User talk:A.Savin
Quality Image Promotion (23 March 2026)
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Pskov asv07-2018 various16 SnetogorskyM.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.
|
Quality Image
Hi, I'm not doing any editing tests. The images I've classified as beaches are indeed beaches and were previously classified as high-quality images, as in this case, for example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3A%D7%A9%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%94_%D7%A1%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%95%D7%99%D7%AA_%D7%9E%D7%A2%D7%9C_%D7%9E%D7%91%D7%A6%D7%A8_%D7%A2%D7%AA%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%AA.jpg&oldid=prev&diff=1186791649 --Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 19:51, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- Please read COM:OVERCAT. You may not put an image in "...of Japan" and "...of beaches in Japan" at the same time. --A.Savin 19:53, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion (28 March 2026)
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Spb 06-2017 img03 Spit of Vasilievsky Island.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.
|
Gesamtanlage Zoologischer Garten
Das Problem, beim Einordnen des gesamten Zoos unterhalb des Denkmaleintrags ist, dass der Bereich nördlich des Landwehrkanals und der Wirtschaftshof nicht zur Denkmalanlage gehören. Ich würde die Kategorien also wieder tauschen und dann alles was zur Gesamtanlage gehört in die Unterkategorie schieben. GPSLeo (talk) 06:21, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- Wo du auch immer Kategorien machst, muss dir stets hinterhergeputzt werden. Und das wird sich wohl auch in 20 Jahren nicht ändern. Lass mich einfach in Ruhe mit deinem Kram. --A.Savin 10:28, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion (26 April 2026)
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Wörlitz Schloss asv2024-06 img02.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Wörlitz Schloss asv2024-06 img03.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.
|
Quality Image Promotion (27 April 2026)
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Wörlitz Schloss asv2024-06 img08.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Wörlitz Schloss asv2024-06 img04.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Wörlitz Schloss asv2024-06 img05.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.
|
Reverted Parent Category:U-Bahnhof Rathaus Neukölln (Berlin)
Hello! I see you reverted my re-categorisation of the station. As I explained in my edit summary, that was done to make it a subcategory of the street it's located on, rather than of the town hall it's located next to. For me this is the logical way because it's not part of the town hall, but it is part of the street. Care to also explain why you think differently? Turtlecrown (talk) 20:22, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
- The station is very close to Rathaus Neukölln which is on Karl-Marx-Street, so I don't see any discrepancies. See for other Berlin stations too: Rathaus Spandau, Rathaus Schöneberg etc.pp... --A.Savin 09:31, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
Category:Pool in Massandra Palace
Hello, thank you for adding this category into Category:Bodies of water in Yalta Municipality. Could you explain the removal of Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Massandra though? The pool is listed as an individual monument despite being a part of the palace complex. Shwabb1 (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
- Massandra Palace is Cultural Heritage, and the pool is part of it; per COM:OVERCAT. --A.Savin 17:00, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
- I'm aware of the policy, but both are listed as separate monuments with their own protection numbers. Sometimes a complex is declared a monument and some of its components also are or in other cases only components but not the complex. Therefore, for uniformity, it makes sense to me to include every listed monument into the cultural heritage monuments category, though the policy does not seem to account for such cases. Overcategorization is avoided to make navigation easier, but in this case I can see the opposite effect: in a situation where Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Massandra does not directly include every cultural heritage monument category, there's nothing to imply that some (but not all) of the subcategories are also monuments. The monument template and Wikidata infobox clear up the situation, but they are only visible once the relevant category is opened. Manually checking every single subcategory to see whether it is listed sounds like a lot of unnecessary work to me. This is different from the Category:Men example at COM:OVERCAT because not every subcategory of a listed monument is a separate listed monument. This is perhaps a part of the wider issue where all categories are assumed to be recursive (while this one is inherently not).
- To solve this particular issue, what would you say about moving the pool and some other structure categories under Category:Massandra park instead? After all, the structures are located around the palace, that is, inside the park and not inside the palace. The park is not a cultural heritage monument so we'd avoid the "over"-categorization. Shwabb1 (talk) 18:03, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
- Yes sure, feel free to move. --A.Savin 07:05, 14 May 2026 (UTC)