Guanolto

Hi, and thanky you for contributing.

To add your user name to a post, add four tilde characters to your post, like this: ~~~~ . This will be rendered into your user name and the date of the post. However, use this only in talk (discussion) pages or other non-article pages, not in articles.  Andreas  ^(T) 20:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Ivolga Datsan Green Tara.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Ivolga Datsan Green Tara.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NtheP (talk) 20:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

The pictures I'm uploading to this page are simply the exact same pictures that appear on the corresponding article in the Russian-language part of Wikipedia. It's just a simple case of copying them from Wikipedia to Wikipedia for my translation of the Russian article. --Scott Ellsworth (talk) 20:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but that's not the point. Even if they are hosted on another wiki, you need to indicate here a) where you got the images from, and by that I mean full URL, not just the Russian wiki and b) what the copyright status is. For all we know these could have been hosted at ru.wiki without a valid copyright tag so without establishing the copyright status here, we're compounding the same issue. If they do have a valid copyright tag then they would be better uploaded to Wikipedia Commkons where they can be used by all wikis without repeated uploading. NtheP (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Just checked the original images, they are all already on Commons

• File:Ivolga Datsan Dzogchen Dugan.jpg is already on Commons as File:Цогчен-дуган в Иволгинском дацане.jpg
• File:Ivolga Datsan Green Tara.jpg is File:Иволгинский дацан - Зеленая Тара.jpg
• File:Devajin Dugan.JPG is File:Dugan Devajin.JPG
• File:Cham dance.JPG is File:Мистерия Цам-1.JPG and your other image you've labelled as being from Commons. Images already on Commons can freely be used and linked to from any other wiki just add the commons filename to your article e.g. [[File:filename.jpg]] and they will be linked. NtheP (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Energiewende

This is all about granularity.

I renamed it as it makes more sense as an article purely about Germany's efforts in transitioning to a low-carbon economy. An article only about Germany's Energiewende only will tend to remain on-topic and will in time become a good reference for Germany's efforts in sustainability. An article about every country under the sun can quickly become long list of overviews lacking in quality and usefulness.

If I were you I'd create one Wikipedia page for each country's Energiewende/Energy transition plans and efforts. Then you could create a "metapage" – yes, call it for now "Energy transition" (in lieu of a better title though something like "Energy transition by country" or '"Energy transitions worldwide" would be better) – and on that page there can be sub-headings for each country, each with a "See also" link directly under the sub-heading which links to each of those country-specific articles on Wikipedia. Then a short summary can be provided summarising the info on each country-specific page (which, as I mentioned above re: Germany, will tend to remain on-topic and will become good references for the Energy transition efforts in each county over time, blah blah.) Such summaries are easier to keep concise and sticking to the salient points of the pages they refer to; this is of enormous benefit to the reader.

Contrast this to Wikipedia pages crammed with information on many countries. Such pages abound throughout Wikipedia. These pages tend to ramble on and on and are often the cause of so much duplication on Wikipedia. It is so much easier to write text and stick it up on Wikipedia than it is to locate, edit, and re-organise the info already on Wikipedia to make a single repository of information about it - that's the granularity I'm talking about.

So question in point, how will your page differentiate itself with pages like the Renewable energy in Germany page for example or the Energy in France page? There are also other pages out there which have overlapping information just for Germany alone such as Germany National Renewable Energy Action Plan. Are you going to add to the jumble? Stick to the principle of granularity and its easier to not do so.

reinthal (talk) 19:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Reinthal,

This is good food for thought. As mentioned, my only role to start with was to develop this page by translating sections from the German version of the article. Granularity and where exactly the article belongs are meaningful questions. The German version really encompasses the whole topic globally, though it has a bit more of a focus on Germany. That seems appropriate since it's written in German. When I started adding to this article in English I did so with the intention of maintaining the same global breadth.

I do think there is a place for general articles on Wikipedia as well as really specific ones. Sometimes when I want some general information I find it frustrating sometimes to only find extremely narrowly-written articles, filled with technical jargon, that would only be of interest to scientists or engineers. I think the best way is not so much to create only narrowly-focused articles, but on linking them together appropriately so that people can reach their desired level of detail. There must be some optimal way of nesting their subject areas.

Looking back at the article now, I see it's been changed considerably and I haven't found notes about who changed it or why. The editing history is almost all blank, so I don't know what's going on. Someone really has been morphing it into an article just about Germany. And the link to the original German article has been broken. There used to be an editing history on this article.

Perhaps this should be split into two separate articles, one page just about Germany and another about the issue in general. "Energy Transition" (which would link again directly to the page's German version from the sidebar) and "Energy Transition in Germany" (which could also have a link to the global-focus article and vice versa).

Scott Ellsworth (talk) 20:00, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Looking around a little more, I think somebody erased the editing history , perhaps by accident. So there's apparently no way of knowing who made the changes or what discussion there was about it. 2602:306:CD03:4D40:549A:7440:CE08:FC1D (talk) 20:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)