A few months ago you contacted me to correct some details of photos I had taken, and I never manged to get round to thank you for doing so! Thanks for the updated details, it's really good to know that the photos are being used in the correct articles now too, cheers :) -- Joolz13:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Albinfo, I uploaded a few more pictures from northern Albania (see here), if you're interested. Unfortunately most of the pictures I took were with my family, so they're not appropriate for Wikimedia. Yes, we went over the pass (with my two-year-old son on my back) and it was fantastic.--Doron08:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - in case you're wondering, I merged all your deletion requests into one as I think they should be considered together and it saves me/others typing in the same reason multiple times. If you come across more pictures, you can add them to the main requests at the subpage for Image:Trojani.jpg. Regards, -- Deadstar (msg) 08:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Hoxha_Bust.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
File:Rrogozhina.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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
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!
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!
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:
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.
Definitely not showing 1912 siege of Shkodra. The image was already published in 1907 by William Le Queux in his book An Observer in the Near East (pictures following page 66). As the reference in the book Balkanski ratovi says, it is originally a picture taken by Marubi. Maybe my books at home would tell us which of the Marubis; some further research needed here. --Albinfo (talk) 07:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have deleted this file on the basis of your assumption. I affirmed my ownership. The file name itself reads File:Ismail Kadare on Onufri.jpgFramed portrait in the main Onufri offices in Tirana, Albania I snapped this photo with my own camera in the main Onufri offices in Tirana, Albania have the photo with my camera's metadata in it, at the offices of the Onufri Publishing House, with the permission of the Onufri Publishing House owner and approval of the subject of the photo himself. This is not a book cover as you accused and never was. What else can I prove? Me with the Onufri owner? A photo of me snapping the photo? A written affidavit from the company? A photo of me drinking coffee with the subject? When I affirm my ownership as I did, you cannot simply delete things because you can't believe me. You have the burden to prove that there is a copyright violation. You did not.--Rereward (talk) 07:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC) (formerly AlbaniaDavid on Wikimedia Commons)[reply]
a) It wasn't me who deleted the file.
b) You are wrong: you have the burden to prove that there is no copyright violation.
c) It is not allow to take pictures of photos hanging in a house and publish them here. You would need the approval of all persons who took part in the creation of this document you took a picture of: those who have written text and especially the person who took the original image.
d) The process to hand in the license of a third person is described here: Commons:Permission
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:AlbaniaLushnje.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:AlbaniaLushnje.png]]).
If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.
If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!
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!
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!
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!
File:Fier Qender.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!
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!
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!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
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!
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!
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!
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!
Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Albania-02602 - Enver Hoxha Mausoleum or Museum!!!!!!!! (10796716863).jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a derivative work of a non-free work, please explain why on the file's talk page.
Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Albania-02659 - National Historical Museum (10796947286).jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a derivative work of a non-free work, please explain why on the file's talk page.
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!
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!
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!
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!
hi!
I saw you translated one of my templates. Thank you so much!
If you want to (don't feel like you have to), you can translate this one as well. It is my "ESC caption template", so if you translate it, you are translating more than 2000 captions on my ESC photos from 2013, 2014 and 2016. -abbedabbtalk18:22, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.
Dear Albinfo,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:RMS Maloja (1).jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:RMS Maloja (1).jpg]]).
If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.
If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:RMS Maloja.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:RMS Maloja.jpg]]).
If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.
If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!
Falls es sich hierbei um das Schiff von 1912 (und nicht 1923) handelt, ist die Kategorie falsch. Dafür ist das Bild wohl alt genug. --Leyo08:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Jcb: I only transfered the image from en to commons. Maybe you can find more information about the source by contacting the user who uploaded it there (or by checking the log files).
@Albinfo, for your information, this talk page notification is placed automatically. The system chooses where to drop the notification. Jcb (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I also think it is the 1923 ship, from the overall appearance. There are identifiable pictures of the said sister ship of the 1912 Maloja: [1] which look quite different. In case of doubt we need to assume it is the 1923 ship, which would make clear the copyright issue but we also need to know how to categorize it.... --Isjc99 (talk) 19:31, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am a very keen Purger & Co Collector, having more than 2000 postcards of them.
I have co-written the Purger & Co. article in Wikipedia.
Please, translate it in Albanian if you can.
I run a closed group in facebook about purger with a full catalogue of the postcards found so far. ANy of you or your friends are welcome to join. Purger Group
You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2016 Picture of the Year contest.
Dear Albinfo,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2016 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eleventh edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2016) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category.
In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.
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!
Isn't it better to rather discuss any issue related to uploaded content in a user's talk page then to just swiftly nominate it for deletion? That way we can make adjustments to the license provided so the content is fair to use. It's disruptively counterproductive to just nominate someone's work for deletion as it pisses on their effort and time used to upload the content in the first place??!! If you have issue with the content I upload here, consult with me first and see what can be done. Then if you don't feel satisfied, you may nominate the content for deletion. Do you know it's hard work to meticulously draw a logo like Sigurimi so to just simply click the "nominate for deletion" link without giving it any the thought is irresponsible. My hard and original work and contribution here should be appreciated and not thrown away in the dirt like it's a waste. Kj1595 (talk) 21:01, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Irresponsible is uploading content here with a wrong license! Doing this can create big legal problems for Wikimedia, you and any other third party who re-uses the content.
I appreciate your work and might contact you in future first on your talk page. Anyhow, there are good reasons for going this way:
a) it is just a nomination for deletion – means we are aksing for other person's opinions.
And b) would it be the be the best if you would check for the correct license first. You were told many times in which cases you can use a CC license. You know exactely that it is not ok to upload an image using CC license when you were redrawing a logo or uploading an old image. So, nobody will need to have the license checked when YOU do your job first (instead of blaming others).
Hello Albinfo, thank you for uploading the logos of the WikiCon St. Gallen. When I saw the banner (CentralNotice) today, I noticed a subtle color difference between the background and PNG logo (#990000 vs. #A10000). Would it be possible to regenerate the PNG version or use a SVG? I tried to do it myself however I'm missing the font 'Ubuntu-Bold' which is used in the SVG. --1-Byte (talk) 18:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Unfortunately, I'm not able to create the logo myself now. I'm having the same problem with the font. Had to find a computer where I have the necessary software and the ability to install fonts - no access to this at the moment. Ubuntu is free (recomended by Wikipedia), so you should be able to download it.
Thank you for taking a look at it. I discovered that the thumbnailing process introduces the small color difference. I will propose the usage of a transparent image instead. --1-Byte (talk) 19:12, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!
File:UPT Logo.png 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!
Wiki Loves Earth 2019 Kosovo ka filluar dhe do të zgjas deri më 31 Maj 2019. Duke u bërë pjesë e konkursit, ju ndihmoni botës që të njoftohet me bukuritë natyrore të Kosovës.
Hallo Albinfo, ich habe die Umbenennung der Datei Silum Panorama Südost – WAF 300 J FL.jpg beauftragt. Es handelt sich bei der Ansicht um Grossssteg und Kleinsteg im Saminatal (auf der anderen Seite des Kulm), nicht um Silum. Vermutlich bist Du bei der Beschriftung der Datei irgendwie verrutscht. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 11:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Das Foto habe ich oben auf dem Grat oberhalb von Silum aufgenommen. Das Gebiet dort wird noch zu Silum gezählt.
Die Bilder vom WAF-Event habe ich mit dem Aufnahmeort an erster Stelle und dem Objekt danach benamst. Da Steg nur klein zu erkennen ist, obwohl im Fokus, habe ich mich entschieden, Steg hier nicht zu erwähnen – im Gegensatz zu File:Silum Blick nach Steg – WAF 300 J FL.jpg.
Die Wortkombination, wie von dir beantragt, macht für mich nicht viel Sinn. Die Himmelsrichtungen und so stimmen in Zusammenhang mit Steg nicht mehr wirklich.
Hallo Hallo Albinfo. Auf dem Bild ist Steg als Alpe (also nicht nur die Rotte) in der ganzen Pracht zu erkennen. Da kann der Berachter aber nur raten, dass es an der Grenze zu Silum aufgenommen wurde. Also mich führt diese Bezeichnung in die Irre. Ob der Kulm zu Steg oder Silum gehört, kann ich nicht sicher sagen. Der Weg ist in dem Bereich mal sicher auf der Seite Saminaltal verlaufen (abwärts), also für mich gehört dieser Teil zum Saminatal und damit zu Steg (weil es über der Gratmitte war). Kann aber auch durchaus auch zur Alpe Gnalp gehören. In Liechtenstein ist der Grenzverlauf mW bei solchen Alpen oftmals historisch gewachsen und für Aussenstehende schwer erahnbar (siehe nur die vielen Enklave der Gemeinden in FL). Ich würde hier auf das im Bild erkennbare abstellen. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 12:33, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Albinfo. Ich nehme Deine Rückgängigmachung meiner Bearbeitung zur Kenntnis. Ich fange dswegen keinen Editwar an, mache darauf aufmerksam, dass es gut wäre, Du holst Dir hier den Rat eines Ortskundigen ein, da Du mir nicht glaubst und um sicher zu sein. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 15:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gemäss Historisches Lexikon erstreckt sich die Alp Sinum (also nicht nur die Rotte, wie du so schön sagst) ganz klar bis ins Saminatal hinüber. Folglich gehört der Grat bei P. 1540 (dem einzigen Übergang von Silum ins Saminatal), der auf dem Bild zu sehen ist und wo die Aufnahme gemacht wurde, auch zur Alp. Und den Aufnahmeort hast du ja auch regelmässig als Kategorie hinzugefügt (zB File:Saminatal (Kulm).jpg). Für mich ist das Lexikon ortskundig genug. Aber da du mir ja nicht glaubst, kannst du ja noch weitere Erkundigungen einholen. --Albinfo (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Aber die Himmelsrichtung "Südost" im Dateinamen ist immer noch sehr verwirrend in Verbindung mit "Steg". Das kann ich noch nicht nachvollziehen. --Albinfo (talk) 16:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Albinfo. Das Bild zeigt Steg, Grosssteg und Kleinsteg - das ist glaube ich unstrittig. Ob es auf dem Wanderweg von bzw nach Silum gemacht wurde und selbst, wenn der Wanderweg tatsächlich auf dem Alpgebiet von Silum liegt, der Betrachter wird in die Irre geführt von der Beschriftung der Datei mit "Silum". Google und alle anderen Suchmaschinne die ich kenne, indexieren das Bild primär nach dem Dateinamen. Es wird also in Google Bildsuche das Bild unter "Silum" angezeigt, obwohl es "Steg" zeigt. Natürlich werde ich noch einen oder mehrere Ortskundige fragen deswegen, das braucht Zeit. Ändert aber dennoch nichts daran, dass die Bildanzeige mit dem Dateinamen "Silum" nicht übereinstimmt. Aber was solls, ich habe es gut gemeint mit der Dateinamenänderung und offensichtlich schlecht getroffen. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ich habe ja gar nichts mehr über die Dateinamenänderung gesagt – abgesehen von der Himmelsrichtung, die seit der Namensänderung verwirrlich ist.
Ich habe mich lediglich auf deinen letzten Post bezüglich Kategoriesierung resp. Revert bezogen. Ich dachte, wir diskutieren jetzt über die Kategorie Silum – zur Himmelsrichtung wolltest du ja nie Stellung nehmen.
Dass du in Frage stellst, dass das Foto beim P. 1540 aufgenommen wurdest, war mir neu. Aber ich kann dir versprechen: Es ist so. Ich habe das Foto gemacht, und auch wenn mein Gedächtnis vielleicht nachlässt, so schlimm ist es noch nicht. --Albinfo (talk) 19:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Albinfo. Da haben wir aneinander vorbeigeschrieben. Mir geht es primär um die Dateinamenerweiterung. Bzgl. der Kategorie "Silum" ist es nicht relevant, ob dies dort steht. Das ist zwar uU nicht ganz richtig, aber lässt sich erst in weiterer Folge feststellen, wenn ich bzgl. der Alpe einen Lageplan bekomme. Kann also genausogut richtig sein. Wie oben schon geschrieben, sind diese Grenzen auf Alpen oft historisch gewachsen und logisch nicht nachvollziehbar. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 18:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Lake Seppings Drawing.jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.
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!
The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.
A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.
There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal!
With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.
You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.
To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.
Category:House_no.17,_Berat has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Category:'Agonate'_House has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.
You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.
To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.
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!
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Maliq Bushati.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Maliq Bushati.png]]).
If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.
If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!
We are happy to share with you winning images for this year's edition. This year saw over 7,707 images represented on commons in over 20 countries. Kindly see images here
Our profound gratitude to all the people who participated and organized local contests and photo walks for this project.
We hope to have you contribute to the campaign next year.
Category:1915_in_Abania has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
You are humbly invited to participate in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk creative activities and many more. It is held every year from the 1st till the 28th of February.
You can help in enriching the folklore documentation on Commons from your region by taking photos, audios, videos, and submitting them in this commons contest.
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!
Hallo Lars, ich habe gerade zwei Löschanträge von dir abgearbeitet, die schon länger liegengeblieben waren; ein Tipp: Wenn du eigene Uploads, die nirgends verwendet werden, maximal 7 Tage nach dem Upload wieder löschen lassen möchtest, kannst du das auch mit einem Schnelllöschantrag unter Verweis auf COM:CSD#G7 machen: Einfach {{SD|G7}} setzen. Das dürfte dann sehr schnell statt wochen- bis monatelang gehen :-) Gestumblindi (talk) 22:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore International Team!
Wiki Loves Folklore is an international photography contest hosted on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from around the world, such as folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folktales, folk games, folk religion, mythology, and many more.
The campaign invites participants to document photographs, videos, and audios linked to folk culture and fit within the contest's theme. Through this campaign, you may become a part of a community dedicated to preserving our intangible culture, which has been brought and passed down for thousands of years.
How to Contribute?
The dates for the submission in the photography contest on Wikimedia Commons are from 1 February to 31 March 2023. Probably you are wondering how you can take part. It’s simple: grab a camera, record an image, video or audio under the folklore theme and start uploading ! To learn more about the rules, check out our Project page on Wikimedia Common. Here are the exciting prizes which you can win internationally.
International Prizes
1st prize: 500 USD
2nd prize: 400 USD
3rd prize: 300 USD
Top 10 consolation prizes: 40 USD Each
Best Video prize and best Audio prize: 150 USD & 150 USD
Top uploader prize for images: First Prize: 100 USD, Second prize: 50 USD
Wiki Loves Folklore Postcards to top 100 Uploaders
Certificates and postcards to Local Organizers.
(Disclaimer : The above prizes will only be disbursed in form of gift card or voucher format only)
You can win both International prizes and your local Prizes simultaneously !
If you are interested in participating in the photography campaign, start photographing and collecting media of your local culture and get ready for the photo campaign happening on Wikimedia Commons.
For more information about rules and prizes of the contest, refer here. For any questions, email us or join our telegram group
du hattest mich einst wegen der Bilder auf Commons angesprochen – ich habe es nicht vergessen, ich wartete nur, wie sich das entwickelt. Nachdem schon zuvor im 2015 ein Dritter sogar ohne mein Wissen oder Beteiligung vermutete, dass versucht werde, in meinen ANON einzudringen, wollte ich mir die Namensnennung doch nochmals überlegen, dann kamen Nazi-Beschimpfungen dazu und Nettigkeiten wie „wenn du –hoffentlich bald – stirbst“ hier in der Diskgeschichte. Rein technisch ist es ja mit dem Formular nicht möglich, sich beim Hochladen als Inhaber der Nutzungsrechte kenntlich zu machen, warum man das nach dem Hochladen eintragen muss (siehe Diskussionen auf Commons) ist mir auch noch nicht klarer. Das werde ich aber nun tun bei den entsprechenden Bildern – erstens sobald ich mal Zeit habe, und zweitens, weil ich mittlerweile tatsächlich von einer damaligen Admina in vollkommener, aber wirklich absoluter Umkehrung der Tatsachen für das Lesen von WikipediaZürich als „Schnüffler“ bezeichnet wurde. Die Ausgangsfrage hatte sich damit wohl erledigt, ich hatte mich sogar danach ertappt beim Wegwerfen alter Dias, die ich eigentlich noch mal scannen wollte. Aber es hat ja auch sonst noch ein paar Zehntausend Bilder, die ich digital nur für Wikipedia machte, die ich unbedingt noch hoch laden möchte, so gesehen war das sehr vernünftig, denn das ist natürlich auch ein zeitliches Problem. Ich weiss gar nicht mehr, wie ich mir die Zeit nehmen konnte für die schon erfassten Dias, es kann ja nicht sein, dass ich später langsamer war(?), aber da fand ich das Ganze plötzlich viel zu zeitaufwändig. Ich glaube es lag an den Kategorien, die zeitaufwändig sein können. Von der Serie vom Flughafen Zürich von vor zwei Jahren weiss ich, gäbe es immer noch Bilder, die damals hätten rein sollen. Jetzt weiss ich nicht mal mehr, wo sie sind. Also deine damalige Idee vom weiteren durch gehen alter Bilder, die hab ich selber im Kopf zwar immer noch, aber wenn man zeitlich ständig davon abgehalten wird...? Das soll dich natürlich nicht davon abhalten, oder sogar ein Ansporn sein. Also dir viel Spass und all die Zeit, die mir fehlt....ː-) --Anidaat (talk) 12:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ja, das braucht alles brutal Zeit. Fotos schiessen oder Dias scannen, sichten und aussortieren, beschriften, hochlanden, Beschreibungen hinzufügen, am besten mehrsprachig, passende Kategorien suchen und hinzufügen, Kurbeschreibungen hinzufügen, am besten mehrsprachig, passende Strukturierte Daten finden und hinzufügen. Allenfalls noch Fotos irgendwo einbinden oder neue Kategorien anlegen, im schlimmsten Fall sogar noch Handlungsbedarf erkennen und neue Wikidata-Einträge anlegen oder Artikel inhaltlich aktualisieren.
Kämpfe mich auch schon seit Monaten durch mein Fotomaterial von der Unihockey-WM durch. Ein Ende allmählich absehbar zum Glück nach einem Vierteljahr.
Wikipedia und Commons sollen Spass machen. Da sind Spassverderber nicht hilfreich … Und wenn das Real Life mehr Spass macht, soll man es unbedingt geniessen. Und wenn das Real Life keine Zeit lässt für Online-Engagement, muss dies halt ruhen. Wikipedia ist keine Verpflichtung. Alles Gute! --Albinfo (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jetzt hab ich gestern grad den oben erwähnten unauffindbaren Ordner gefunden, der wohl mal irrtümlich verschoben wurde, mit den Bildern von Kloten - ein einem anderen Ordner, den ich Jahre nie öffnete...
Apropos Kategorien findenː Ebenfalls gestern bin ich über Bilder gestolpert mit sinnlosen strukturierten Daten; zum Beispiel diese Mirage in der Luft mit Angabe "Payerne", auch wenn man nichts von Payerne, nicht mal Boden sieht.
Ich will ja hier keinen Datenmüll anhäufen; mal einfach die Frage an dichː Wo siehst du den Unterschied von Strukturierten Daten gegenüber Kategorien?
Ich meine, ich versuche ein paar gute Kategorien zu finden aber bei den Strukturierten Daten bin ich ganz bewusst zurückhaltend, weil das ja einmal nützlich sein soll, also wenn ich ein Flugzeugbild beschreibe, sage ich dem System, welches einen Suchenden zum Ziel führen soll, sicher nicht, dass darauf "Himmel" zu sehen ist. Was würdest du sagen - mehr Kategorien oder mehr strukturierte Daten?
Passt wunderbar zum Thema "keine Zeit haben".... ;-)) (Undː Die IP, die nun wieder solche Unsinn-Daten löscht (wie "Pflanzen", wenn der Name des Bildes sagt, dass es um ein Flugzeug geht) bin übrigens nicht ich.)--Anidaat (talk) 09:06, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Kategorien sind eigentlich ein System aus den Anfangszeiten des Internets, aber doch nützlich um Bilder thematisch zu gruppieren und so das Auffinden zu erleichtern.
Strukturierte Daten wurden eigentlich geschaffen, um Bilder mit Wikidata – also Daten, die von Computern verarbeitet werden können, zu verknüpfen. Strukturierte Daten sind näher bei «Tags», sollten aber auch möglichst treffend vergeben werden (insofern war das wirklich Datenmüll bei dieser Mirage).
Bei den Kategorien gibt es im Optimalfall die eine passende Kategorie – in extremis anstelle der drei Kategorien aktuell bei der Mirage nur die eine: HB-RDF in flight at Air14 Payerne. Häufig sind es aber etwas 2–3 Kagtegorien: Thema/Objekt, Ort und Zeit.
Bei den Strukturierten Daten kann pro abgebildeten Objekt im Bild ein Eintrag hinzugefügt werden, und zur Not vielleicht auch noch was zu den Umständen (Ort, Zeit, Aktivität oder so).
Unter den Strukturierten Daten von der Mirage Himmel zu erwähnen, finde ich nicht abwegig. So kann die KI/der Computer lernen. dass das Blau auf dem Foto eben "Himmel" ist und nicht "See" oder "blaue Wand" und eine Verbindung zwischen Mirage III und Luft herstellen. Aber übergeordnete Strukturierte Daten sind – im Gegensatz zu Tags – hier auch nicht vorgesehen. Wenn man Mirage IIID eingetragen hat, sind Dassault Mirage, Dassault Mirage III, Düsenjäger, Luftfahrzeug, Jagdflugzeug, Strahlflugzeug, Militärflugzeug und Flugzeughersteller sicher unnötig resp. sogar falsch/unerwünscht/unangebracht.
Meine Rede, nur beim Himmel bin ich nicht ganz einverstanden; es ist eine Aufnahme am Boden und dort unterscheidet sich ein Flugzeug nicht von einem Fahrrad im Bezug auf den Himmelː-) Und von wegen KI würde es doch Angst machen, wenn man der sagen könnte, was sie denken soll - so wie auch jede andere Variante Angst macht, ich sehe bis jetzt als einzige Anwendung Fälschungen.
Ich hab jetzt grad bei einem Bild von dir die Beschreibung ein bisschen detaillierter geschrieben (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hochbord.jpg) - das Bild müsstest du jetzt wiederholen - es sieht ganz leicht anders aus...
Ich habe auch nicht alle Bilder gleich kategorisiert; die hatten ja eben verschiedene Aussagekraft zu verschiedenen Themen. Viel war zwar der Jabee-Tower, aber je nach Vordergrund gibt das schon andere Schwerpunkte. Ein paar hab ich ganz bewusst nach "Buildings in Dübendorf" geschoben und jetzt folgt noch ein Beerenstecher-Bild - man hatte doch früher gar nie gedacht, dass alles mal anders wird.... Viele Grüsse--Anidaat (talk) 14:58, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Irgendwann wird wohl wieder mal jemand da oben durchfliegen und auf den Auslöser klicken …
Danke für die Fotos. Da stellt sich mal wieder die Frage, wo Stettbach aufhört und Dübendorf anfängt und was dazwischen liegt. Albinfo (talk) 13:22, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Für mich war Stettbach immer einfach nur der kleine Weiler. Bis Mitte 80er-Jahre war das unten an der Zürcherstrasse nämlich ganz klar die "Hoffnig", früher war das Haus bei der Gemeindegrenze die Untere Hoffnung (neben der "Oberen Hoffnung" im Bereich der Stettbachstrasse). Von der Hoffnung ist ja nur noch die Bushaltestelle "Hoffnung" übrig geblieben.
Alle Erschliessungsstrassen in dem Gebiet entstanden ja erst ca 1970, obschon die drei Wohnblöcke "am Stadtrand" (am damaligen Sagentobelbach vor dessen Umleitung) schon in den Sechzigerjahren standen. Ich habe nicht das Gefühl, die hätten sich dort "stettbacherisch" gefühlt. Der Name dehnte sich doch überhaupt erst dank des Bahnhofs ab 1988 aus. Du nanntest dein Bild korrekt Hochbord (Hochbort), nur weil ein Bahnhof in der Nähe Stettbach heisst, wird das Gebiet doch nicht zu Stettbach...:-) würde man meinen. Hätten die Zürcher auf einem Zürcher Bahnhofsnamen bestanden, hiesse der Bahnhof wohl Mattenhof und das hätte dann überhaupt keine Auswirkungen auf Namen in Dübendorf. Wäre interessant zu wissen, ob um den Namen gefeilscht wurde. Die Veränderungen sind so oder so unvorstellbar; das Mattenhofquartier bestand zwar schon 1955 auf zuvor grüner Wiese aber andere grüne Wiesen in Dübendorf oder auch Wallisellen waren die längste Zeit noch grüne Wiesen. Die Ringstrasse ist ja auch ein Kind der Autobahn und erst von Mitte 70er Jahre.--Anidaat (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sehe das grundsätzlich für früher genau gleich. Frage ist, wie sich die Wahrnehmung der Menschen seit der Eröffnung des Bahnhofs verändert hat, wie sich «Grenzen» vielleicht verschoben haben – wie die Hoffnung auf der Landeskarte zwischenzeitlich verschwunden ist.
Nehmen wir das Beispiel «Jabee Tower»: Auf der Website steht, er stehe beim Bahnhof Stettbach im Hochbord-Quartier. Medien stellen das anders dar: «in Stettbach» ([2]).
Auf der Website der Stadt wird klar vom «Weiler Stettbach» gesprochen mit klarer Abgrenzung ([3]) und dem «Quartier Hochbord« ([4]). Die Bezeichnung «Stettbach Mitte» für ein Gebäude östlich beim Bahnhof wird aber auch von der Stadt Dübendorf übernommen ([5], [6]). Und die Helsana sieht sich eher in Stettbach als im Hochbord.
Trotzdem würde es meines Erachtens Sinn machen, eine Kategorie Hochbord zu erstellen, in der dann auch der Bahnhof Stettbach landen würde – wobei das hier leicht anders dargestellt wird: [7]. Eventuell in beide Kategorien? Albinfo (talk) 14:18, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Meinst du die Formulierung "Nähe zum Bahnhof Stettbach"? Kann man meiner Meinung spülen. Die Zentrumszone Z4 heisst Hochbord und geht bis zum Kiosk in der Tramschleife.... also nicht in die Nähe, sondern bis "mittendrin".
ich hab grad die Geschichte der Stadt etwas aufgearbeitet; 1931 wurde Hochbord Industriezone und kam dann wie die Jungfrau zum Kind zu einem Bahnhof, vor dessen Eröffnung die 1/2 Wohnnutzung festgeschrieben wurde und damit neu Zentrumszone (Z4). Aufgrund aller Dokumente ist klar, dass z.B. der Jabee alleine und nur im Hochbord steht und alles bis zum Sonnental heisst Hochbord. Ja das gibt eine kleine Um-Sortiererei... (Wenn der Link vom Zonenplan nicht funzt, ist er auch unter Zonenplan im Artikel Dübendorf.)--Anidaat (talk) 14:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Die Grenzen von Stettbach scheinen in der Wahrnehmung der Menschen von der Realität auf den Plänen abzuweichen.
- Der Bahnhof Stettbach scheint nicht in Stettbach zu liegen, was der Benutzerfreundlichkeit bei der Kategorisierung nicht gerade dienlich ist - hier ist vermutlich ein Kompromiss notwendig.
- Und wann passt Swisstopo die Flurbezeichnung an und dehnt den Namen Stettbach auf Gebiete rund um den Bahnhof aus, so dass Wahrnehmung der Menschen/Sprachgebrauch mit den Plänen wieder übereinstimmt?
Volltreffer von dir, auf das Problem "Stettbach" bin ich überhaupt nicht eingegangen -so dumm.
Aber ebenː Die Wahrnehmung von wem? ː-))
Vielleicht hätten es die Dübendorfer ganz gerne, wenn per Kategorisierung hier etwas aufgeräumt würde; bei ihnen gibt es zum Beispiel im Dokument Quartierentwicklung nur den Bahnhof Stettbach, es gibt keine weiteren Gebäudlichkeiten, welche irgendwas mit Stettbach zu tun haben, das wirkliche Stettbach ist nämlich etwas Kernzone, etwas Wohnzone und dann Erholungszone, ohne Reservezone; niemand will den Weiler Stettbach entwickeln.
Es ist einfach der Wortgebrauch das Problem; wer dort in der Waldkantine isst, sagt halt manchmal einfach Stettbach. Das Resti ist [https://bymaag.ch/waldkantine/ Ortsmässig ein wirrer Mix ("Zürich-Stettbach", obschon Stettbach Dübendorf wäre), auch wenn es dann schreibt "Direkt beim Bahnhof Stettbach". Auch der Bahnhof führt explizit kein Zürich im Namen, er ist ja auch in keiner Zone, sondern Zonengrenze, vielleicht wurde deshalb der "Dübendorfer" Name Stettbach gewählt? Im gleichen Gebäude schreibt ein Mieterː ...befindet sich nur 1 Gehminute vom Bahnhof Stettbach. Die machen also interessanterweise NICHT Werbung damit, in "Stettbach" zu sein.
Ich kannte Leute vom Tenniscenter Schumacher lange vor dem Bahnhof aber dummerweise weiss ich nicht mehr, wie man Leuten erklärte, wie man dort hin kommt.
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!
Hallo Lars
Wie du weisst, verwenden wir in CH für {{Cultural property of ... significance in Switzerland}} zwei Auszeichnungenː national oder regional. Was man immer wieder antrifft ist, dass Objekte unter "Übrige Baudenkmäler", also weder zur Klassifikation A noch zu B (national oder regional) gehörend mit:
{{Cultural property of national significance in Switzerland}}
Salut @Albinfo und @Gestumblindi, irgendwie hab' ich das Thema hier verpeilt, mea culpa. :-( Template:Cultural property of local significance in Switzerland ist für mich OK. Das Bild sollte nach meinem Bauchgefühl ebenfalls OK sein; falls sich nachträglich herausstellen sollte, das letzteres nicht so, kann man die Datei des Bildes weglassen oder durch eine andere, passende .svg Datei ersetzen. Das war der simple Teil.
Hinsichtlich der Nummern ist es "gut schweizerisch" von Kanton verschieden. Beispielsweise haben Thurgau und Aargau dezidierte, respektive einzigartige Nummern auf welche man auch referenzieren/verlinken kann. Hingegen haben Kantone wie Bern keine einzigartigen Nummern, sondern verwenden die Grundstücksnummer; das zum Beispiel bei Brücken oder Brunnen in N.N. resultiert. - Das Template-Konzept, respektive Layout würde ich weiter verwenden und anpassen, z.B. "Dies ist ein Bild von einem Kulturgut von lokaler Bedeutung in der Schweiz", nichts weiter. Soweit mein konstruktiver Beitrag.
Abschliessend, was ich machen würde, wenn ich eine one-man show wäre. Ich würde diese Auszeichnungen (national, regoinal und lokal) in Commons generell weglassen. Sie wurden zu einer Zeit vor Wikidata angedacht und entwickelt. Mit Wikidata und Commons Categories sind die Tags eigentlich obsolet, respektive mir erschliesst sich deren Mehrwert für den Nutzer nicht, da die Information bereits in Wikidata sind und mit der Commons Categorie gebündelt werden. Just my 2 cents...
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!
I'm trying to find out more information about the painting that is prominently in the background of this photograph. So far, I'm not having much luck. Thought I'd ask if you knew which painting this was or who the artist was. Abzeronow (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It shows the declaration of independence in Vlora in November 1912. You can recognize Ismail Qemali just above Begaj's head. Based on that, I did some research.
stamp of 1975
The work was created by Petrit Ceno. Ceno has no Wikipedia article, but the painting has one: sq:28 Nëntor 1912 (pikturë). The image was published on an Albanian stamp in 1975 ([10]).
Ceno was born in Vlora in 1937 ([11] – other sources say 1941, but I don't think that this is true). He moved to Italy in the early 1990ies and still living there –also active on Facebook. He is missing for some reason in the general literature about Albanian painters. The text by Ergys Alushi in Gazeta Telegrafi is the best bibliography I was able to find.
This painting in the Presidency seems to be a copy of the orginial work, that is part of the collection of the National Art Gallery. There are more copies around: [12]
Hi Albinfo, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:
Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
Lieber Albinfo, du warst vor einigen Jahren mal mein Mentor in der Deutschen Wikipedia, damals hiess ich aber noch anders und editierte unter einem anderen Namen und auch account. Hier der link dazu, wurde dann etwas schwierig für mich und ich schämte mich derart, dass ich mich nicht mal richtig verabschiedete. Ich sah aber dass du mich nicht einfach so abgegeben hast, auch wie ich schon lange nicht mehr in der Deutschen Wikipedia editierte. fand ich eine schöne verantwortungsvolle Weise wie du mit einem deiner Mentees umgegangen bist. Weshalb ich dich aber eigentlich anschreibe ist ein Albanisch-Alemannisches Missverständnis. Und zwar wird in der Mobilen Ansicht die Alemannische als die Albanische beschrieben. Ich habe hier einen Screenshot hochgeladen. Ich habe schon ziemlich viele Leute zu diesem Thema angeschrieben, und bisher hat das niemand zu lösen gewusst. Vielleicht weisst du da weiter? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:04, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo zusammen, wenn ich mich kurz einmischen darf: Ich wurde auch schon in dieser Sache angesprochen und mein letzter Stand ist, dass Freigut den Holder ansprechen wollte, man muss vermutlich eine Anfrage auf Phabricator zum Thema stellen, evtl. hat Holder das schon gemacht (ich bin auf Phabricator nicht so unterwegs und kenne mich dort nicht gut aus). Als Ursache vermute ich, dass die alemannische Wikipedia unter als.wikipedia.org steht, als aber eigentlich der ISO-639-3-Code für Toskisch ist, eine der beiden Dialektgruppen der albanischen Sprache, also sozusagen ein "Geburtsfehler" der alemannischen Wikipedia (da es keinen passenden ISO-Code für Alemannisch als Ganzes gibt, gsw war wohl für die Definition der alemannischen Wikipedia, die u.a. auch Schwäbisch umfasst, etwas zu einschränkend). Und die App wird dann wohl einfach auf die Liste von ISO 639-3 zurückgreifen. Gestumblindi (talk) 22:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo zusammen, ja, ich wollte hierzu mal einen Antrag auf dem Phabricator stellen, bin aber noch nicht dazu gekommen. Gruss --Holder (talk) 18:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Melde mich zurück aus den Ferien und muss sagen, dass ich mit Phabricator auch nicht vertraut bin.
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!
If you think "history of" doesn't work be my guest and add the images to better categories like ones by date or subject. The outcome of the CfD is what it is though and doing mass reverts to put files back in non-exiting categories just because you can't be bothered to categorize the images a different way isn't really helpful. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of extra work because you did it not correctly in the first place and create a big mess. These files DO NOT belong in categories "History of" – only because they are old, it doesn't say they are about history. It was outcome of the CfD to move these images into "1XXX in XXX" categories. Albinfo (talk) 16:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was no mandate in the CfD that files had to be immediately put in better categories besides "history of." I'm sure people will do that over time, but I'm not your servant and your the one who thinks "history of" is an inappropriate category for the files. Personally, I don't have a problem with it for now. Since again, there is no mandate that the files have to put in better categories right away and I'm sure someone will do that eventually. So it's your problem to deal with if you can't wait for someone else to do it. I get that your upset by this whole thing, but your barking up the wrong tree if you think I care or will stop cleaning up the categories if you keep mass reverting me. That's not the way to deal with this. Period. Just move the files into better categories if you think "history of" doesn't work. It's not that difficult. Your just causing needless work and drama by mass reverting me though. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's good – just go on ignoring the first two sentences: "Delete. We sort images by year and event." History in … doesn't fulfill this critera.
Or a little bit further on: "Categorise according to the highest precision of time taken, be it date/month/year/decade/century." No History in … mentioned again.
Or contineu reading: "A move from Category:Historical images to Category:Images requiring sorting by date."; "Material can be sorted by date, year, decade, century, whichever is most precise."; "Stick to eras/centuries/dates, whatever can be reliably sourced."
Only 1 person who is not even knows how to add a signature to his post suggested to move it to "History of …"
It all was about making things better, clearer, more precise and never about making things worse by moving files from one inappropriate category to the next one. Albinfo (talk) 19:04, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Material can be sorted by date, year, decade, century, whichever is most precise." What part "can be" are you having a hard time understanding? If I say "you can" do something a certain way does that mean you have to or maybe that I'm just making a suggestion about it?
From the closing comment In most cases, their contents can be moved to History of But hey, screw their opinion because they forgot to sign their comment right? Apparently that's how low the bar is on here. I guess your opinion doesn't matter either because you miss spelled "continue" as "contineu" in your last comment. Clearly you shouldn't have an opinion about this if your that incapable of writing English at a basic level (obliviously I'm being sarcastic, but that's literally how petty your acting).
Still though, I think your confusing putting the files in categories by date or subject versus your particular way of doing that by mass reverting me and restoring categories that have already been deleted. They aren't related and my issue is with the later. Not the former. "It's cool if I repeatedly revert you for no reason because the files should be somewhere else" is what I have an issue with and what I'm asking you to stop doing. There's no reason you can't move the files to better categories without mass reverting me in the process. The guidelines are pretty clear that there's only specific instances when your suppose to revert someone and this clearly isn't one of them. So stop doing it. Period. I could give a crap what you do with the files after that. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For about the seventh time now I'm not here to debate what the correct category is. Just fix it without reverting me. I could give a crap what you do beyond that but your personal opinion that "history of" is wrong isn't an appropriate reason to repeatedly revert someone and there's no reason I should have to repeatedly ask you to stop doing it. It's not that difficult. So get the point and stop doing it. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I reverted one edit today. Just because I hope that you learn from such obvious misplacements. But as we can see by your reaction, you do not want to learn and improve. --Albinfo (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Uuuhh beause I felt like it? I thought that was the standard here. Your the one who repeatedly reverted me based on your own personal feelings about it and repeatedly restored deleted categories in the process. I guess it's only cool when you do it though. Your the one who needs to learn that your approach of repeatedly reverting someone instead of just adding whatever category to the file that you think is better is the problem here. Again, for like the 15th time, just add the new category without reverting me and restoring the deleted one in the process. Literally all you have to do is add the category to the file without pointless reverting me to restore the deleted category in the process and there'd be zero issue here. What don't you get about that? I have zero problem what-so-ever with continuing to revert you if your just going to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore what I'm telling you though. I could literally give a crap. Just stop with the tantrum throwing, self entitled nonsense. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but you won't annoy me with these revenge reverts. I laugh about it because I see what person you are: Harming the project seems to be ok for you when feeling offended and having a need to pay back. You do not show any knowledge about category principles, probably just seeking to get as many easy edits as possible.
Of hundreds edits yesterday cleaning up the mess, I did one single revert – and it wasn't pointless: My intention was to show you that putting that file in that category was indisputable wrong, and I fixed it immediately so you can learn from the version history.
You can be sure that I won't revert any other edits from you. Because I gave up all hope that you have the intention to do it better in future. Albinfo (talk) 15:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of hundreds edits yesterday cleaning up the mess, I did one single revert One of multiple reverts your done in the last couple of weeks. You could have at least made the edit without the revert because I asked you to stop doing it and in respect of the whole "collaborative project" thing, but clearly you don't care about or the fact that it's needlessly annoying and pointless. Your the only doing "revenge reverts" here because you refuse to just categorize images the normal way without doing a revert in the process. Stop acting like the one being petty and vengeful here. It's 100% your issue. I would have dropped it after the first message if you had of. Your the one who decided to continue with it.
so you can learn from the version history. I don't need to learn anything here. Your not my teachers and this isn't a class. You need to listen to requests people make about your edits and not do things just to be petty or harass other users.
Harming the project seems to be ok for you when feeling offended and having a need to pay back. I think I already mentioned it, but I didn't participate in the CfD to begin with and it was just something to do on a weekend. I could really give a crap about this outside of other people decided "historical images" categories should be gotten rid of. So spare me the hemming and hawing. Again, this is 100% your problem because you decided to repeatedly revert me.
Probably just seeking to get as many easy edits as possible. Yet I would have absolutely nothing to do with this right now if other people hadn't of voted to get rid of the categories and you hadn't of reverted me multiple times even after I asked you to stop. It's pretty clear you have zero ability or urge to reflect on your own behavior though. Have fun with that. Your wasting everyone's time including your own by being tendentious and refusing to get the point that your particular approach to dealing with the problem is the issue here though. You revert me, I discuss it on your talk page and/or revert you. That's it. It's pretty simple. I can guarantee you this wouldn't be an issue otherwise. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just in case you didn't got it: I accepted the deleting of the "historical images" categories a long time ago and didn't question the CfD since you told me about it. I only question the way how you handle it. All the images I reverted since have been reverted because you have put them in a incorrect category. Told you about it above. But somebody who doesn't need to learn and doesn't want to learn … Albinfo (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And just in case you didn't get it nothing says images can't temporarily be in "history of" categories until they can put in better ones and there's no reason you can't do that without the reverting me. I'm getting sick of the gas lighting condescension on your end about it though. So I think I'll end the conversation there for now. Just move the images to better categories the normal way with out reverting me in the process. It's not that difficult outside of your apparent need to be a tendentious, tantrum throwing control freak. I rather not have to message you about it again though. So just stop doing it for both our sakes. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Klar sieht man auf dem Bild auch den Bahnhof Kleine Scheidegg, aber die Kleine Scheidegg ist ja grösser und der Ort von dem das Bild gemacht wurde scheint mir um das Hotel Grindelwaldblick zu sein, das sehr wohl auch noch zur Kleinen Scheidegg gehört. So wäre die mein edit durchaus richtig gewesen und dein revert wäre nicht nötig gewesen. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 13:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also: Unabhängig von der Diskussion, ob der Grindelwaldblick noch zur Kleinen Scheidegg zählt oder nicht (auf der Landeskarte ist Rotstecki gleichwertig eingezeichnet als die Kleine Scheidegg; wo hört ein Pass auf?), sollte ein Bild, das primär die Kleine Scheidegg zeigt, auch in einer Kategorie zu finden sein, die primär auf Darstellungen dieses Objekts fokussiert (und nicht auf den Aufnahmeort).
Es hat noch weitere Bilder in dieser Kategorie, die nicht wirklich in eine Aufnahmeort-Kategorie passen, weil sie gleichwertig die Kleine Scheidegg und eines der Dreigestirne zeigt resp. die Berge sogar eher Hintergrundmotiv sind.
Mein Revert war also doppelt begründet, weil das Bild nicht in eine Aufnahmeort-Kategorie gehört und andererseits, weil es nicht Eiger, Mönch und Jungfrau zeigt. Albinfo (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Danke für deine Ausführungen. So haben wir irgendwie beide recht und da kann ich deinen edit besser nachvollziehen. Bei den Bergen war mir auch klar, dass es nicht die beste Kategorie war, aber es gab so viele Bilder von Bergen in der Kategorie:Kleine Scheidegg dass ich es sortieren wollte. Ich lege nicht gerne Kategorien für ein, zwei Bilder an, aber vielleicht ist es nunmal das beste. Werde mich daran machen, es noch zu unterteilen. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
16:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
→ Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 20:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
wikimediashqip.org.
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[1]](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medina_(Schiff)#/media/File:StateLibQld_1_141863_Medina_(ship).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(_Ank_Kumar,_Infosys_Limited_04.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
