You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.
Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.
Made a mistake?
Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.
I found the Carpaccio's image... Regards, --Bellatrix Black (talk) 15:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Categorization tools
Hi I have seen that you have made a lot of categorization work recently. You may like "Hot Cat" and "Cat-a-lot" that can be activated through Preferences -> Gadgets. --Zolo (talk) 07:24, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks very much. Although I'm very active as a content contributor on English Wikipedia, I'm still figuring out the Commons categorization system, so I'm concerned that I've done some questionable things in trying to learn. I'm mainly motivated by my experiences in looking for images to illustrate specific kinds of content. So I appreciate the tip, and if I seem not to be following up, it's because I'm getting some kind of personal benefit plodding through manually and individually browsing the images. Thanks again. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Rotation
Hallo Cynwolfe, I have reverted you at this stone. That thing is standing on the ground, isn't it? Also see the other version of this stone. Cheers --Saibo(Δ∇) 20:44, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thanks! Sorry for the goof. I saw others that were "sidewise" because they were on the ground, but hadn't realized I'd been careless in looking at that one. It would've been nice to have the photo taken from an angle that presented the inscription with conventional reading orientation. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Okay, no problem. --Saibo(Δ∇) 23:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Cynwolfe, regarding your query, the image is bit complex because two separate copyrights are involved: 1) the sculpture itself and 2) the photograph thereof (COM:DW deals with the concept). Accordingly, we need to have evidence that both copyrights are released with a free license, which, you're correct, does indeed mean that commercial use must be allowed. That said, if Eaton is indeed the license holder for both, an email from him is all that is needed to resolve the issue.
He may email directly or you may forward correspondence to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. COM:OTRS has details about the process, expectations, verbiage, etc. Given that his website is www.scott-eaton.com, it would be optimal if he used a @scott-eaton.com address (as anyone can register for gmail, hotmail, etc. addresses). Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Эlcobbolatalk 01:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Cynwolfe, I don't like to fragment conversations, so I've responded on my talk page (I responded here initially because you requested me to do so, but I think it would be best to use one location going forward). Эlcobbolatalk 14:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Autopatrol given
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have grantedautopatrol 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 20:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I don't always feel comfortable editing at Commons, as I'm insufficiently informed of policies and procedures. But I do try to help with categorization, and to correct errors when I see them. Cynwolfe (talk) 20:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
It looks like you're doing a pretty good job. If you weren't, you'd probably have a talkpage full of complaints.;) INeverCry 20:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Cynwolfe
new message at the graphics lab for you. Penyulap ☏ 16:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Picture of the Year 2013 R1 Announcement
Nereid mosaic in Nîmes
Hi Cynwolfe. This is just a courtesy notice to let you know that I have redirected Category:Europa mosaic (Musée de la Romanité), which you created a few months ago, to Category:Nereid mosaic (Musée de la Romanité), for reasons explained in the note on that page. It is now generally believed that the female figures riding taurocamps "représentent indiscutablement des Néréides, en dépit d'anciennes attributions erronées" (J.-P. Darmon, in the review article cited on the category page). Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 15:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Melonenfrisur
Hi Cynwolfe. I admire your work on enwiki. The quality of most WP articles about Greek and Roman topics is pretty dismal, so it's always a pleasure to see scholarly, well-sourced contributions by someone with actual training in the field (rather than just enthusiasm for it).
I noticed that you've recently created a Commons category for "cornrow-like hairstyles in ancient art". Having a category for this is useful, no question, but I'm going to quibble with you over the name. You may already know that the technical term for this kind of hairstyle in art historical scholarship is Melonenfrisur, because of the supposed resemblance of the head to the ribbed contours of a melon (see the article in German Wikipedia here). You may also have noticed that this is the term I used in my description of (for example) File:Portrait bust of a Roman girl (SK Dresden Hm 369) 07.jpg, which is one of the photos you placed in your new category. Although the word was coined by German scholars, it's also used regularly in English-language studies of Roman portraiture, as well as in other European languages; if you search for it on JSTOR, you'll get German, English, French, and Italian articles on the first page of results, and similar results if you search on Google Books. Because it is international in scope, and is the term actually used in classical scholarship, I think "Melonenfrisur in ancient art" would be a better name for the Commons category than "Cornrow-like hairstyles in ancient art". A short description on the category page could clarify the meaning for non-German speakers, and we could still have "Cornrows" as one of the parent categories, so people interested in the same kinds of hairstyles in other eras would be able to find it. How would you feel about making this change? Choliamb (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
I totally agree! I just reacted to the fact that a Roman portrait head had already been placed in Cornrows, and thought huh, if that's going to be there, it needs some company and to be subcategorized as "like" rather than the same thing. That a term existed was rolling around in the back of my mind, and I hesitated, but not long or thoughtfully enough. I should've listened to the little voice that was bothered by a Roman example being there in the first place. Or at least paid closer attention so as to have been prompted by your category.
I've been trying (ha, here come the excuses) to move a massive amount of uncategorized coins of the Gauls out of Gallica and Portable Antiquities because I'm interested in the iconography and art historical relations, but I've been going for sheer volume to get a sense of scope – a lot more exists than I had any inkling of, and I've come upon so many surprises. I find some of the descriptions or identifications dubious and needing better sources, and I'm continually sacrificing precision for efficiency, but I'm wanting just to get the files amassed within some kind of structure that can be refined. I try not to impose an interpretation, but in a very few instances I've categorized some things that seem obviously of the same kind so they're easier to locate for further verification. That's what happened with the Celtic head that had what looked like cornrows. I digressed from what I was really looking at, darting about like a border collie obsessed with herding objects. I'm happy to fix the hairstyle category when insomnia takes hold or in the morning. But if you would like to go ahead and make it right, please don't hesitate to proceed! Cynwolfe (talk) 02:22, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2024 voting is open!
2023 Picture of the Year: Incense plays an important role in Vietnamese life. It is considered as a sacred bridge to connect the visible life of human beings and the world of heaven, earth, and gods. Photo taken in Quang Phu Cau village, on the outskirts of Hanoi, Vietnam. In this picture, incense sticks are being set out to dry, after being dipped in the incense solution.
Dear Wikimedian,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2024 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year is the nineteenth 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 (2024) 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.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2023 Picture of the Year contest.
Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2024 voting is open!
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 (2024) 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 2024.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
Happy First Edit Anniversary Cynwolfe 🎉
Hey @Cynwolfe. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 17 years of dedicated contributions to Wikimedia Commons. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey.:) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙✉ 09:45, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
What a nice message! Commons gives me so much more than I could ever give back. It's like having access to a treasure you can never exhaust. Cynwolfe (talk) 12:26, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2025 voting is open!
2024 Picture of the Year:Mundari man polishing the horns of one of his Watusi cows using a mixture of cow urine and ash as a ritualistic and protective practice in a temporary cattle camp in Terekeka, South Sudan.
Dear Wikimedian,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2025 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year is the twentieth 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 favourite images featured on Commons during the last year (2025) 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 the top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just five images to become the Picture of the Year.
Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2025 voting is open!
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 favourite images featured on Commons during the last year (2025) 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 five images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2025.
Announcing the Winners of Picture of the Year 2025!
Hi everyone,
Wikimedia Commons is pleased to finally announce the winners of this year's Picture of the Year 2025 contest! We had some truly incredible finalists to choose from, but the community has spoken.
Here are your top three winning images:
First place: The aftermath of an Israeli airstrike in Gaza City on October 9, 2023, leaving widespread destruction in the Rimal area. Attribution: WAFA (Q2915969) / CC-BY-SA 3.0
Second place: Baby cape fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus) sleeping at Cape cross, Namibia. Attribution: Giles Laurent / CC-BY-SA 4.0
Third place: A gigantic jet photographed from the International Space Station by astronaut Nichole Ayers. Attribution: public domain
You can view the full results and see where all your favorite images placed here: Full 2025 Results
I also want to highlight what an incredible turnout we had. In the second round, we saw a massive jump in both the number of users voting and the total votes cast. We had exactly 13,979 votes cast by 3,509 users! To put that in perspective, last year we had 7,403 votes from 2,837 users. It is amazing to see that level of growth and community engagement.
Thank you to everyone who voted, helped organize, and generally made the contest such a huge success this year!
Stop to remouving categories "by subject" in coins categories! Thank you. DenghiùComm (talk) 05:12, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Sorry, what are you talking about? Vandalizing is a serious accusation. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:11, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
A fuller reply
Having reflected on "vandalism", I'd like to justify my existence in lieu of deleting this unfounded accusation from my talk page.
In my 20 or so years of editing WP and Commons, I've never once been accused of such a thing, nor have I ever been blocked or received any administrative censure, so that's quite hurtful. I think you are misunderstanding what I'm doing.
Here's what I think what you'll see if you actually look at the categories I remove.
Sometimes individual coins are labeled with quite broad categories. But in fact, with coins we often have a large number of images that are strikings of the same issue or same coin design with very minor differences. These coins can be usefully grouped under a single subcat label so that they can be viewed together. And I've added a large number of coins from Portable Antiquities and BnF that had no subject categories.
It's like when we have multiple images or multiple views of the same artwork. We don't need to put all the possible categories that apply to, for example, the Ara Pacis on every single image we have of the Ara Pacis. The full range of categories will be applied to the main cat. There might be details that are placed in subcategories under Ara Pacis that are appropriate for that detail but not the main cat. But the categories that apply to the main subject category should all be consolidated there. It defeats the purpose and utility of the "tree" if we label each instantiation with all the properties or characteristics of the group.
Effective categorization is not about slapping all possible categories on every individual image. It's about grouping images hierarchically to facilitate (re)search. Category:Chariots on coins is useful, but all coins with chariots don't need to be in that category in addition to being categorized as a quadriga, biga, or something else specific that falls under "chariots on coins". That's why we have subcats.
One coin example that I worked on recently (and where your name appears in the history) is the problematic Bacchius Iudaeus coin. So let me use that as an example of my modus operandi.
Some individual images of the Bacchius Iudaeus coin were in categories that applied to that main cat, so I consolidated all those broader categories there, and then set out to categorize all the individual examples of this coin under that one main label. Some images from Portable Antiquities had received no categories. Now Category:Bacchius Iudaeus coin (which had been spelled incorrectly when I found it) is a subcat of 11 other pertinent categories that had been scattered on individual instantiations of this coin. When I first found this category, it was subcatted to only four categories. I deleted two categories because they were wrongly construed — the scholarship indicates that this is not the personal name of a historical personage as such — but I provided some bibliographical references in case this was questioned. One existing category was OK, and the fourth I changed from Category:Camels on coins to Category:Camels on Roman coins because the camel has a specific symbology in Roman imperialist iconography that's helpful to see in one place. The camel appears in certain scenes of surrender/supplication on Roman coins, which was a subject I was looking at.
For example, if I go to Category:Cybele, it isn't useful if a couple of these coins are scattered randomly in Cybele's main cat. Now all the examples are corralled as Category:Bacchius Iudaeus coin, which can be accessed under Category:Turreted head of Cybele on coins as one of the head types of coins depicting Cybele (there are many turreted heads of Cybele on coins that I haven't got around to labeling as such). And the collection of Commons images for this one coin now also has a point of entry under ten other categories that apply to the coin as a whole. I didn't "vandalize" the file by removing Category:Cybele from the one coin image to which it had been attached. I made sure that users interested in the iconography of Cybele on coins could see all the examples of her head on this coin by going to one place. Ditto for the other categories I moved from individual coins to the main cat.
To leave this example to speak more broadly, some "Coins by [issuing authority]" have been placed as a subcat of an image (say, "Horses on coins") that appears on as few as 20% of that issuing authority's coins. In that case, the "horse" category belongs on the individual coins, or "Horses on coins of [issuing authority]" may be one of the subcats of design. If I'm looking for coin designs that feature horses, I don't want to plough through 75 images looking for horses among the heads of rulers, temples, and whatnot. I want to see how horses are depicted on the coins of a particular people, polity, or ruler. And I don't remove a "Coins by [issuing authority]" from an image category that doesn't universally apply to the coinage unless I label the coins individually by the image or create a subcat for them.
The Category:Coins of Athens is an unusable mess. There's no periodization of the stages of the Athena head design or the owl design, which is standard in the numismatics of Athenian coinage. The denominations weren't pulled out in their own subcat or otherwise grouped . There's no category for the provincial coinage issued for Athens under the Romans, so when a user tries to look through the 1,700+ examples (!), you can't observe "real" Athenian iconography separately from the Roman imperial iconography. However, the number of images is daunting and would take a long time to work through. While Category:Coins of Corinth has a long way to go, I feel that I've been able to at least start a structure for accessing and understanding that important coinage.
If you would like an example of how I'm organizing coin categories, I would suggest maybe Category:Coins of Selinus. For example, all the coins we have from Selinus appear to have been produced in the 5th century BCE; therefore, Category:Coins of Selinus is a subcat of Category:Coins of the 5th century BC. What would be the utility of leaving the century category on some (but far from all) individual coins when the whole lot of them have been so categorized?
I recently created Category:Coins of Hamaxitos and have corralled all the examples I could find there. As a further example of my M.O., it appears that all the coins of Hamaxitos that we have are bronze, so I haven't labeled the individual coins as bronze but rather have subcatted the entire Category:Coins of Hamaxitos to the category of ancient bronze coins. Because of the small number of coins available, I've categorized them all in the main category but have also placed them in design categories when these are either verified by the BnF link or not in doubt. The two previously categorized coins of Hamaxitos had been placed (correctly) under Category:Coins of Troas, but it is not vandalism to have removed those two examples from that broader category when Category:Coins of Hamaxitos collectively is a subcat of Category:Coins of Troas — as with other city coinages in the Troad.
Although numismatics is an area in which I'm only developing knowledge, and I'm primarily interested in iconography as an art historical topic, I think I've made useful contributions toward making the Commons coins images more accessible to users or researchers. I do have the benefit of having pursued a doctorate in Classical Studies, and I try to stay within that field unless I see some minor obvious tidying in a coin category. My longtime contributions to en:WP pertaining to Classical antiquity and numerous articles created made me aware of the rich but underutilized resources at Commons for illustrating articles. These images are often hard to find because they aren't categorized in ways that are useful labels for how people actually want to use or understand them. So I've been mainly working in Commons for the last 18 months or so, and as a result I've been able to update some articles with better-quality images and add images to articles that didn't have any. And if I might further explain myself, I've been a professional writer and editor outside WP for decades, and some categories that are supposedly named in English aren't orthographically correct. In my opinion, we should do more to internationalize category naming if the topic is more pertinent outside the Anglophone world, and a couple of times I've used French because the English equivalent is awkward or simply not used in scholarship. But when we use English names, we need to follow standard English style and grammar.
I see that you have stated an intention to withdraw from Commons, but I hope you will reconsider and made more of an effort to understand what other contributors are trying to do and perhaps dialogue with them in good faith instead of making unfounded attacks. Because of the vast number of uncategorized or too broadly categorized coins I'm interested in making more accessible to users, sometimes I have proceeded precipitously without thorough-enough research or have made stupid mistakes. For this I apologize. I spent a whole Sunday afternoon recently not noticing that an eye issue I was experiencing had caused me to spell Phrygian as Phyrgian and to replicate the error egregiously. So I had to correct that.
But vandalism? I can assure you that dumb stuff I've done more likely arises from either innocent ignorance or watching a Dodgers game at the same time than from any vandalistic impulse. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Hi Cynwolfe. Sorry, i have a very basic english and i need more time to read and anderstan your long answer. Its very difficolt for me to understand without a translator. I will try to answer you in some days. Best regards DenghiùComm (talk) 20:14, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
I appreciate that. You don't need to spend time on it. I am explaining how I understand categories and subcategories to work. I am saying that I am not a vandal. If you think I have done something contrary to Commons guidelines, then please explain what. Be specific. Don't all-caps shout at me. Don't accuse me of vandalism. A vandal intends to do mischief or harm. I am trying to support and multiply paths of access so that images can be searched efficiently. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for your work on ancient coins
You've been doing a heroic job sorting through these enormous unsorted categories and I didn't want you to think that nobody had noticed. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 14:48, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
First steps tutorial
Getting help
Goodies, tips, and tricks
Made a mistake?
_07.jpg){kind=link}