User talk:Meneerke bloem

Welcome to the Commons, Meneerke bloem!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: `[[:Image:Foo.jpg]]`, it makes this: `Image:Foo.jpg` If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: `{{bad name\|Correct name}}` For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 00:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phu Wai hermitage

where is it? Thank you writing the location. Jpbazard

Dear Jpbazard,

This former hermitage is located in the outer wall of the Phu Wai cave, which is located in the Ban Rai district, Amphoe Uthai Thani, Thailand (see: File:Amphoe 6106.png).

The Buddhist hermit, who was living in this cavern, has been killed some year ago by unidentified people. The hermitage is now a part of the reserve. The man you see on the picture is a ranger.

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 13:13, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Reginald.JPG

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Reginald.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Cnyborg 17:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Reginald1.JPG

Bonjour,

Si c'est votre photo, merci de déposer l'originale et non une version réduite. C'est beaucoup plus utile pour Wikipédia et c'est la preuve que cette photo est la vôtre. Cordialement, Yann 00:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The original size is at least 800x600 pixels, much more than your image which is 199×281. Regards, Yann 16:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

I have gone through all your photos and no one will ever see them if they are not linked to an article gallery or a Category. Use the and symbols around the botanical names and this will tell you if there is an article (color blue) or there isn't (color red). If there is a blue link, place your photos in the article gallery or category showing. If not put the photo in the next highest taxanomic Category WayneRay 12:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

I looked and not one of your photos has a category other than the license 3.0 etc etc. Go to your User page, click on your Gallery link at the top and look for Trillium vasey Trillium vasey I created a species gallery article and put it in Category:Trillium If you go to the edit part of the article gallery use the text template I have there and you can create an article if there is none. Make sure each trillium photo gallery has a Trillium Category attached. WayneRay 18:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Salut, à la demande de Valery75, j'ai jeté un coup d'oeil sur tes images. J'ai placé ces dernières dans différentes catérogies. Essentiellement Category:Trillium et Category:Cyclamen, où j'ai créé des sous catégories pour chaque Species. J'ai eu un problème avec Category:Trillium rugelli et Category:Trillium rugeli qui semblait être de la même Species mais orthographiées différemment. Je n'y connais rien en botanique donc la création de Category:Trillium rugelli est peut-être une erreur de ma part.

Tout tes documents ne sont pas catégorisés, notamment les premiers que tu as importés, ne le sont pas encore. Tu peux t'y essayer en regardant comment j'ai procédé (en regardant par exemple ce lien où l'on voit en vert ce que j'ai ajouté en modifiant la page de l'image). Si tu créés une category qui n'existe pas encore, celle ci apparaitra en rouge lorsque tu regarderas le résultat (aprés avoir sauvegardé tes modifications), si tel est le cas, la nouvelle category nécéssite elle-même d'être mise dans une catégorie regroupant les species dans le genre.

Il existe par ailleur des articles regroupant aussi les images en y ajoutant du texte descriptif. Voir Cyclamen repandum comme exemple où j'ai ajouté ton image à celle qui était déja sur l'article. Il y a de nombreux articles à créer sur le même modèle pour chaque Species afin de les décrire. Malheureusement j'en serait incapable, mon rôle étant plus technique. En cas de problème, n'hésite pas à demander à Valery ou à moi sur ma page de discussion.

Bien cordialement --P@d@w@ne 09:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re ;) bon pour créer un article sur Trillium rugelii par exemple, il existe techniquement deux méthodes. Soit on tape Trillium rugelii dans la boite de recherche sur la gauche et on tape consulter (ou go). Une page t'indiquera si elle existe déja, ou si le terme existe dans d'autres pages. Cette page crée aussi un lien rouge Trillium rugelii qui si tu cliques dessus te permet d'avoir une page vierge au titre Trillium rugelii. Si tu écris un texte et sauvegarde la page, l'article est créé. Soit tu écris et sauvegarde sur une page le texte [[Trillium rugelii]] (le titre désiré entre des doubles crochets), lorsque tu regardes le résultat, il apparait un lien (bleu si l'article existe) rouge. Si tu cliques sur ce lien rouge tu arrives dans la situation précédente avec la page vierge. Tu as le droit de créer des pages par contre tu n'as pas le droit de les supprimer. La suppression étant réservée aux administrateurs. Mais si tu crées par erreur une page, pour la faire supprimer, tu la blanchi en enlevat toutes les informations qu'il y a à l'intérieur avant de sauvegarder, les admins la supprimerons si elle est vide. --P@d@w@ne 13:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Thanks for the note and it is so nice to see spring flowers. It is still snow here in London Ontario Canada and we are waiting for spring !! Keep in touch. WayneRay 14:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

April 03 2008 and the weather is still too cold for even the first spring flowers. Hope all is well with you. WayneRay 18:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Unidentified Lilium

Hello, Meneerke bloem, thanks for your notice. Unfortunately I have no knowledge in the Genus Lilium. I will give your question to User:Denis Barthel. He is expert for lilies. Best regards. Orchi 10:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Cyclamen libanoticum01.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Cyclamen libanoticum01.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by User:Sz-iwbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Sz-iwbot 15:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Belgian physician-naturalist?

Hello! I stumbled on your user page and was delighted to note that you are a physician and a botanist, and a doctor! I am myself a public health doctor and a birdwatcher and have been in Belgium for a year now, in Antwerp. I dont have a commons page, but my wikipedia page is here Just a note to say hello to you! Cheers. Prashanthns 07:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gladiolus byzantinus02.jpg

Very nice photo, I was unaware of the thinner gladiolii. I have gone and created a separate gallery page for the two photos and put them in there on the same Category Gladiolus. If you have more you can keep them in there. Hope you don't mind. Spring is finally in full force here and the streets and parks look great, however the Platinus acerifolia is still not in leaf so it is the only distraction WayneRay 15:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Flore des Pyrénées

Salut, j'ai mis la flore des Pyrénées à caractériser dans Category:Flora of Pyrenees. D'autre part je me demande si Image:Gentiana burseri.jpg est bien une Gentiana burseri (ne colle pas avec les autres photos) mais plutôt une Gentiana lutea (colle avec les autres images). A+. Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 10:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

En fait c'est plutôt le contraire : ce sont les autres images de Gentiana burseri qui ne ressemble pas à l'espèce (telle que donnée par Tella Botanica), alors qu'elles sont-elles? Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 10:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salut, un grand merci pour ton identification de la flore des Pyrénées (j'en ai encore d'autres sous la main). Désolé de ne pas avoir pris les feuilles ou l'inflorescence complète pour certaines d'entre elles. Enfin je suis quand même content que la majorité d'entre elles soient identifiables, il y a beaucoup d'articles qui vont pouvoir être illustré. Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 22:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

En fait je m'interroge sur l'identification des photos suivantes :

Est-ce vraiment Gentiana burseri villarsii? Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 09:19, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Reginald, es-tu sur que Image:Vallée du Marcadau 36.JPG est une Campanula recta ou une Campanula hispanica ? Je pencherais plutôt pour une Campanula raineri. Qu'en penses-tu? A+. Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 17:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Page

Yes your User page looks great now. I have to work on mine again, my focus has changed a bit. Cheers WayneRay (talk) 19:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Recategorisation

Salut Meneerke, merci du message. Les expertises sur les plantes sont rares ici. Ce que je sais c'est qu'il est très difficile d'identifier une image :

des espèces du même genre se ressemblent de manière similaire (si tu as le temps regarde à category:Pinus mugo dans lequel on met aussi les Pinus uncinata)
le titre d'une image aussi peut être erroné, or comme il n'est point possible de le changer, cela donne plus de poids. Donc ne te laisse pas impressionner si tu vois un long titre scientifique pour l'image alors que l'image elle-même te semble caractéristique d'une autre espèce
pour les cultivars, il est possible de faire des sous-catégories du genre nom1 x nom2 mais cela n'est pas nécessaire.

Encore un grand merci pour ton expertise. Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 17:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

pourquoi Crocus aureus est-il catégorisé dans Crocus flavus? Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 17:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C'est bizarre sur la wikipedia anglophone, crocus aureus est une redirection qui pointe vers crocus vernus, les deux sont-ils synonymes? Sinon pour la classification des catégories d'espèces : tu écris [[:Category:Crocus]] dans Category:Crocus flavus si tu veux que le titre de cat commence par un "C" dans Category:Crocus, et tu écris [[:Category:Crocus|flavus]] dans Category:Crocus flavus si tu veux que le titre de cat commence par un "f" dans Category:Crocus. Amicalement. Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 18:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crocus

Hi my friend, you might want to retake a better focus shot of some of the crocus, they seem a bit fuzzy Just an FYI, hope you are having a good Fall weather WayneRay (talk) 21:42, 26 October 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

HI, in order to delete an obsolete Category or misnamed Category it is fastest to use the {{}} symbol and inside the symbols put speedy delete|wrong name or obsolete category etc etc WayneRay (talk) 13:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Good job it should all be gone soon and the new one remains. A simple process for future reference. I have not neglected my photography just my botanical stuff I have yet to get scanned and have been taking photos of more landscape type stuff. Always enjoy coming to your pages now and again. WayneRay (talk) 19:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Beautiful flowers too bad I couldn't get any. I used to work in Heemstede Holland for a bulb distributor back in 1970. I wonder if they are still there I should order some . Great photos of a great flower. WayneRay (talk) 23:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Deletion

Your photo has been speedy deleted, cheers WayneRay (talk) 04:56, 8 November 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

About Narcissus muñozii-garmendiae and Narcissus perezlarae

Dear Reginald: My name is Alfredo Barra and I have studied the spanish wild Narcissus for many years. I don't see any reason to put N. muñozii-garmendiae as subspecie of N. pseudonarcissus; they are species very different. N. muñozii-garmendiae is closer to N. minor subsp. asturiensis, but there are very clear differences between them. In my opinion, the work of the RHS is rather a compilation than a taxonomic one.

Unfortunately errors reproduce as rabbits. I'll write both species in Wikispecies, so anyone could see the differences. Un cordial saludo, Reginald.--Cillas (talk) 07:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have written to Kew asking to correct this error. His answer was "Thanks Alfredo, I corrected that. Rafaël Govaerts, World Checklist Programme,Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew"--Cillas (talk) 11:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In relation with the nomenclature of N. perezlarae, I think was fixed adequately by Soler in his work (Descubrimiento de Narcissus perezlarae Font Quer (Amaryllidaceae) en el levante español) about the presence of this plant as a stable species.

All seems to be in order for your deletions, I will have to go look at the ones that exist now, Thans for the e-mail that is better sometimes than on a Talk page. WayneRay (talk) 16:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Categories of Narcissus images by Cillas

Dear Reginald: I am detecting more changes in the categories of my images and I don't understand why. ¿Do you think that N. confusus or N. eugeniae are not good species? I would like that before change the category, you suggest it in the talk page. Thank you. --Cillas (talk) 08:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Reginald:

I agree with you: there are no consensus. After A. Fernandes and D. A. Webb there are not any taxonomic work on the whole genus. However, there are many partial works about the wild Narcissus in the iberian peninsula. In Spain, the research have been made mainly by Fernández Casas, G. López González and myself, Alfredo Barra. We, the three, work in the Royal Botanical Garden of Madrid, but G. López and I have work and published together at first and our relation with Fern. Casas have been of competition and criticism, because our different oppinion about taxons.
However, in some things we agree. So, we published the presence of N. fernandesii in Spain and described the new specie N. baeticus (syn., N. assoanus subsp. praelongus) but at different range. When Fern. Casas described N. cordubensis and N. marianicus, G. López and I said they are synonims of N. fernandesii [1].

As I said, I think that N. hispanicus Gouan is the concolor form of N. bicolor L. (var. concolor Barra) [2]. Also, I said that N. rivas-martinezii is a variety (N. assoanus var. parviflorus (Pau) Barra) and the same for N. palearensis[3].

I could add many more examples but this is too large and my english must be a suffering for you (I try to do it the best possible). When I thougt to load my images of Narcissus in Commons I thougt that it serves to give people good identifications more than good images, but now I doubt. Perhaps you can advise me what to do. Thanks. --Cillas (talk) 10:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Identification only is better suited at WikiSpecies and less at Commons or Wikimedia WayneRay (talk) 15:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Sect. Cyclaminei

Dear Reginald: The citation is: Set. Cyclaminei DC. in Redouté, Liliác. 8, Obs. sub tab. 486 (1815)
I'd like you to see also my comment in [4] --Cillas (talk) 07:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirection of pictures from French Wikipedia to Commons? duplicate answer on my page

Hi Wayne,

I want to update the Dutch page Hoge Venen using the content of the corresponding French page Hautes Fagnes and... I am facing a problem.

Some of the pictures on the page Hautes Fagnes, e.g., Gentiane des marais and Croix Hautes Fagnes, are in the public domain of the French Wikipedia, but are not uploaded on Commons.

Is it possible to redirect them to Commons so that I can use them in the Dutch page?

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 15:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tien! it was hard I had to get all the French information and change the Source and the License and stuff then download the photo then upload to Commons and put it in the Category:Hautes Fagnes You should be able to use it now I think. WayneRay (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

See, Flora of Turkey, http://biow.tubitak.gov.tr/present/taxonForm1.jsp?taxon=14601 but there Galanthus caucasicus synonym of Galanthus alpinus var. alpinus http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?70953 --Karduelis (talk) 23:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Because I can't read German, I miscategorized the picture. Thank you for your action. --KeepOpera (talk) 14:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zephyranthes atamasco

Hi Meneerke bloem; I tidied up the file history of File:Zephyranthes_atamasco.jpg just now.[5] I feared that it might be confusing and SSRustySnail (talk · contribs) has not edited since. Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi and thanks for the information on the new uploads I was busy here last two weeks so will now have a chance to take a look at all of them, cheers and spring is on the way. WayneRay (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Continued great photos and happy second day of spring. Here nothing is up yet I will send you some photos of my home town soon WayneRay (talk) 15:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I have uploaded photos to Category:London, Ontario and placed them in several different categories of places around London, hope you see them and enjoy my small town (pop. 340,000) WayneRay (talk) 02:34, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another thanks

I looked again at one of the Scilla sibirica pictures in question and the description has a conflict now. Scilla sibirica seems to be Sibirischer Blaustern in German and not Zweiblättriger Blaustern which is Scilla bifolia. Well, at least half of the description is not in conflict with the category anymore. The conflict is only inside the description. Annelis (talk) 9 March 2009

question about PR-template File:Ivo Pauwels gardening.jpg

Hi Meneerke bloem,
thanks for your feedback. But this is a rather typical misunderstanding of this template. It is directed only to re-users of the image to inform them that it is their task to check whether they can use a portrait image of an individual for the intended purpose.(It's actually meant to protect the depicted against abuse of his/her image, and it should be on every image showing a single recognizable person.) It has nothing to do with the question whether you as the uploader are authorized to upload the image. The latter was assumed. Cheers. --Túrelio (talk) 08:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Garbage

There is still some "garbage" on this page that should be cleaned, i.e., unidentified or insufficiently identified pictures, and some garlic bulbs, etc. How would we classify them?

Firstly you can create Category:Garlic or :miscellaneous garlic and connect it to Category:Allium and also Category:Unidentified Allium, also any title that fits the photos and connect them to the main Category:Allium. Go into each photo and change the Category:Allium section to the new one. This should clean up the main Category page.

There was already a page called Category:Unidentified Allium so I moved most of the images in there and you can work on the Garlic and the Onions in Art or Books whatever. Hope this helped. I also found three out of Category and one new species. WayneRay (talk) 14:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just received a notice that one of my Boy Scout images was selected as the Photo of the Month (June) for the Scouting Portal on Wikipedia. Link is on my pedia profile WayneRay (talk) 14:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carnations

Great job and beautiful plants, you must have a terrific garden, I hope to visit sometime. How can we sneak plants into Canada LOL WayneRay (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brodiaea californica buds.jpg

Hi Wayne,

I have a problem. I have uploaded File:Brodiaea californica buds.jpg. After uploading no picture was displayed on my screen. I have uploaded it again and again no picture was displayed on my screen.

Yes it shows on my monitor, there are about a dozen unopened buds and two with slightly blue/purple buds WayneRay (talk) 14:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brodiaea californica buds.jpg

Hallo. Zag je post ivm deze file. Alles blijkt in orde te zijn. Ik zie de bloem (groengestreepte knoppen met wat lila op de grootste). Groet. Lycaon (talk) 16:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful

The new photos are absolutely beautiful. It makes me wish I was taking botanical images again instead of the trivial Commons projects I have given myself. A new digital camera would help although I like my 35mm just as well. Talk later, I am moving this week into a new place with a real back yard! WayneRay (talk) 13:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colchicum alpinum

Hallo Meneerke Bloem,

ik zag net uw twee bijdragen aan Colchicum alpinum, en vroeg me af waarom u gecropte versies upload. Wikipedia is prima in staat om met grotere versies te werken en bij het genereren van pagina's zelf te croppen.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Teun Spaans 09:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colchicum alpinum 2

Cher Reginald,

Zie svp mijn overlegpagina.

Teun Spaans 18:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Acis ionica flower.jpg

Hi Réginald - thanks for the note; unfortunately cc-by-nc is still not suitable for Commons; commercial use has to be allowed. The only cc licenses that are allowed on Commons are cc-by and cc-by-sa (see here). Sorry! If you can persuade the photographer to re-license as one of these two, I will be happy to restore the page on Commons. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 09:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I hope you are successful, as it is a good photo. - MPF (talk) 10:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, well done! - MPF (talk) 16:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Meneerke bloem!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Crocus ligusticus opening2.jpg was uncategorized on 22 October 2009.
Image:Epimedium versicolor01.jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for forgetting it! I have categorised to Category:Crocus ligusticus. --Réginald (To reply) 08:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne

My father is taking an internet sabattical for the year please excuse his absense. Leanne.

@Reginald, see my reply at User talk:Túrelio#Category:Crocus albiflorus. --Túrelio (talk) 11:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing location of "Kok Phra temple"

Thank you very much for providing photos of temples in Thailand. Could you please provide the location (village, town or province) for "Category:Kok Phra temple"? It is advised to name categories in as much the same way as others which have already been named. For naming the category of a certain temple, see "Category:Buddhist temples in Thailand". Also, viewing "Category:Mae Sot temple", it is not clear if this is one temple or photos of several different temples in the town of Mae Sot. Can you please clarify this in the category page please? -Takeaway (talk) 00:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing locations for Phu Wai cave and Hup Patad cave

In addition to the location requests for the temples, can you also please provide locations for "Category:Phu Wai cave" and "Category:Hup Patad cave" by categorising them within their changwat? = Takeaway (talk) 00:20, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of "Category:Buddhist temples in Chiang Mai province"

It is a pity that you had this category deleted as Chiang Mai province is very big with many temples and Chiang Mai city itself has a huge amount of temples. It was for this reason that the two were separate, where "Category:Buddhist temples in Chiang Mai" (the city) was a subcategory of "Buddhist temples in Chiang Mai province". "Category:Buddhist temples in Chiang Mai" was also a sub-category of "Category:Chiang Mai" (the city). I will now have to try and restore the distinction again. I have re-categorised all the Thai temple media here on Commons with a certain system. Would you please notify me the next time you want to change the categorisation of Buddhist temples in Thailand?

To specify what I meant: There will eventually be many pictures of temples outside of the city in the province. It is therefore that the temples inside the city of Chiang Mai were put in to their own subcategory. The Thai system of naming provinces after their main cities is very confusing for categorising media here on wikimedia commons. Unfortunately, this has taken its toll where it is sometimes not easy to distinguish a province category for a city category. For categorising Buddhist temples, the first to have this distinction between town/city vs province is Chiang Mai. Takeaway (talk) 22:22, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Dear Réginald,
I wish you a Merry Christmas and in the New Year 2010 all the best for you.
Further much enjoyments in pretty plants and commons.
Greetings. Orchi (talk) 22:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With thanks for your greetings and your support, Réginald, also my best wishes to you for a merry christmas (or happy holidays) and a lucky new year!
As in this autumn photo (left) the light at the horizon triumphs over the dark in the foreground, lets hope that next year there will be overall more cooperation than confrontation on Commons and less problems than this year. --Túrelio (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Passiflora coccinea00.JPG

The species in this image is Passiflora miniata. Most, if not all plants in cultivation under the name P. coccinea is this species. epibase (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In reply... I'll do my best to find names to your plant images epibase (talk) 13:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ipomoea albaRHu2.JPG and File:Ipomoea albaRHu1.JPG

This is Ipomoea obscura. Ulf Eliasson (talk) 19:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glad if I could help... sorry for my brief note, but was in a hurry... Ulf Eliasson (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unid orchid23.JPG

Dear Réginald, long time is passed, but today by Badlydrawnboy22 the following identification of your picture File:Unid orchid23.JPG:
"I would say it's a Papilionanthe-Hybrid. Difficult to say which one. There are so many of them. Maybe something with Vanda sanderiana and Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim. But rather a higher hybrid. Cheers Badlydrawnboy22 (Diskussion) 16:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)"
I will bring your photo to "Papilionanthe cultivars". Cheers. Orchi (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cyclamens purpuracens.jpg

bonsoir Reginald Merci de ton intervention sur ce fichier, il est vrai que mes connaissances en botanique sont restreintes et les ouvrages spécialisés ne suffisent pas toujours. Je vais demander le renommage du fichier. Meilleures salutations jean-pierre (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hepatica

I will be consistent and redirect the rest. I just, unfortunately, didn't have the time to do all yesterday... sorry Uleli (talk) 11:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lespedeza bicolor

Bonjour Réginald, dans la wikipedia allemande, il y a une article de:Lespedeza bicolor, utilisant un de tes images (File:Lespedeza bicolor02.JPG). La description de Lespedeza dit que les feuilles sont trois-foliolées, la plante dans l'image a peut-être 11 petite feuilles. Je pense que ce n'est pas une Lespedeza du tout. Est-ce que tu peux aider avec l'identification? Cordialement, Dietzel (talk) 15:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: File:Cyclamen - ? (1).jpg & File:Cyclamen - ? (2).jpg

Hello, these photos were taken in September in northern Italy (Kras region), 500 meters above sea level. The shooting date is 23/09/2010. Maybe (just maybe) could be this or this.

I'm sorry but I can not help further. Coridali greetings, -- T137 (varie ed eventuali - @) 11:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 5caa1ebfc1817f3ed2f8373ffc7e4c8b

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

RE: Pictures of other Cyclamen species

Bon jour Réginald,
thanks for the botanical greetings ;-). As you wrote in regard to Mark Griffiths "he grants me for putting them on Wikipedia", I felt compelled to remember you that a "wikipedia-only" permission is not really sufficient for Commons. So, you might check, to what Mark Griffiths actually agreed. If is only "for wikipedia", I would recommend you, to talk to him and make clear what putting under a free license actually means. When I try to get a permission from a rights holder, I always use (and recommend) the permission template found on Commons:Email templates ("Declaration of consent for all enquiries"), which is also available in other languages. That said, I hope you understand that the description of File:Cyclamen libanoticum Eliot Hodgkin.jpg is somewhat problematic, as "source= ... à la disposition de Wikipedia par Mark Griffiths" could be understood as "wikipedia-only", which would contradict the GFDL license (I assume that the CC-BY license was added per the relicensing action, right?). Also, as this image was shot by Mark Griffiths (right?), you should replace your by his name in the author field. (I've posted my "reply" at your talkpage to decrease the risk of you feeling embarrassed by my comment.). --Túrelio (talk) 16:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images sans license?

Cher Bapti,

J'ai été plus qu'étonné du courriel suivant que j'ai reçu :
<Courriel supprimé (violation du secret de la correspondance)>

Ce qu'il écrit dans son message est inexact. Le résumé proposé pour ces images était le suivant :

=== {{int:filedesc}} ===
{{Information
|Description= 
|Source= Picture taken by Mark Griffiths uploaded by [[user:Meneerke bloem| Meneerke bloem]]
|Date=
|Author= [http://www.markgriffiths.org Mark Griffiths]
|Permission=Permission for uploading allowed by [http://www.markgriffiths.org Mark Griffiths] under GFDL
|other_versions=
}}

=== {{int:license}} ===
{{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}}

La seule chose qui manquait était bureaucratiquement une confirmation formelle de Mark Griffiths que ces images sont effectivement sous licence "GNU Free Documentation License", en utilisant pour ce faire le formulaire adéquat duement rempli "Declaration of consent for all enquiries".

Vous comprendrez certainement mon agacement. J'ai envoyé le formulaire à Mark en prenant le temps de lui expliquer les tenant et aboutissant. J'espère qu'il renverra le formulaire rapidement et qu'il ne m'enverra pas et par voie de conséquence Wikimedia simplement promener.

Botaniquement votre, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir,

Merci de ne pas violer le secret de la correspondance en divulguant, sur un site public qui plus est, des correspondances privées, sans l'accord des intervenants.

Sur le fond, ces images sont des violations des droits d'auteurs jusqu'à nouvel ordre : nous n'avons pas l'autorisation du photographe pour les diffuser sous licence libre. Je suis désolé de ces formalités ennuyeuses mais indispensables : il faudrait aussi les faire pour les anciennes images (dont je viens de découvrir l'existence et qui devront être supprimée en l'absence d'autorisation).--Bapti ✉ 20:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket#2010112910007793

Cher Bapti,

Mark Griffiths a adressé ce soir à <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org> le document "Declaration of consent for all enquiries" dûment rempli confirmant son acceptation de publier sous "GNU Free Documentation License" les 30 photos qu'il m'avait confiées pour téléversement sur Commons.

Je vous serais donc gré de prendre sans tarder les dispositions nécessaires pour que soient re-téléversées les 8 photos que vous aviez mises en quarantaine et que soient également replacées là où elles figuraient, avec les légendes qui y étaient attachées, celles qui illustraient plusieurs pages des wikipedia française, anglaise et néerlandaises.

Je vous demande par ailleurs de prendre également les dispositions nécessaires pour mettre à jour la licence des 22 photos de 2007 et 2008, pour lesquelles j'avais signalé l'existence du même problème, et que vous aviez mises en ballotage.

Je vous serais enfin gré, si vous découvrez un problème similaire pour une ou plusieurs des quelques 2.500 autres photos que j'ai téléversées par le passé, de bien vouloir m'en avertir. Je prendrai dans cette éventualité les dispositions nécessaires pour que dans les plus brefs délais cette situation soit régularisée.

Bonsoir et merci d'avance, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 21:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir,

Tous les courriels envoyés sur OTRS reçoivent une réponse : tous les personnes y répondant sont des bénévoles, moi le premier. Merci néanmoins de m'avoir signalé ce courriel, je vais le regarder. Il n'est cependant guère pratique qu'il ait placé ces images sous GFDL uniquement (licence très rigide pour les réutilisations sur support papier). Je vois au moins un problème avec cette autorisation (mineur à régler), mais je regarderais ça plus tard.

Concernant vos autres importations, si vous avez téléchargé des images sur Wikimedia Commons dont vous n'êtes pas l'auteur, il est impératif de faire envoyer une autorisation similaire, de manière absolument systématique. Sinon, elles risquent d'être un jour ou l'autre accusées de violations des droits d'auteurs à leur tour.--Bapti ✉ 22:18, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Je vois que la quarantaine des 8 denières photos et la mise en ballotage des 22 autres n'ont pas encore été levées. Y a-t-il un problème ?

Je remarque par ailleurs que je suis loin d'être le seul à être confronté avec ce problème et j'aimerais bien qu'on m'explique pourquoi aucun commentaire ne m'a été adressé lorsque j'ai à l'époque téléversé les 22 autres photos de ce même auteur.

Merci d'avance pour votre diligence en la matière et les explications supplémentaires que vous voudrez bien m'adresser. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 16:01, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ces huit images seront remises en ligne quand l'autorisation de l'auteur de ces images sera validée (ce qui n'est pas encore le cas). Il n'y a en tout cas rien à faire sur le wiki : tout se passe par échanges de courriel.

Wikimedia Commons est un site collaboratif : les violations des droits d'auteur sont signalées par tous les utilisateurs. Personne n'a du remarquer le problème avec les images que vous avez importées, tout simplement. Cela ne veut pas dire qu'il n'y avait pas de problème ;)

Encore une fois, pour éviter cette mésaventure à l'avenir, il vous appartient d'envoyer ou faire envoyer les autorisations des auteurs dont vous importez les images sur Wikimedia Commons.--Bapti ✉ 16:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Griffiths a confirmé que les deux adresses courriel sont d'une seule et même personne. Le dernier obstacle est donc levé. Merci de bien vouloir faire diligence pour lever la quarantaine des 8 denières photos et la mise en ballotage des 22 autres. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:00, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ça ne sert à rien de me contacter ici : ces images seront validées aussi vite que possible quoi qu'il en soit ;)--Bapti ✉ 16:45, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Si voulez en savoir plus sur qui je suis et sur mes contributions à Wikimedia, n'hésitez pas à jeter un coup d'œil sur ma page utilisateur sur ma home-wiki.--Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:34, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

euh merci.

Je présume de toute façon votre bonne foi, mais, au risque de me répéter :

merci de ne pas citer de courriels ou de noms sur ce site public sans obtenir l'accord des personnes citées
gesticuler sur ce site ne résoudra en rien les problèmes de violation des droits d'auteurs. Túrelio ne peut rien faire sur ce wiki : il s'agit d'un problème d'ordre légal à régler par courriel, puisqu'en l'état, Wikimedia Commons ne peut pas conserver certaines des images que vous avez importées.

Ça ne veut dire que votre travail n'est pas appréciable et encore moins que votre bonne volonté est remise en cause--Bapti ✉ 20:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<Phrase supprimée (violation du secret de la correspondance)> Il semble effectivement qu'il y ait beaucoup d'incompréhensions de votre côté.

Même si nul ne doute de votre bonne foi et de votre bonne volonté, vous avez importé sur Wikimedia Commons des documents enfreignant les droits d'auteurs, puisque leurs auteurs n'avaient pas fourni d'autorisation pour que ces documents soient diffusés sous licence libre. Je veux bien être responsable de tous les maux du monde, mais d'une part, il est encore possible de corriger le tir, et d'autre part, vous ne pouvez que vous en prendre à vous-même si ces dossiers mal ficelés sont aujourd'hui considérés comme incomplets. Je regrette autant que vous de devoir supprimer certaines illustrations, mais Wikimedia Commons respecte scrupuleusement les droits d'auteurs.--Bapti ✉ 09:59, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cyclamen persicum 2.jpg

Cher Baptiste,

Une dernière vérification de mes téléversements m'a révélé que j'avais par accident écrasé une photo existante (ce que, à l'époque, le serveur ne m'avait pas signalé !), lorsque j'ai téléversé la photo File:Cyclamen persicum2.jpg.

J'en ai téléversée un double sous le nom File:Cyclamen persicum 2.jpg avec les informations actuellement correctes concernant sa licence, j'ai rétabli les liens vers ce nouveau téléversement, et j'ai restauré sous File:Cyclamen persicum2.jpg la photo originale, que j'ai par ailleurs replacée dans la catégorie correcte.

Bien à vous, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pas de soucis, mais File:Cyclamen persicum 2.jpg risque d'être supprimé dans quelques jours faute d'autorisation valide.--Bapti ✉ 16:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS : Pour info, au passage

Cher Bapti,

J’aimerais que vous expliquiez publiquement pourquoi une déclaration de licence dûment remplie via le formulaire officiel « Declaration of consent for all enquiries » n’est pas suffisante à vos yeux, et pourquoi vous exigez qu’une personne, qui m’a, il y a trois ans, amicalement cédé des photos pour les téléverser sur Commons – avec une autorisation écrite qui a été à l’époque acceptée par un administrateur de wikimedia –, vous fournisse des renseignements supplémentaires qu’elle n’est plus à même de vous fournir. J’estime que si vous deviez retirer au cours des prochains jours ces photos de Commons sans explication motivée, cela constituerait un dangereux précédent.

Bien à vous, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non, je ne peux pas faire état sur un site public de courriels privés. Toujours est-il que pour plusieurs images que vous avez importées, nous n'avons pas l'autorisation de leur auteur (ou plus exactement nous n'avons pas d'éléments permettant de penser que les personnes nous contactant sont bien les auteurs).--Bapti ✉ 09:50, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS : J'ai signalé l'absence d'autorisation sur File:Trillium vaseyi.jpg.

Cher Bapti,

Vous ne semblez toujours pas comprendre mon point-de-vue.

Le maintien de votre refus de faire part des raisons précises d'une décision dûment motivée qui aboutirait au retrait de ces photos, constituerait à mes yeux un manque de transparence. Je considèrerais dès lors une telle décision comme arbitraire.

Bien à vous, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

La motivation est pourtant très claire et tout à fait valable : nous n'avons, jusqu'à preuve du contraire, pas d'autorisation de la part de l'auteur de ces images pour les diffuser sous licence libre.--Bapti ✉ 10:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cher Bapti,

Je ne comprends pas votre réponse, qui me laisse bouche bée.

Comment pouvez-vous considérer comme non valides deux formulaires « Declaration of consent for all enquiries » dûment complétés, que l'auteur des photos a adressé par courriel à un de vos collaborateur (je suis en copie de ces courriels), dans lesquels elle affirme qu'elle est l'auteur des 51 photos, dont la liste est par ailleurs mentionnée, et mentionne la double licence sous laquelle elle autorise leur téléversement ? À moins qu'il y ait des problèmes de communication interne dans votre groupe et que ces documents ne vous aient pas été transmis ?

Que vous faut-il de plus ? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...

Pour la énième fois, il faut d'une part une autorisation, d'autre part des éléments permettant de penser que c'est bien l'auteur des images qui envoie cette autorisation. Vous avez déjà reçu moult réponses pour régler ce problème en vous expliquant ce qu'il vous restait à faire (ou plus exactement, ce que la personne se présentant comme l'auteur des photos avait à faire). Votre bonne volonté à tous les deux n'est pas remise en cause, mais effectivement, il faudra supprimer toutes ces images faute d'autorisation valide.--Bapti ✉ 11:05, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vous exigez de l'auteur, une dame de 80 ans, des chose impossibles après autant d'années, pour lesquelles elle devrait même rouvrir des sites payants. Cessez SVP de harceler cette personne avec des requêtes irréalistes.

Si vous décidiez en fin de compte de retirer ces photos, cela constituerait un dommage pour l'information scientifique de Wikimedia.

Salutations, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:30, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nul n'harcèle cette personne ni vous d'ailleurs : Wikimedia Commons respecte scrupuleusement les droits d'auteurs. Il serait effectivement dommage que ces images soient supprimées, mais il ne tient qu'à vous deux de faire les formalités nécessaires. Bonne continuation.--Bapti ✉ 21:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Au risque de me répéter, ce n'est pas en m'envoyant des courriels que vous réglerez ce problème : seul des échanges avec le système OTRS permettront de régler ce problème d'ordre légal. Si vous apportez des éléments nouveaux (en particulier, la présence d'une photo de Wikimedia Commons sur un autre site, où il serait possible de relier le compte à l'adresse email utilisée par votre interlocutrice), il faut le faire directement à l'adresse permission-commons-fr. Merci d'avance.--Bapti ✉ 11:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Si je comprends bien il suffirait que j'établisse le lien entre une (ou plusieurs photos) figurant sur une page où l'adresse courriel de l'auteur présumé est mentionnée et cette (ou ces) photo(s) qui a (ou ont) été précédemment téléversée(s) sur Commons ? Si cela suffit, pourquoi ne me l'avez-vous pas tout simplement fait savoir beaucoup plus tôt ? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hum, cela vous a été proposé dès le 6 décembre.--Bapti ✉ 10:37, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Dear Réginald,
I wish you a Merry Christmas and in the New Year 2011 all the best for you.
Greetings.
Orchi (talk) 11:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you could take a look at this this file and eventually add the correct description in order to rename it (an the other ones). Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:41, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oregano

Hello. Concerning your edit on this picture File:Origanum_vulgare_(Oregano).jpg, I have to disagree. It's far more succulent than Melissa officinalis. However now that you brought it to my attention I may have actually misidentified it. It's common name here is 'Oregano', it looks and smells like Oregano and is used like Oregano unlike Melissa officinalis. But it may not be Oreganum vulgare but probably Plectranthus amboinicus, the Cuban Oregano. What do you think? Thanks for attempting to correct it btw. --Obsidi♠n^Soul 18:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oh, and re: File:Oxalis repens.jpg, looks about right. It's Oxalis corniculata. Thanks for the ID. :) --Obsidi♠n^Soul 19:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011

Thanks for the greeting and best to you also. I am taking a sabbatical from the internet for two years. Only seldom will I be checking mail or write to my friend who let's me know what is going on with other friends. materia @ live.ca WayneRay (talk) 15:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ghislain's unidentified plants

Eh bien merci pour ces informations. Tout a l'air de bien se passer. Teofilo (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

C'est parfait. Teofilo (talk) 12:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Téléversement de deux nouvelles photos de Mark Griffiths

Cher Baptiste,

Afin d'éviter les ennuis, qui ont fait suite au téléversement de 22 photos précédentes que Mark Griffiths m'avait autorisé de téléverser sur Commons, je me permets de vous contacter au préalable.

Il s'agit de deux photos uniques de Cyclamen colchicum File:Cyclamen colchicum 13-10-2009.jpg et File:Cyclamen colchicum 16-10-2009.jpg, que Mark vient de m'adresser pour téléversement sur Commons. Comme précédemment, il m'autorise de les téléverser via la licence simple "GNU Free Documentation License".

Mark vous a dans l'intervalle adressé le document de licence requis.

Pour ton info : J'ai reçu hier la Botany Barnstar pour ma contribution à Commons.

Amicalement, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:30, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS : Dans le document adressé par Mark Griffiths les photos sont appelées "*.JPG" au lieu de "*.jpg". J'ose espérer que cette petite différence d'ordre typographique est sans importance.

Bonjour,

Bravo si un autre contributeur a choisi de saluer votre travail.

Au risque de me répéter, il ne sert à rien de me contacter sur le wiki pour ces images : si une autorisation est envoyée, elle sera examinée aussi vite que possible par les bénévoles compétents.

Bonne continuation.--Bapti ✉ 11:12, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

Hi. Please fill in the reason for the new name when using Template:Rename. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ 18:38, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Hello, Meneerke bloem. You have new messages at Jeff G.'s talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Help !

Hello, As Túrelio suggest, i need somme help for the name of flowers :
File:Béziers-Jardin médiéval 07.jpg and File:Béziers-Jardin médiéval 08.jpg
Thanks
D Villafruela (talk) 09:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fleurs des montagnes

Cher Réginald, Comme vous avez pu le constater, j'ai commencé à mettre un peu d'ordre dans les galeries. En ce qui concerne la page que vous mentionner, je ne comprends pas ce que vous appelez des liens fautifs ? Il n'y a qu'une photo qui ne s'affiche pas (Raoulia hookeri 1.JPG). Est-ce ce dont vous parlez ? Amicalement --Ghislain118 (talk) 10:59, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vous parliez de la page 2. J'ai essayé de changé l'extension majuscule en minuscule, mais les images qui se sont affichées ne sont pas les miennes. Je les ai donc supprimées. Par contre, j'ai constaté un phénomène plus ennuyeux, un certain nombre des photos que j'ai chargées ne s'affichent pas dans mes pages. Sans doute s'affichent-elles dans les pages d'autres utilisateurs. Je m'en suis aperçu un peu par hasard... Si vous le voulez, vous pouvez faire ce travail de classement. Par ailleurs, connaissez-vous les mécanismes de l'induction florale des alpines ? J'ai des espèces qui fleurissent bien, mais d'autres qui s'y refusent et je cherche à comprendre... --Ghislain118 (talk) 11:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

cher Réginald, Savez-vous s'il existe des moyens pour forcer la floraison ? Les engrais ont-il une véritable influence ? Si oui, lesquels ? car j'observe aussi ce phénomène avec d'autre plantes comme avec l'iris de jardin, par exemple .... Amicalement. --Ghislain118 (talk) 13:13, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cher Réginald,Vous faites un travail remarquable. En ce qui concerne vos suggestions, vous avez raison et carte blanche ! Amicalement.--Ghislain118 20:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rosa cultivars

Hello Meneerke bloem,
as I noticed that you started to work on Rosa cultivars, I'd like to see what ideas you have in mind - and explain my 'classification system'...
I'm trying to create a gallery for each cultivar (as you did with 'Lavaglut'), including when possible information about grower, year, synonyms, cultivar group, parentage and some awards (helpmefind roses offers a lot of information). A link to the gallery should be provided in the correct alphabetical page (underpage of Rosa cultivars by alphabet) and if possible, the correct grower (e.g. Roses by Reimer Kordes), perhaps even the rose cultivar group (as you did for 'Lavaglut').
I do think that categories for cultivars can be helpful - but you are correct that in the case of Lavaglut that wasn't really the case. In my opinion a category is useful, when there are at least 4 to 5 pictures of that cultivar (therefore in my opinion the Category 'Linvin' Easy' shouldn't be deleted - even though the number of pictures making a category reasonable can be discussed...)
Best wishes, --Anna reg (talk) 16:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Réginald,

I don't know a lot about botany, but as the rose cultivars were awfully ordered a year ago, I started to organise them (and in doing that learned quite a bit about roses, not that I would call myself a specialist... ;->) and therefore observe a bit what others do in the rose categories - in part to see, if the system is understandable.

As it seems that it's not clear when a gallery/category for a rose cultivar should be created (some users create a cultivar category instead of a gallery leading to categories with one picture) it would probably be sensible to provide that information - the question is just where...

About your observation that some cultivar galleries are to be found in their own cultivar gallery as well as in the main alphabetic gallery, while others are not - I'm probably contributing to that inconsistency, as I'm undecided which way would be better...

Best wishes, --Anna reg (talk) 10:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudolysimachion versus Veronica

I hope it is correct now. There seemed to be a bug beacuse I could not see my chanes for quite some time. I have put Pseudolysimachion back in Veronica following: Albach, D. C., M. M. Martínez-Ortega, M. A. Fischer & M. W. Chase. A new classification of the Veroniceae. Problems and possible solution [6], and their website [7] Uleli (talk) 17:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving the files, I was about to notify an administrator Uleli (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Narcissus

Como podrá observar ya detecté el error y lo he corregido, Saludos,--MILEPRI (talk) 10:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merci beaucoup, Reginald, for your special barnstar! That was a very nice surprise.
Though you may still be too far away from Aachen, I don't want to miss to inform and invite you to the first 3-country (Belgium, Netherlands, Germany) meeting in Aachen, which will happen on Saturday, October 8th. --Túrelio (talk) 20:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Hello. I don't think that it's helpful to redirect Arabis turrita L. (1753, accepted name) to Pseudoturritis turrita (L.) Al-Shehbaz (2005, synonym). Thx. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 02:58, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris,

I have redirected Arabis turrita L. (1753) to Pseudoturritis turrita (L.) Al-Shehbaz (2005) according to the GRIN taxonomy (see: [8]). Let us wait until what will be proposed for the genus Arabis by the Kew World Checklist to state definitively about the statute of this species.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 06:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tela-Botanica.org/ BDNFF [9], ThePlantList.org [10] and FloraWeb.de [11]. Not good at all. GRIN (United States Department of Agriculture, Agrigultural Research Service, Germplasm Resources Information Service): it's better to stick to West Europe and not to North America. It isn't good to redir old, established names of the central european flora, if there's no consens in Central Europe to do so. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Following your advice I have restored it and redirected Pseudoturritis turrita to Arabis turrita. Let us wait to what will be proposed by the Kew World Checklist when the genus Arabis will be reviewed. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 08:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, botanic expert. Meanwhile, I saw that GRINS takes its data from NCBI. I thought that ThePlantList.org was Kew. I believe that genetic code + control = form, so I don't believe too much on NCBI (different codes are different, same code aren't always the same). Best regards, --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Meneerke bloem. Hylotelephium telephium got a similar problem, do u really think that NCBI has a better nomenclature? Tela-Botanica.org accepts: Sedum telephium subsp. telephium, syn. Hylotelephium telephium (L.) H.Ohba; Sedum telephium subsp. maximum (L.) Rouy & E.G.Camus, syn. Hylotelephium telephium subsp. maximum (L.) H.Ohba; Sedum telephium subsp. fabaria (W.D.J.Koch) Syme, syn. Hylotelephium telephium subsp. fabaria (W.D.J.Koch) H.Ohba. ThePlantList.org seems to agree [12]. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:40, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris, we are indeed facing a similar issue. I do not think that NCBI is a better list than European ones, as e.g., "ThePlantList", which is a list of names, not a taxonomic classification ruling on the best name for a species. In case of Hylotelephium telephium I have not participated in categorising it (see [13]. The polymomorphous genus Sedum has not yet been reviewed within the framework of the Kew World Checklist [14], as were already, e.g, Colchicum, Crocus, Narcissus, Clinopodium and Origanum. I would propose to wait to the name choosen by the Kew World Checklist (when they will have reviewed the genus Sedum), before ruling on the best name for this species. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. thx --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:26, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudoturritis turrita is correct, and the name Arabis turrita is outdated, if you follow the most recent phylogenetic classification of Brassicaceae: see pages 101f. in the following PDF. --Franz Xaver (talk) 13:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx Asking and learning ... Sorry Meneerke bloem, I saw that u didn't edit Hylotelephium telephium, by the way Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 13:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Hello, Meneerke bloem. You have new messages at Stefan4's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

	Hello, Meneerke bloem. You have new messages at Stefan4's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

	Hello, Meneerke bloem. You have new messages at Stefan4's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Dear Reginald, my best wishes to you for a peaceful and “productive” new year!
I hope the damage by the autorotate bug ("feature") is already undone. --Túrelio (talk) 14:52, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

bad images

Dear Réginald Meneerke bloem There are many bad images of the family Poaceae. I write the genus Calamagrostis in Czech wikipedia and here in commons are bad images of Calamagrostis villosa. I think, that it is Anthoxanthum. Calamagrostis arundinacea is maybe bad too. It look like Arrhenatherum elatius. The problem is with source James Lindsey's Ecology of Commanster Site, for example: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Poa.chaixii.2.jpg It is not Poa chaixii, it is bad too: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Poa.chaixii.jpg Poa compressa: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Poa.compressa.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Poa.compressa.2.jpg It is maybe Poa trivialis??? I can't rename and repare it. Best regards,--Don Pedro28 (talk) 22:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Asperula rupicola01 was correctly oriented

Hi Meneerke bloem,

At the first look, I thought the image was uploaded upside down, didn't know it was dropping. That's my bad, sorry and best regards. :) PRENN (talk) 06:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Location?

Hi Meneerke - File:Crocus tommasinianus wild form.jpg - are these wild plants, and if so, what location please? Or are they cultivated? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 19:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! So Commons is still lacking a photo of the species from its native habitat, unfortunately - MPF (talk) 22:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flora Batava

Hello. Category:Uncategorized Flora Batava images is being built up, contributions would be welcome. Thank you very much. Regards ;o) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Triglochin palustris vs. maritima

Dear Réginald,

please have a look at your images of Triglochin "palustris":

Both of the photographs show the other common European species Triglochin maritima (which has a similar habit but quite different fruits).

Best regards, S.v.Mering (talk) 16:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Meneerke bloem

Phu Wai hermitage

Image Tagging Image:Reginald.JPG

Image:Reginald1.JPG

Stop

Hello

Unidentified Lilium

Image Tagging Image:Cyclamen libanoticum01.jpg

A Belgian physician-naturalist?

Image:Gladiolus byzantinus02.jpg

Flore des Pyrénées

User Page

Recategorisation

Crocus

Deletion

About Narcissus muñozii-garmendiae and Narcissus perezlarae

Categories of Narcissus images by Cillas

Sect. Cyclaminei

Redirection of pictures from French Wikipedia to Commons? duplicate answer on my page

Thank you

Zephyranthes atamasco

Thanks

Another thanks

question about PR-template File:Ivo Pauwels gardening.jpg

Garbage

Carnations

File:Brodiaea californica buds.jpg

File:Brodiaea californica buds.jpg

Beautiful

Colchicum alpinum

Colchicum alpinum 2

File:Acis ionica flower.jpg

Tip: Categorizing images

Wayne

Missing location of "Kok Phra temple"

Missing locations for Phu Wai cave and Hup Patad cave

Deletion of "Category:Buddhist temples in Chiang Mai province"

Greetings

File:Passiflora coccinea00.JPG

File:Ipomoea albaRHu2.JPG and File:Ipomoea albaRHu1.JPG

File:Unid orchid23.JPG

File:Cyclamens purpuracens.jpg

Hepatica

Lespedeza bicolor

Re: File:Cyclamen - ? (1).jpg & File:Cyclamen - ? (2).jpg

TUSC token 5caa1ebfc1817f3ed2f8373ffc7e4c8b

RE: Pictures of other Cyclamen species

Images sans license?

Ticket#2010112910007793

File:Cyclamen persicum 2.jpg

Greetings

Oregano

2011

Ghislain's unidentified plants

Téléversement de deux nouvelles photos de Mark Griffiths

Renaming

Help !

Fleurs des montagnes

Rosa cultivars

Pseudolysimachion versus Veronica

Narcissus

Redirect

bad images

Reply: Asperula rupicola01 was correctly oriented

Location?

Flora Batava

Triglochin palustris vs. maritima

Navigation menu

Search