Exmoor pony mix-up?

Hi, I see you moved a bunch of non-Exmoor-pony photos from "Ponies of the Netherlands" to "Exmoor ponies..." in 2024. Some files were misleadingly named by an uploader, but others had no ID either way, so I'm wondering, what prompted you to move files such as this? Exmoor ponies only come in solid dark bay or seal brown, and they are 20-50 cm taller than Shetties too. For some pictures, just the location (De Alde Feanen) is enough for definitive ID. --Pitke (talk) 08:07, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Pitke, I may have skipped passing them to Free-roaming horses in the Netherlands first, assuming they use only either Koniks or Exmoors for this, and had not taken a closer look at them yet. Thank you for your expertise. It is appreciated. I wondered if you have done equine studies as a professional? Note: I now just noticed this cat Free roaming for Spain is lacking some of the available images, like from Basque Mountain Horse but they could be on collective pastures idk. Peli (talk) 08:19, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

About Color correction charts RMA

Previous discussion is here stating these files still have their color charts on their pages. To check them out, just click the original uploads at the bottom of the pages. Peli (talk) 02:27, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

OK. Didn't know that. From the point of view of a regular user of Wikipedia (not: contributor to Wikipedia) this doesn't seem the best way. If images with colour correction charts are now used (and they are, hundreds of times) one needs to upload a separate, cleaned, version (no extra work) and replace all used images (extra work). Moreover: who will ever use the version with colour correction charts? I am willing to upload separate versions though, if it is standard policy in Commons. But is it? One more question: I am removing Category:Images with color correction charts from the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam from images like this one (if no colour charts are currently present). That is correct, isn't it? Last but not least: you are extensively working on images from Rijksmuseum Amsterdam in Commons for over 5 years. Very good work. Thank you so much for that. Vysotsky (talk) 12:19, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Vysotsky, in my approach I even add this tag after cropping files, to keep track of them and no matter if it would only be for statistics in the end, so I'm requesting to not remove them. And I apologize for reverting these removes. Thank you for your acknowledgement. Hier is een map die aantoont dat de 'color charts' vaak gewoon een vervelende technische fout zijn, niet een feature. Best regards. Peli (talk) 15:34, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Not removing or even adding Category:Images with color correction charts from the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam after removing that chart seems extremely unlogical. Couldn't you change that into a new Category:Images with removed color correction charts from the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam - if useful? Vysotsky (talk) 20:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

But like I was saying the charts are still visible on the same description pages, just one click away to check them in full size, in the thumbs of the original uploads at the bottoms of the pages. So in my view these pages are still 'images with color correction charts'. And it is a maintenance category, hidden. The cat is usefull to show that really no info from the file was removed by the cropping, plus in fact these are easier to find than untagged pages with charts. Since the speed of cat-a-lot was drastically reduced by the board I'm avoiding too large tasks of questionable urgency. the cat has 14k files now and appr 50% would need to be moved and in the end every file would be in that new cat with the longer name. Peli (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Still think it's odd, but I won't remove this category from now on. As for uploading the "cleaned" file as as separate image: is there any official Wiki guideline or policy re this matter? Vysotsky (talk) 21:11, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Ik ken alleen de regel: we willen geen logos en geen randen. De rest (het catalogiseren naar zeg maar 'RMA uploads met color charts') is een vrijwillige dienst aan eventuele drukkers en hergebruikers, die voordeel zouden kunnen hebben bij het bekijken van deze charts tijdens het callibreren van hun apparatuur. We zijn niet verplicht voor deze groep van hergebruikers aparte categorieën aan te leggen. Vooral ook omdat zij deze bestanden zelf direct bij het museum kunnen aanvragen. Doel hier is uiteindelijk heel precies te kunnen inschatten hoeveel van de ca. 300d museum bestanden bijgeknipt moesten worden. Dat is op dit moment nog volslagen onduidelijk. Deze categorie groeit immers nog dagelijks met handmatig getypte toevoegingen. Het kan uiteindelijk blijken te gaan om twintig, dertig, zestig of zelfs tachtig procent. Gefundeerde aantallen zijn daarover nog niet bekend. Bij vijftig procent zou het doubleren een extra categorie opleveren met ca. 150d bestanden, hetgeen een evenzogrote onderhoudsklus oplevert waar werkelijk niemand op zit te wachten. Peli (talk) 10:09, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Album Neurenbergkroniek

Cropping and sub-sorting of Album Neurenbergkroniek is still a work in progress. To avoid almost literal doublures of the same cats in People depicted in the Nuremberg Chronicle I was planning to rename these subcats of the album to this format: "Album Neurenbergkroniek, popes". Using this dutch word seems enough to saparate the RMA files and cats from the others, and will not interfere much with existing cats using tools like Hotcat. (= they will not show up in the list when starting to type "Liber Chro " or Nurembrg Chro.) And these RMA-Album cats can exist within the various Nuremberg Chronicle cats about people. RMA has some pages from other editions too, so we will keep the one main cat:Liber Chronicarum, Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, and the subdivided groups in it as Album Neuerenbergkroniek. Agree? Peli (talk) 02:48, 23 April 2026 (UTC)