Laugavegur 2012 panoramic 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View on Landmannalaugar area from Laugavegur 2012 panoramic 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 14:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jökulgil from Skalli 2012 panoramic.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Graphium 18:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kiruna mine English.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 21:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for not answering sooner, but I did not check my Commons talk page for a while. I have in Excel US mined copper production back to 1845. I will see if I can find a good source for other countries, especially the UK. Because the smelters at Swansea treated a lot of foreign ore, UK smelter production may have been substantially larger than mined copper production; any preference? Regards. Plazak (talk) 17:02, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Plazak: Yes, exactly : UK copper production shifted from local to foreign ore, and then decreased when US took the leadership. All these changes intersest me because I am trying to write some featured articles about copper extraction processes. Borvan53 (talk) 20:01, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found a source for UK mined copper production 1854-1885: B. R. Mitchell, Abstract of British Historical Statistics, Cambridge University Press, 1971, p.159.. If you want, I could email you an Excel file with the UK and US production. Regards. 21:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Plazak: I found the figures very ineresting : comparing p. 159 (whose stats sadly stops in 1885) wiith pp. 164-168 was my objective. If you have Excel files for US and UK production, I will take them! My mail is, typed in reverse (to avoid spam from bots) : moc.liamg@35drareg.naej Borvan53 (talk) 20:06, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Borvan53,

Pour aller plus vite, j'ai ajouté le détonateur {{speedydelete|asked by author}} sur les deux pages concernées : ça devrait sauter d'ici quelques jours.

Pour aller plus loin, j'ai pratiqué le même traitement sur la page correspondant à la partition.

Y a-t-il tant de pages utilisant encore le format jpeg ? J'en vois partout quand je creuse un peu, par curiosité, dans les articles sur la littérature, la peinture, et le reste... Leurs auteurs-contributeurs sont-ils conscients du danger ?

En tous cas, puisque je peux soumettre des dessins / schémas / partitions au format png, c'est adopté.

Cordialement, Flopinot2012 (talk) 09:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merci Flopinot2012 de compatir à ma jpegophobie ! En fait, je me suis souvenu de tes gribouillis suite à la découverte de cet intéressant graphique. Ces jpeg n'étant pas catégorisés, j'ai à la fois soulagé mes pulsions de maniaque du rangement avec celles de suppressioniste, en me défoulant sur ces malheureux jpeg.

Quant à tes partitions en PNG, je te signale, pour ta -très respectable- culture, l'existence d'une bibliothèque de notes en format SVG, avec le code pour les utiliser. Sinon, on peut tout faire à la main, comme dans cet exemple. Mais dans ce cas, je n'ai pas (encore?) l'intention d'imposer le SVG à qui que ce soit.

Moi, ce qui me régale plus encore, c'est de moucher les labellisations de manœuvres militaires sans carte, d'architecture sans plan, de biologie sans illustration,... Borvan53 (talk) 21:19, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I would like to ask you to translate your File:Evolution convertisseurs.svg into ukrainian language. Here is a vocabulary - Bessemer-Thomas - Бессемерівський і томасівський процеси, Siemens-Martin - мартенівський процес, Oxigen converter - киснево-конвертерний процес, Electric ark - Електросталеплавильне виробництво, Direct reduction - Безпосереднє (пряме) одержання заліза. If two last phrases are too long then tell about this and I will change them by somethin else. Thank you. I am sorry for trouble. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 10:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blast furnace chip worker! I will avoid "процес". But the two last phrases are too long, even if I change the size of the text. Can you propose shorter phrases ? Borvan53 (talk) 08:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Electric ark - Електрометалургія, Direct reduction - Безпосереднє одержання заліза or Пряме одержання заліза. If Безпосереднє одержання заліза or Пряме одержання заліза are too long for "Direct reduction" too, then use a phrase Пряме одержання.

By the way, I want ask you about one thing. Industrial use of oxygen converter production started in 1952 [3] but on your chart it is starting in 1950. Why? Maybe you have took into account a certain amount of steel wich was produced by this process in the experimental meltings in a test period of the history of this process until 1952? Or maybe your sources did this and take information being considering experimental meltings in a test period? Or something else? Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 14:45, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done It was not so easy with these long titles. @Blast furnace chip worker: you just need to set the good parameter in the article.

About your question : first trials began in 1949, and then industrial production started about 1952. This graphic is then not very accurate. I need are the exact figures, to make a table, as I did, for example, with File:Production préréduits (DRI et HBI) par procédés Midrex HYL Charbon.svg. Borvan53 (talk) 20:16, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merci beaucoup. Thank you. Well, I hope you will finde exact figures and your chart will be more correct. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 20:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am sorry for I did not answer your quation immediately. First of all, I am not against the renaming you have made. I am not native English speaker so I can not discuss this topic professionally. All I can to say is the following. May be something of this will be interesting for you.

You made a remark that I «named the Dunkirk steel industry as a steel mill, although pictures show blast furnaces». Well, just take a look on the article Steel mill in the English wiki. There, they used a picture which shows blast furnaces. Of cause, I think it is a mistake because the article is about «steel plant» while blast furnaces produce pig iron but not steel. But when I used an expression «steel mill» in commons category name I used it in the meaning «ironworks» (usine sidérurgique) but not in meaning «steel shop» and, as we know, there are BFs in usine sidérurgique.

In the countries of former USSR the following two expressions are used:

1. металургійний завод(uk), металлургический завод(ru). Ukrainian-English and Russian-English dictionaries say: металургійний завод(uk), металлургический завод(ru)= metallurgical works = metallurgical plant = steel mill = steel foundry = steel works — is a plant where produce pig iron, steel and metal-roll or just one of these. It is composed with BF, casting mashines, open hearth furnace, converters, continuous casting, slabbing mill, rolling mills in this kind of plant but there are no coke ovens and sinter plant. If a plant produces only pig iron (pig iron ingots — gueuse, like fr: Usine sidérurgique d'Uckange did) or only steel (slabbs or also metal-roll from scrap-metal or from pig iron ingots) or only metal-roll (from slabbs and blooms), it is a металургійний завод(uk), металлургический завод(ru) nevertheless.

N. B. steel mill and steel works can be also translated into Ukraine and into Russian languages as «сталеливарний завод» (uk), «сталелитейный завод» (ru) — is a plant (works, not shop) in which the finish products are steel and metal-roll but not pig iron. There are can be BF but its presence is not necessarily.

Sometimes term «iron and steel works» is used for this kind of plant. One will not find an article (redirect) «iron and steel works» in wiki but nevertheless one can find en:Yenakiyeve Iron and Steel Works (comprise a sinter plant but have been called works, not combine).

One will not find an article «metallurgical plant» in the English wiki but nevertheless one can find, for example, en:Moscow Metallurgical Plant (built by a frenchman, in past there was an open hearth furnace to produce steel in this plant).

2. металургійний комбінат(uk), металлургический комбинат(ru) — is an soviet term «metallurgical combine» for which Ukrainian-English and Russian-English dictionaries say: iron and steel works = integrated iron-and-steel works  — is the complete industry (coke ovens, sinter plant, BF, open hearth furnace, converters, casting mahines, rolling mills, coating lines, etc.) But if a plant has no coke ovens, for example, it can be called «combine» too. For example, en:Azovstal iron and steel works (in Ukraine, the works, if I'm not mistaken, is not composed with sinter plan), en:Illich Steel and Iron Works (in Ukraine, the works, if I'm not mistaken, is not composed with coke ovens).

So, I think dictionaries I have do not give me a really clear answer on your quation. But from my experience and Wikipedia articles I have made the following conclusions:

• still mill (or steel shop) → is the shop which produces liquid (molten) steel, blooms, billets or slabs. It is composed with open hearth furnace, converters, ladle metallurgy and continuous castig machines. But nevertheless sometimes one can find in literature and in internet that «still mill» means not just a «shop» (department) but means whole «steelworks». English wiki article en:Steel mill says: «A steel mill or steelworks is an industrial plant for the manufacture of steel.»
• plant → sometimes means «works», sometimes means «shop». You was right then you told that English language is really fuzzy.
• steelworks or iron and steel works → french: Usine sidérurgique → is the complete industry (coke ovens, sinter plant, BF, converters, casting mahines, rolling mills, coating lines, etc.) But it is posible that steelworks or iron and steel works not have a coke ovens, sinter plant.
• iron and steel works or integrated iron-and-steel works → french: Usine sidérurgique → is the complete industry (coke ovens, sinter plant, BF, converters, casting mahines, rolling mills, coating lines, etc.)
• ironworks → I am agree with you about your interpretation of the term "ironworks" as «the old way to produce iron and steel, before the invention of the Bessemer converter. It deals with puddling of fining processes.» But I think that when English-native speaker says «ironworks» he can means morden steelworks too. May be I am not right.

I am sorry for such long answer. I hope I did not expend much of your time. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 20:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blast furnace chip worker! Whoosh! What an answer!

When I am reading you, I notice that I was myself wrong in French ! An «usine sidérugique» only produces rolled products (or product designed to be rolled). I even pointed myself this definition in the article «Sidérurgie» ! An so the Usine sidérugique d'Uckange is an «usine sidérugique» only because it sometimes send liquid pig iron to nearby steel shops! Even in my own native language, things are not so clear.

I fully agree with everything you wrote. My main concern is then : how do we name steel shops / mills categories? Do not forget electrical arc furnaces! Do we need to create specific categories as «Stell mills in Germany», to focus on steel shop? Borvan53 (talk) 21:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am sorry, I was not on-line some time. Well, I think if Wikimedia has enough materials on steel shops (wich is just a part of whole steel works) in Germany or in any other country, one can create such kind of category. But I do not know how it should be called - "Steel mills in Germany" or "Steel shops in Germany". I think it is better, may be, to ask about this on en:Wikipedia: Reference desk/Language. Why you did not do this yet? Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 09:57, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt I will have the answer. The best way to have a good answer is to identify who writes good articles in English, and ask the question to him. But main contributions about steel topics in the English wiki are both old and of poor quality. Moreover, you probably know, like me, that metallurgists have a very light knowledge of industrial topics.

I finally prefer "steel mill" because of the word "mini mill" ("mini shop" doesn't exist). Borvan53 (talk) 18:55, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Схема лінії Арпада.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Схема лінії Арпада.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Sergento (talk) 10:13, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Опорний пункт.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Опорний пункт.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Sergento (talk) 10:13, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm quite sure [4] is an svg file. Is there a mistake? Else I'll revert it back. Thanks. Yinweichen (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Yinweichen: May you please publish the source code? I'm not able to reproduce your plot.--Kopiersperre (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Look, please, on the upper left corner of this picture File:The Pennsylvania railroad. What is the Franch name of the profession of those men who are on the top of the blast furnace and charge it? Dictionaries I have do not contain this word. I am going to create a category about this profession. Is the name of those people who on this blast furnace File:HautfourneauXVIII 1nb.jpg the same? How do you call a wheelbarrow on their hands? Have it a specific name or not? About English name of this profession I have asked another man who are English-native speaker. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 16:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The people who are responsible of feeding the furnace are the chargeur(s), like it is shown on the top left of your picture. The common French name of a wheelbarrow is a brouette (but in your picture there is a specific wheelbarrow with two wheels, which is often called a viviane). Borvan53 (talk) 09:59, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have to clarify. Are you only guessing that the people of this profession are called chargeur(s) or the name realy has been used on French blast furnaces or recorded in the literature in this matter? There are a separate word for this profession in the Ukrainian language (and in the Russian). This word is каталь (spellings in the two languages are equal but pronunciations are different).

And more about the barrow. See, please File:Charging a blast furnace at the Govan Iron Works.png. As I understand, the word viviane began to be used in the 20th century (see Étimologi in viviane). Therefore, the word is not unsuitable, since such wheelbarrow were used in the 19th century and earlier. Or am I wrong?

By the way, may be you have Franch-English dictionary and can to look in there and to see the english word for this profession, becouse as I have allready told there are no this word in my Ukraine - English and Russian - English dictionaries. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 13:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I found in THE French reference the evidence that chargeur is really the name of the profession. It has been recorded like that, and I checked that -in any part of France- there is no other word for that profession (which is a little bit strange because of its numerous dialects).

Yes, you are right : the word Viviane is too young for that tool. The word brouette is then better. About the tool used is your (very interesting) picture, the word brouette is better, although it is not very accurate. But I checked -always in THE reference- that this word is perfectly correct.

I can propose you this blast furnace French-English dictionary. It is not the best one. Because French vocabulary in blast furnace is very accurate and specific, many dictionaries have been made, but I don't remember where they are. Borvan53 (talk) 21:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you for your answers. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 13:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Borvan53... you seem to have nominated a file for deletion by adding it to an unrelated DR's subpage (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Girl Meets World Volvo B7RLE 1.jpg). Storkk (talk) 09:24, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. If you have a good photo of a control panel at a blast furnace, for example something like this one File:Control panel at a blast furnace.jpg, but not of a control panel at a cast house like the previously mentioned, it would be nice to download it into the Wikimedia Commons. If you do not have such a photo or it is impossible for any reason, then just forget about this and I am sorry for trouble. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 04:15, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blast furnace chip worker. Yes I can have a picture of a control room. But, due to legal and technical reasons, it is better to find a ~15-years old picture. So I have to look for it. Borvan53 (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I did not even know about this nuance. Well, if you suddenly find it, it will be good, but if you do not find it then there's nothing to be done in this case. On Flickr I found the above mentioned one only. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 00:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Dear Blast furnace chip worker, please look at file:Hamborn Kontrollraum HO8-HO9.jpg. Borvan53 (talk) 15:55, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good photo. Unfortunately, it's yet one from Germany. I mean the fact that in the article I am currently preparing (and in others too), there are allready so many photos from Germany that the article does not looks like an article about a simple blast furnace, but looks like an article about German blast furnaces. For diversity I would prefer a photo from the Netherlands, Belgium or France. But, nevertheless, I'm certainly going to use this photo in my article. Thank you very much. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 01:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blast furnace chip worker. I have many pictures of Belgium and France, but I have to search a little bit more, because most of them were done by colleagues and their quality is bad. Borvan53 (talk) 06:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not bother you. If there is an other photo, then it's good, if not then it's okay. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just remenber I have several hundred pictures of the blast furnaces of Liege, dated about 2002. I will make a massive import when I will have time. I hope you will help me to sort them ! Borvan53 (talk) 20:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to share these photos with Commons for free, then this is your business. From my part, I'm always ready with pleasure to take part in the process of sorting this kind of photos. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 10:03, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alfred Barnard.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Yunshui (talk) 13:16, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour. Is this atmosferic valve File:HF6 Seraing - Bleeder en 2007 2.jpg of Paul Wurth production? If you have some fotos of Paul Wurth's devices, except of Paul Wurth's top of cource, and can share them, it will be good. I need these fotos to illustrate an article about the firm. In our country Paul Wurth is more or less famous but in our country there ara many enough our own design institutes and machine-building plants, so I, for example, have never seen Paul Wurth's devices directly and can not to make this kind of fotos. By the way, nevertheless, Paul Wurth's top was first established in the fomer USSR in the 1970s and in Ukraine in 1980. Of course, I understand that one can not always to know of whose production this or that equipment, but I ask just in case. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 07:17, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blast furnace chip worker. It is probably a PW bleeder, but there is a very small doubt about it: it could be a Zimmermann & Jansen bleeder. In fact, I have no evidence to prove that it is a PW bleeder... Borvan53 (talk) 12:45, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see. And what about the other devices? Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 12:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The BF top and the tap floor machines were from PW. You can also notice that the taphole drilling machine was completely new. It was used only a few months. Sad fate for a very modern blast furnace, which was (one of?) the biggest BF in Europe, and the first in Belgium to use a PW top. Borvan53 (talk) 18:22, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are talking, apparently, about this photo File:HF6 Seraing - Plancher de coulée.jpg? If you have photos of these PW's devices from a different angle and you can download them it will be great. If you can not to do that, well, there's nothing to be done in this request. And I want to ask you about this photo File:HF6 Seraing - Granulation du laitier INBA 1.jpg. What do you mean "fournisseur Paul Wurth"? Which exactly devices in this photo are made by the Paul Wurth company? The pipe in the middle of the photo? Overhead cranes? Conveyor on the left side of the photo? All the metal constructions in the photo? Or may be specific equipment is not visible at all? Thank you. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 14:31, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am talking about the photo File:HF6 Seraing - Plancher de coulée.jpg ; I have other pictures but their quality is medium, I will look for them.

"fournisseur Paul Wurth" means "supplier Paul Wurth". INBA was developped by Gent steelworks, but Paul Wurth bought all patents and royalties -worlwide. So, outside Gent BFs, any INBA system is from Paul Wurth. The stack is the chimney of the INBA drum : that means it is a "hot water INBA" (most common). I added some descriptions at the image to help you. The overhead crane is not supplied by Paul Wurth. Borvan53 (talk) 18:06, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Dear Blast furnace chip worker, I uploaded File:HF6 Seraing - Machines de plancher.jpg. It's not a wonderful picture, but it is the best I have. The drilling machine seems not so new, after all, because this design with arms and revolving joints to supply the trolley is typical of 1990s design. Today, cable shape are preferred. Borvan53 (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is what is necessary. Unfortunately, the angle for the drilling machine is not the best and not everyone student or someone of this kind will understand at once what it is and how it works, but nevertheless this is a normal photo for illustration. I will allow myself to ask you one quation yet. Do you know, whether tuyere stocks in this photo are of PW's production or not? Thank you very mach. Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 15:21, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Borvan53,

Pour faire suite à ton message dans la page de discussion de Floflo, je viens de demander à mon frère s'il a la possibilité de faire un détour à Saint-Pierre-d'Albigny (il fait souvent la navette entre Lyon et la Maurienne). Je lui ai expliqué le problème (démontage de la trompe hydraulique) et peut-être qu'il pourra dire ce qu'il en est de visu. En ce qui me concerne, je devrai être dans le coin à la fin de l'été. --Poudou99 (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Borvan53 et bonjour Floflo,
Polo est passé ce matin à Saint-Pierre-d'Albigny est a pris quelques photos de la forge à l'arrache (avec sa tablette et son smartphone - c'est tout ce qu'il avait sous la main).
Voici quelques photos : Category:Forge des Allues. Un certain nombre d'éléments de la trompe hydraulique sont plus ou moins en place mais pas faciles à photographier (dans le sombre ou innaccessibles de près). J'en ferai d'autres cet été.

J'ai des photos de plaques d'explication sur la forge que je ne peux pas mettre dans Commons (droits d'auteur). Je peux te les envoyer par mail ; mais sur ton compte WP-fr, je vois que la fonction "envoyer un courriel" n'est pas activée. Aussi, est-ce que tu peux m'envoyer un mail de "Hello" via mon nouveau compte dans WP-fr, en réponse je te ferai parvenir les photos. Cordialement, --Poudou99 (talk) 13:40, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Floflo et Poudou99 !

Merci pour ces photos. Elles méritaient d'être faites.

Et elles confirment mes craintes : la trompe est toujours démontée. Le tube qui a été photographié est la conduite forcée d'une turbine de type Canson.

Le bief d'amenée d'eau à la trompe aurait dû être posé sur les 2 profilés en porte-à-faux qu'on voit bien sur cette photo. On y distingue encore la caisse à vente de la trompe (un peu mieux sur cette photo), mais c'est tout.

Avec une roue à aubes, deux turbines Canson et une trompe et deux martinets, cette forge mérite vraiment d'être classée. Mais sans trompe, c'est dommage pour elle comme pour mon article.

Il me reste plus qu'à vous remercier tous les 3. Pour les photos des panneaux explicatifs, je ne me vois pas la dispo pour créer l'article qui les exploiterait. Borvan53 (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour à vous deux,

Merci Poudou99 pour ces photos. Je verrai s'il est possible de revenir au bon moment (dans le soleil) mais je réduis l'urgence à y aller ;-) À bientôt, --Floflo (talk) 18:16, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Borvan53 : je viens d'avoir mon frangin au téléphone et il m'a dit apparrement il y a des travaux en cours en vue de "réhabilier" la forge et en faire une espèce de "lieu touristique". Peut-être qu'à terme les installations de la trompe hydraulique seront remises debout. --Poudou99 (talk) 19:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

C'est confirmé par divers sites internets. J'ai envoyé quelques mails pour avoir des précisions sur la date, mais jusqu'ici : aucune réponse. Borvan53 (talk) 17:59, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tourelle pour une arme mixte et un mortier modèle 1935.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Trougnouf 13:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you just depopulated this entire category and moved the contents to "coke ovens".

They're not ovens. They're called "retorts".

The "ovens" are only one aspect of a coke works - there are many other parts to the site.

Please restore. Or at least discuss before making large changes like this. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Andy Dingley

Thank you for this message.

Because I am working in coke ovens for some years, I can swear you that the name "coke ovens" is related to the complete facility, and not only to the furnaces.

It is like the difference between "steel mill" and "steel plant", the first means now the complete facility, the second is now only related to the converter house. You can face exactly the same problems with "ironmaking", "blast furnace", etc.

I guess that you can give me thousands of examples showing the opposite. I know that these ovens are in fact retorts. But we are in the beginning of the XXI, and in a globalized world. The ways that american or english terms are sometimes found are outdated, or not used any more in that industry (did you notice how many of these pictures are related to closed facilities ?).

You can revert as you want. It won't change my job. And I know that every days, I see tons of coke and I smell them. I know I work in a coke ovens plant (want a selfie? ), and my american and english colleagues don't call it often a "coke making facility" or a "coke retorts plant", a "coke works", etc. Even if everybody perfectly understand what these words means, and agree that people could use more accurate terms. Maybe a "coke plant" could be considered as a good and common way to name the facility...

The fact is that, as technology and economy change, languages evolve, too (not always in the good way).

Or, for example, where should we categorize "Bowen coke ovens". In "coke ovens" or in "coke works", or in both of them ?

Borvan53 (talk) 21:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about retorts. It's not important.

But what you've done is to throw away any sense of sub-categorisation. In what way is this: a "coke oven"?

This is a coke oven: File:Cokemaking.jpg

But now you've put all three of these into the same category, with no longer anything to distinguish them:

• 
  A coke works
• 
  A gas meter
• 
  Some actual coke ovens

This merge is not an improvement. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:35, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Andy Dingley : the first picture is not, technically, coke ovens. But it is named coke ovens.

Because, in the past, railway network, gas cleaning plant, quenching tower, coal screening and blending, etc. didn't exist. And a new word for the complete facility didn't appear in english.

It is the same with blast furnaces : "blast furnace" means both the furnace and the complete installation. Hot stoves alone are not blast furnaces, but are part of a blast furnace.

So, for me, about the 4 examples given, only the "gas meter" is a real problem that should be corrected.

For me, we really need only ONE category for coke production facilities. We need to merge. But which word should be used to name these facilities? I repeat that today, the most common word is "coke ovens".

But... as wikipedians are generally not involved in coke production, we can use more intelligible words. "Coke works" is correct. There is maybe better : "coke plants" or "coke oven plants" which could used to name this category. "Coke plant" is widely used as an international term for the whole facility.

And for the retorts themselves... As "coke ovens" should be not used, I propose "coke oven batteries".

I hope you will agree with these two proposals. Borvan53 (talk) 17:42, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Borvan53 et bonjour Floflo

Est-ce bien de cette section : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_Wikipédia:Atelier_identification/Identification_d%27un_objet#Engin_ferroviaire_à_identifier dont il s'agit ? Et trouver le type et le rôle de la loco ? Cordialement, --Poudou99 (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour à vous deux,

Hélas non, ce type d'engin ne m'est pas familier, désolé =( Si c'est un train désherbeur, ça me parait surprenant qu'il n'y ait pas de citerne, après...). Demander directement au Projet:Chemin de fer sinon ? Je ne sais pas si le projet a activé la fonctionnalité pour être notifié (et ni même si tel est le cas, comment ça fonctionne).

Bien à vous, --Floflo (talk) 17:25, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Je vais tenter mes jokers ferroviaires (le frangin conducteur de locos, et mon neveu qui travaille sur les voies). --Poudou99 (talk) 17:34, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

En attente de réponses de mes cheminots familiaux, la loco semble être une "bourreuse" à voie métrique, détachée de ses wagonnets de ballast (vidés). --Poudou99 (talk) 21:27, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation : il s'agit bien d'une boureuse. L'auteur de ces photos les avait catégorisées dans category:Ballast tampers of France. --Poudou99 (talk) 12:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merci Poudou99. Je te laisse donc cloturer la demande d'identification ? Borvan53 (talk) 13:11, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Denis L. Feron WANTED.png 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Homme et haut fourneau à Fos-sur-Mer.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quite interesting but not very sharp. Can you sharpen it a bit and remove CA? --Podzemnik 23:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]  Done --Borvan53 19:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]  Support Good to me --Podzemnik 11:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir, j’aimerais savoir pourquoi vous citez une source inexistante pour le nom du phare? J’aimerais savoir d’où vous viens cette information. Ce phare à toujours eu pour nom celui de L’Étang-du-Nord.

Merci.

Cordialement,

                       Jean-Philippe Déraspe,
                        Conseiller Municipal de  L’Étang-du-Nord Requieminvictus (talk) 23:51, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, Requieminvictus

Le commentaire de mon revert est "Il y a un débat en pdd. L'appellation est sourcée, merci de respecter les principes d'édition de cette encyclopédie."

Donc j'ai souligné deux soucis avec ta contribution (je me permets le tutoiement) :

• L’appellation Cap-aux-Meules est sourcée par The Lighthouse Directory. Modifier le texte sans corriger la source est une falsification : la source The Lighthouse Directory n'a jamais dénommé ce phare "Étang-du-Nord".
• Les principes d'édition de Wikipédia sont qu'une affirmation non sourcée a moins de crédibilité qu'une affirmation sourcée. Et The Lighthouse Directory est une source tout à fait sérieuse. On peut tout à fait contester cette source (elle n'a pas la prétention d'être infaillible!) sans avoir d'autre argument que "en tant que conseiller municipal de L’Étang-du-Nord j'estime être plus crédible que cette source". Ça s'appelle un argument d'autorité. C'est généralement mal reçu, mais pourquoi pas ? Alors ce type de contradiction est débattu sur la page de discussion de l'article.

Si tu vas dans la page de discussion (la pdd) de l'article, tu verras les échanges... qui montrent que le nom du phare est effectivement débattu ! Donc, la solution est 1. de trouver une source (une "sérieuse", pas un truc perso du genre blog ou vidéo Youtube), 2. d'exposer cette source sur la page de discussion (car il s'agit de contester un élément important de l'article, à savoir son titre), 3. de corriger l'article en y accolant la source retenue (car ta liberté de le faire est également un principe d'édition de cette encyclopédie).

En espérant ne pas t'avoir découragé,

Borvan53 (talk) 16:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you recently converted a .png to a .svg for File:Japan annual total net electricity generation by fuel type in 2000 through 2017.svg. Thanks! I wish I knew how to do that myself. I notice, however, that the vertical axis doesn't have units provided [it should be Terrawatthours (TWh)]. Is that something you can add? MarginalCost (talk) 00:10, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @MarginalCost: I added it ! If you can propose me other translations (this is a multilanguage SVG) and spread them in Wikipedia, please do it ! Borvan53 (talk) 08:10, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Terminator T-800 armed Blank background.png

And also:

• File:Terminator T-800 armed.jpg

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:TetraèdresChauvigneau.png 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Le Petit Chat (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Convertisseur Kaldo de Florange - Coupe transversale.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Aristeas 09:06, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ouvrage La Ferté carte.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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: The file source page's oldest archive (2010-02-13, just after the upload date) stated that the map files are licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND-2.0 or CC-BY-ND-2.0, in which both are unacceptable per COM:L Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

 

廣九直通車 (talk) 11:37, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the contents on User talk:Acroterion#Maginot Maps, I have some questions:

1. What is the permission given by Association des Amis de la Ligne Maginot d'Alsace? Apparently their generic permission is unacceptable for Commons. I'm not sure whether they gave another permission for us.
2. If there are no specific permission (i.e. CC-BY-NC-ND-2.0 or CC-BY-ND-2.0), is the file acceptable on French Wikipedia? If so, please arrange for transferring the file to French Wikipedia before the file is re-nominated for deletion.

Please feel free to ask me if you have any questions, or if you request French translation, thank you.廣九直通車 (talk) 13:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@廣九直通車: The general permission for these maps is very clearly described in [5], link Mentions légales.

But, before massively uploading them, and because of some questions (your and Acroterion were not the only one to ask me the question, many skilled contributors like Lvcvlvs asked it), I had a public debate on the forum with the webmaster about the use of the pictures on Commons (link Contact, then Forum). He gave me his full and clear acknowledgment for an upload of of low-res bitmaps in Wikipedia Commons (I have never uploaded these images in Wiki fr). He checked the files I downloaded and wrote that for the images I made, he agreed with CC-BY-SA. But... I just discovered that the link to the forum is dead !

You can notice that the website seems "dead" until 2013. I still sent an email to the webmaster, but I don't expect a (quick?) answer. This is annoying because these maps are highly valuable. And there are more than 60 in this case.

I don't know if any national Wikipedia has a more flexible policy about licensing. Borvan53 (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your information. I actually find the corresponding page the forum's archive actually displays the index of all discussions, with most links to individual discussion pages can be still found on archive. I'll be grateful if you can sort out the specific discussion page that contains the permission. Once confirmed, then everything will be much easier (As we know CC licenses are irrevocable). Many thanks.廣九直通車 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, the forum archives show exchanges which are from another forum. Absolutely not correlated with the forum of cartomaginot (it deals with soccer, fishermen, barbecue,...). Borvan53 (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also trying to get some information about the situation of cartomaginot : the Maginot Line fans are all connected in a small but efficient network. Borvan53 (talk) 22:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@廣九直通車: I succed to concact a friend of the webmaster of cartomaginot, by the wikimaginot site. It was not easy. But I had the confirmation that nothing changed about all authorizations and licences. Now I am trying to clarify everything in a better way. Borvan53 (talk) 20:32, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, I succeed to contact Pascal Lambert, the author of these maps.

He still clearly remembers that he gave a CC BY-SA license of all the PNG maps I uploaded, with the condition that cartomaginot.com must be clearly cited as the source.

But, today, he gave all the source code of his maps to wikimaginot.eu. This association is improving them. Then, cartomaginot.com is intended to disappear for the benefit of wikimaginot.eu.

So, in agreement with the rest of the wikimaginot.eu team, he agrees to preserve the CC BY-SA license to Commons maps. But I was asked to cite wikimaginot.eu as the source of the maps.

After discussion, I proposed him to ask for an OTRS license for each map. The procedure in on-going. I also changed source and author according to his demand. Just note that OTRS bot cannot treat File:Abri Heidenbuckel carte.png, File:Ouvrage Thonnelle carte.png and File:Casemates Crusnes carte.png for unknown reasons. Borvan53 (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then, I think that everything will be then clearer to everybody ! Borvan53 (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, comme vous avez effectué des ajouts dans la catégorie "ponts en fer puddlé", suite à la création de la catégorie correspondante, je tenais à vous informer qu’à la suite d’échanges avec un administrateur de Wikimedia Commons ( voir svp les échanges à cette adresse : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2024/01/Category:Puddle_iron ), celui-ci n’a pas accepté la création d’une catégorie correspondante supplémentaire « fer puddlé » car pour lui le « fer puddlé » est issu d’un travail à la forge et correspond à la catégorie existante « fer forgé » (wrought iron). J’ai effectué les modifications demandées aujourd’hui et je les ai soumises à sa validation. En conséquence, les liens précédemment reliés à "Puddle iron" sont dorénavant reliés à la catégorie principale ː "Wrought iron" avec dessous ː "Wrought-iron bridges" et "Wrought iron lighthouses". Bien cordialement GOUPILLEAU J-Y (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dommage GOUPILLEAU J-Y, il semblerait que cet admin n'ai pas une culture étendue de la métallurgie. Les deux domaines ne se recoupent que partiellement : le fer forgé est une activité dynamique de nos jours, et donc totalement indépendante du fer puddlé dont le travail a disparu. La prochaine fois que tu as une controverse en métallurgie, contacte-moi. Borvan53 (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Colombelles poche50.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Hyppocastanum (talk) 23:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2023 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighteenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 14 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2022 Picture of the Year contest.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at 28 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]