User talk:Rowanwindwhistler/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

talkback

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

	Hello, Rowanwindwhistler. You have new messages on another wiki at Commons:Graphic_Lab/Photography_workshop#Graphist_opinion(s):. 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 ∙ +/−

--Kevjonesin (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

p.s.— It's short, so I just went ahead and copied to here:

"Hi Rowan, Nagual has uploaded his Photoshop composite and we are discussing it here. Would you offer us your opinion, please? I'd value your input. It likely helps that you've actually seen the building. : }"

It's just Nagualdesign and I discussing design elements. Nothing contentious. --Kevjonesin (talk) 12:29, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:RefugiadosGriegosHuidosDeLaOcupaciónAlemanaAbrilDe1941--007763.jpeg

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:RefugiadosGriegosHuidosDeLaOcupaciónAlemanaAbrilDe1941--007763.jpeg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 21:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:ReclutasYugoslavosEnOrientePróximoSeptiembreDe1941--009825.jpeg

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:ReclutasYugoslavosEnOrientePróximoSeptiembreDe1941--009825.jpeg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 22:16, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Rzeczpospolita 1939 ES.svg

Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi there, you might be interested in the fact that I updated my File:Rzeczpospolita 1938.svg map. You made a derivative of it for the Spanish wiki (File:Rzeczpospolita 1939 ES.svg), so that one could be updated as well. BTW, thanks for translating it :) Not that there were that many Spanish names for towns in our part of the world :) Halibutt (talk) 20:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I have just uploaded a new version based on the current one of the original map. There are indeed not many Spanish names for localities in this area but at least I wanted to have a version that showed the ones that do (mainly capital cities and a few others). Thanks for the tip.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 20:53, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

There is one big mistake in the map you uploaded. In the map of Sweden there wrongly appear two Malmös. You put the name of Malmö instead of Göteborg in this map. The actual and correct Malmö is aready depicted in the southwest corner of Sweden opposite Copenhagen. Please correct this obvious mistake. 31.200.13.46 14:14, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Mended, but for simple changes it is always best to make a quick correction than reporting it to somebody else for setting it right.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 15:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:FuneralDeAlejandroIDeYugoslavia--P01471.034.jpeg

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:FuneralDeAlejandroIDeYugoslavia--P01471.034.jpeg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Ju Ta 10:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Egypt NK edit es.svg

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hola Rowanwindwhistler. Magnífico mapa ¿Puedes cambiar el texto: Egipcio HITITA por Imperio egipcio? Gracias Un cordial saludo, --JMCC1 (talk) 14:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Pd: ... y Siglo XV BC por Siglo XV a. C.

;-)

En realidad, yo solo lo traduje, y parece que no muy bien (las prisas...). Al menos esos errores ya están solucionados, gracias por el aviso.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 17:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

hello & suggestion

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello! I found your user page very entertaining! I don't have any complaints, only compliments, and a bit of info.

I noticed that back in Sept 2012 you uploaded several wonderful images of the Bulgarian royal family from a 1913 book about Tsar Ferdinand that you found on archive.org.

For example, File:EudoxiaKyrilBorisYNadejdaHijosDeFernandoDeBulgaria--czarferdinandhis00macduoft.jpg. with a source of http://archive.org/details/czarferdinandhis00macduoft .

I was just wondering, were you aware that if you look at the complete file list for that book (which you can access by clicking on the link after "all files" on the left), you can access the original scanned page images? They are in the file czarferdinandhis00macduoft_orig_jp2.tar , an archive file of the original jp2 images. These images are probably much higher resolution than the images you uploaded.

Just thought you might find this interesting for future reference. You have contributed so much to Commons, and I agree with your judgment of those who appoint themselves copyright/source/status police (who are siblings, I think, of the self-appointed non-notability and source/citation police on en-wiki). Cheers! Laura1822 (talk) 23:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Ugh, I just took a look at the original page images and found the one for the image I referenced above, and while it's much higher resolution (1484 x 1972 when cropped) it's not really any clearer. The images in this particular book aren't printed as photographs but with low-res dots like in a newspaper, so the pattern is obvious even when not at full resolution. How annoying. Sorry to bother you! Laura1822 (talk) 23:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, no problem at all! I was not aware these images were there and it may be worthwhile uploading those instead of the ones I originally did (most likely by getting a copy from the online book itself, I cannot remember any more). As far as I can remember, these scans in archive.org (specially those paid by Google) tend to give priority to getting a clear text, not good reproductions of the images. I suppose if one is interested in one image in particular this could be requested here (noth sure though, I have never tried it myself)... But I do upload images from these books as I know of no better alternatives. Regards.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 07:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Giovanni Giolitti.jpg

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Giovanni Giolitti.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Stefan4 (talk) 18:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Stop

Latest comment: 10 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

I made an administrative action. I give a cause why I have done it. You have done a rollback two times. One time more and I see it as vandalism. If you think, I have done it incorrect, ask for a second opinion. But never again di a rollback! Maybe I am not right - but we don't do a game here. And I am elected as an admin to decide such requests! Marcus Cyron (talk) 22:40, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

You are already being reported. You did it wrong and you are the one breaking the files. The request will be added back. I do not care who you are.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Vandalism#User:Rowanwindwhistler. If you don't want to hear. Marcus Cyron (talk) 23:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

You are the one that does not want to hear. You wrongly renamed the files, you reject the restoration of their names, you delete my requests and you do not seem to know the criteria as you add reasons that contradict the rules. Your vandalism has been reported. My requests will remain in place, if you keep removing them, I will keep adding them back.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 23:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

If you disagree with a decision of another editor, even an admin, the correct move is not to edit-war with that user, it is to take it to a third party using dispute resolution. In particular, rolback is only to be used for obvious vandalism and if you abuse it again, I will remove it from you, without prejudice to you being blocked for edit-warring. Rodhullandemu (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I consider your unjustified removal of my request as vandalism. None of your reasons meet the 7 rules that justify a renaming, hence the removal of my request is unwarranted and the permanent removal I consider vandalism. If you insist in deleting my request I will have no choice but to ask for your admin category to be removed as undeserved.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 23:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I must apologize for my last not as it was not directed to you, user Rodhullandemu, but to user Marcus Cyron. My sincere apologies. However, I have to disagree, an admin cannot arbitrarily (without proper reasons) use his power to back his personal point of view.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Felicidades! ¡Te concedo este premio por tus fotos excelentes! CyberWarrior (talk) 02:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Algunas mejores que otras pero, ¡muchas gracias!--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 07:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Covarrubias20100201132139SAM 1785.jpg

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Covarrubias20100201132139SAM 1785.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Túrelio (talk) 06:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

File:SabiaGeneraluluiAdevarulMagIstAug1971.jpg

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:SabiaGeneraluluiAdevarulMagIstAug1971.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

New messages

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

	Hello, Rowanwindwhistler. You have new messages at Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop#SVG version for easy translation. 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 ∙ +/−

Rcsprinter123 (talk) 09:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Madriguera81.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Ok --Poco a poco 21:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Maps of Pagania

Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

I saw that you uploaded two maps of Pagania based on maps uploaded by user Ceha. These maps had numerous errors.

I now uploaded new corrected map versions of both:

I also elaborated reasons for changes on talk pages:

So, please correct maps which you uploaded accordingly. PANONIAN (talk) 10:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

One more important thing: user Ceha is from Croatia and he disputed my original map of Pagania only because it was based on Serbian sources: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pagania.png I hope that you know that this kind of "ethnic disqualification of sources" is simply not acceptable argument in academic disputes.

Anyway, it is truth that Serbian and Croatian historiography have different views about this question:

Here is map from Serbian source: https://markoek.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/910veksrpskezemlje.png
And here is one from Croatian source: http://www.croatia-in-english.com/images/maps/800s.jpg

You can notice differences. I think that fair solution is to have here in Wikimedia two different maps, one based on Serbian sources and another one on Croatian:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pagania.png (Serbian version)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pagania9st.png (Croatian version)

Since you make maps mostly for Spanish Wikipedia I also think that two of your maps should depict one of the views and that both should be in article in Spanish Wikipedia, per the sake of neutral approach. The way in which user Ceha simply removed my original map from all Wikipedias and placed there his hybrid version (based partly on Serbian and partly on Croatian source with amount of personal original research) is really not the way in which one Wikipedian should behave. PANONIAN (talk) 10:42, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Done, unless I overlooked something the last changes have been added to the SVG versions I drew. Please bear in mind anyone (not just me, who may or may not be available to perform the modifications in the files) can change the SVG maps, that is the idea of the wiki...--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 07:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, I would change these maps by myself, but I am not good in SVG maps editing. I can do anything with PNG files in Photoshop, however, Incscape is for me hard to work with. I tried to modify some SVG maps with Inkscape, but results were not good. So, I asked you, as image uploader, to change these SVG maps. Anyway, you might also make two small corrections in this one: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PaganiaSigloIX.svg 1. part of Pagania border with Croatia is still kept from old version, 2. Name "Byzantine territories" should not be near islands of Vis and Lastovo, which were not Byzantine, according to used Croatian source. The other map is OK. PANONIAN (talk) 08:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Just to tell you that dispute over Pagania borders was solved with 4 different maps, each depicting borders from one of reliable sources:

By the way, you map still depicting kind of "wrong border" between Pagania and Croatia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PaganiaSigloIX.svg

Border between Pagania and Croatia in your map should be like in this map: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pagania04.png (since all other borders in your map are from that one)

But instead, the border between Pagania and Croatia in your map is in fact like in this map: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pagania.png

My point is that borders of Pagania are depicted differently in different sources and that each of Wikimedia maps should exactly depict borders from only one source (not from more of them because it would be then original research). So, please, if you find free time, try to correct border between Pagania and Croatia in your map so that all maps of Pagania in Commons are correct. Thank you. PANONIAN (talk) 22:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I changed the borders, following the original raster file mentioned as source in the SVG map. In case there are future changes, I think COM:GL/MAP is the best place to go for help...--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 12:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)