User talk:JuTa/Archive 46

Bodyworlds

Apparently, in the time between when I posted the deletion request and today, several more photos got added to Category:Body Worlds in Poznań 2017-2018. Can you delete those also, citing the same request? Or do I have to do them separately? DS (talk) 22:35, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Raise new request(s). And this time please put the DR into every file description page and inform every uploader. regards --JuTa 01:43, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thomas Hart Benton - Achelous and Hercules - Smithsonian.jpg

Hi, What about Carl Lindberg's opinion? Regards, Yann (talk) 06:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Restore is if you think its OK. But you should update the license-plates as well. --JuTa 06:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

The license templates were perfectly accurate. The nominator misread them. This was part of a cooperation project by the Smithsonian themselves -- their curator verified the PD status when we were there. Please undelete. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:34, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

I dont think so, a 1947 work cannot be public domain because because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1924. as the template states. --JuTa 06:37, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

{{PD-US}} states: This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1924 (emphasis mine). In other words, it could be PD for other reasons, such as (in this case) either PD-US-no_notice or PD-US-not_renewed. It is *not* a claim of a pre-1924 solely. It is intentionally different than {{PD-US-expired}} in that respect -- it is a cover for when the exact tag is not certain, but one of them is definitely true. I used that as a bulk upload since some were pre-1923, some were no-notice, and a couple were not renewed. The Smithsonian museum themselves supplied the images (verifying the photos were taken by PD-USGov employees, thus the Licensed-PD-Art as well). If you want to change this to PD-US-no_notice, fine. But the existing tag is also accurate, if you read it closely. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Then it should be changed to no notice or not renewed, what ever applies here. And currently I cannot determine if one of them applies. --JuTa 06:45, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

One of them definitely does. If it's not PD-no_notice, then it is PD-not_renewed for sure. That situation is precisely what the tag is for -- it is NOT a pre-1924 tag, if you read that tag's documentation. No evidence whatsoever was supplied in the DR to suggest that the work is not public domain in the US. A more specific tag is preferable, but not required, and certainly not grounds for deletion. PD-US is a completely valid tag. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:47, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Well, I have no problem if Yann or any other admin will overrule here. You wont convince me. --JuTa 06:50, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Apparently not. The file was uploaded as part of a Masterpiece Museum edit-a-thon, a cooperation project between the Smithsonian and MediaWiki. It should not have been deleted lightly. The images were provided by the Smithsonian themselves -- I was just the uploader present at the event. They verified the PD status. The license tag states that it is either PD-1924, OR PD-US-not_notice, OR PD-US-not_renewed, OR PD-US-1978-1989 -- it does not solely claim it is a pre-1924 work (which this one obviously isn't, but one of the other tags does apply). It is a valid license tag, and only one of the possible tags was refuted on the DR. It was not a valid nomination to my mind -- I don't see why you think tag does not apply to the work. The painting was in a department store, thus almost certainly PD-US-no_notice, but if not then it was definitely never renewed (it far predated 1964). I fail to see where there is a significant doubt that one of those templates applies. I do not understand under what policy this was deleted. Carl Lindberg (talk) 07:01, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:In_Bed_With...Sonia_Ben_Ammar_-_LOVE.webm

Please see Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:In_Bed_With...Sonia_Ben_Ammar_-_LOVE.webm. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 13:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Thx for the note. I answered there. --JuTa 20:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Mynewsdesk-problem and some questions

Hello JuTa! I saw that you closed the Commons:Deletion requests/File:Magnus Uggla 2013-06-14.jpg, but I have some question about how you came to the conclusion to keep the image? Am I understanding you correctly that you made the keep because there is an archived site saying that the photo has indeed been published under a CC-license on mynewsdesk? If so, I do not think you understood the problem, the problem with photos from mynewsdesk is that people not owning the copyright to images uploads them (and one cannot change the license on images one do not own the copyright to). Some years ago mynewsdesk put CC-license by default on images, most uploaders did not notice this. And you can see on the archived page that the image was uploaded quite a few years ago (2013). So, my main problem with the image is that it is wrongly licensed, not that it has never been able to find on internet with a CC-license (wrongly put).

Further information: The image in itself is from a studio album released 2011, the photo is taken by the photographer Severus Tenenbaum. The album is marked with copyright and "All rights reserved", you can see the images from the album here, and information about photographer and owning companies here. "Liseberg", as stated as the uploader on mynewsdesk, has nothing to do with either the album or the photographer, it's a venue just promoting bands playing on their stage. Liseberg is certainly not the copyright holder to the image and the CC-license is therefore not valid.

I found the information in my second paragraph out today, when I was doing a tineye search on the image. But one shouldn't have to go to such length to have to prove copyright violation, the people uploading (or reviewing) the media should be the ones having to prove that it is not violating copyright, and I'm afraid you cannot prove that with mynewsdesk. Sincerely, Vätte (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

If the mydesk uploader is not the copyright holder and its prior published as all rights reserved, you might start a new DR. regards --JuTa 20:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

A new? The discussion in this case already says that the uploader probably is not the copyright holder. Starting a new DR seems like unnecessary work for all parties and will also mean that a copyright violation will stretch out for even more months. :/ But yes, I will do it. And thank you for answering quickly. //Vätte (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Not clearly for me. --JuTa 21:05, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Empty categories

Hello.User BB 22385 (talk · contribs) has emptied dozens of categories.Please delete them.Thanks ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 09:20, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I do not know how to deleted --BB 22385 (talk) 10:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done. @BB 22385 next time please use {{Speedy}}. regards. --JuTa 08:49, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Merci JuTa --BB 22385 (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:In flight entertainment (11406360124).jpg

I can blank the screen. Already have the file ready to overwrite. I probably intended to do this sooner as I watchlisted the page, but I must have forgotten. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Reupload it, here the source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/26781577@N07/11406360124/ --JuTa 19:43, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Patronyms are not given names

I strongly disagree with the names of the categories you created. Patronyms are not given names, you cannot just go and call your child “Alekseevich Jones”. I think a new category for patronyms is required, but all of these categories should be renamed in all cases. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

I have to agree here. Patronmys like ~vich, ~son/~dottir and the like are not given names. Instead they are on the same level as family names. Confer also Spanish names like "Pedro Alvarez Gonzalez" which are composed of the family names of both parents. In the latter case, Alvarez is not a given name either. De728631 (talk) 20:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, thats years ago, but what about to categorize patronyms as Category:Patronyms? --JuTa 21:57, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but with a separation between male and female ones. That in my eyes is not a big problem, it can be easily re-cat-a-lot'ed; the problem are the names of the categories, in all of which “(given name)” should be changed to “(patronym)”. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files of Bombay Thana train

This should not be fixed by rename. Because firstly, these all are badly cropped and blurred images marked by Template:Blurry template. The template itself suggest that if an identical image of better quality is provided, the image might qualify for deletion. The better image is File:Dapoorie viaduct, Poona, 1858.jpg and/or File:Train on bridge (9185928344).jpg. Secondly, even if we rename, say to "Poona to Khandala train", the existing names would be still left as redirects, which will make them available to be wrongly used in other wiki projects such as Wikipedia in future. Also Template:Blurry would be still valid. So best decision would be to delete all these files.

I request you to please reconsider your decision. Thanks Vatsmaxed (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, thats what is intended by the redirects. See above. --JuTa 19:19, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

First, they qualify for deletion as they are marked by Template:Blurry. Even if I renamed them to "Khandala Poona train", they would still qualify for said deletion. They could be deleted as Exact or scaled-down duplicate see Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#File. We already have 2 full size quality images already here in commons (see above). Second, these would remain as fully mis-titled redirects (wrong city names and wrong year), which should be still deleted to prevent their wrong use across other wiki projects in future. Please reconsider your decision. Vatsmaxed (talk)

You might mark them as {{Duplicate}} and wait what the deciding admin will do. regards. --JuTa 05:55, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Done. Lets see. Vatsmaxed (talk) 11:46, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Duplicate request was rejected, so marked by rename tag as per deletion discussion. Lets see. Vatsmaxed (talk)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dapoorie viaduct bombay1855.jpg

There are valid reasons for deletion. As I had mentioned in the deletion request, this is a redirect with a wrong name. Such redirects should be deleted as they could be wrongly used across other wiki projects like Wikipedia.

An almost similar deletion request by me got approval and the file was deleted. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dapoorie viaduct poona1855.jpg. I request you to please reconsider your "kept" decision. Thanks Vatsmaxed (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

The file existed under the old name for about 8 years. There are likely external usages of it under that name. We dont want to break these usages. regards. --JuTa 19:16, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

That is exactly what is required, to break external usages of it. This image was uploaded way back with a wrong name and wrong description (which is although corrected now), referring to a wrong note in an external source. This file was then used across many other external sources with a reference back to Wikipedia, effectively making a wrong image/name/description true. Also a mis-titled redirect (in this case, wrong city and wrong year) should always be deleted, so that the redirect could not be wrongly used across other wiki projects and future external sources. Please reconsider your "kept" decision. Vatsmaxed (talk) 04:32, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Please reply, @Ju. Vatsmaxed (talk) 06:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

But we dont want to break external usage of it. Thats what redirects for. --JuTa 08:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Háczky Kálmán (1828–1904).png

Hi! Please, help! I tried to rename this file, but something error happened. --Regasterios (talk) 06:47, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, the file itself seems to be lost. I'll delete the file description. Please try to retransmit it. --JuTa 06:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Please delete the redirect too. --Regasterios (talk) 06:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

I cannot find it anymore. What was the name? --JuTa 07:01, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Háczky Kálmán (1828–1904).PNG --Regasterios (talk) 07:03, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done. --JuTa 07:05, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleting empty categories, Dennis Stork, Russell automobiles

Hi Juta. I have created many thousands of categories for Wikimedia Commons. I am not sure that you are properly aware of that.

I recognise the logic in deleting empty categories.

I am not convinced that the way Commons is set up fully recognises the difficulties it creates for its voluntary contributors. You must be a volunteer yourself and know how it feels to see your best endeavours smashed up without rhyme or reason.

Is it possible to create a function that notifies the creator of a new category so that the creating editor will know when another volunteer has removed the item categorised leaving the category empty?

Then it would be possible to backtrack and find out where that item has been re-categorised to — and revert the re-categorisation if necessary or at least discuss a better categorisation to reach some consensus.

As you know, currently, I am only notified that categories of my creation have been deleted. That is absolutely No Good. I cannot backtrack. If notified beforehand I can carry out a pre-mortem (if there is such a name exists to match post-mortem) You right now force me to carry out a post-mortem without a body.

We have had words about this before. Where should I go to get an improvement on your current arrangement?

Sincerely, Eddaido (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Please watch those cats and untick Hide categorization of pages within your preferences. Then you should see it on your watchlist. --JuTa 12:42, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I volunteer less than I used to and such as remains of my urge to do so collapses under the sheer volume involved. Nevertheless thank you very much for your constructive advice. I find I'm unable to access this "Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist preferences" unless I use the link you've provided.

I expect (when you make these deletions) you work from a list automatically created for you. Is there some way I can know about that list - so far as it affects me - some time before you tackle it? Just your thoughts please do not go to any special trouble. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 09:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

The list is User:Achim55/Unused categories. regards --JuTa 11:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thomas Bach signature.png

Hi JuTa. I saw that you closed the above nomination with the comment "no valid reason for deletion on commons". The IOC is concerned about potential misuse of this signature if it is this easily available on Wikipedia (I can forward the correspondence if necessary), so if it cannot be removed at the community level, I know that they would be looking to contact the foundation itself to address the issue. Would you be able to recommend the best person for them to contact in this regard? Thanks. Canadian Paul (talk) 23:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Contact us/Problems. regards. --JuTa 00:28, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Sicherheitsmerkmale 100CNY.jpg

File:Sicherheitsmerkmale 100CNY.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: This photo is non-free according to COM:CUR China. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

神樂坂秀吉 (talk) 00:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Сonfirm permission

Hello

I asked the author of the media File:Сергей Владимирович Рыжиков.png write on permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . He did it.

Please tell me how long should waiting for an answer?

--Duffyduff1010 (talk) 13:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The current backlog is 181 days - see Commons:OTRS/backlog. A first automitic reply (with the ticket number) should come automaticly and I would expect a first replay from a volounteer within a week or similar. You could ask for your case on Commons:OTRS noticeboard. regards --JuTa 13:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! --Duffyduff1010 (talk) 14:21, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Caffiéri

The authors of the extended article on the Caffiéri family at Grove Art Online give the accented form as the preferred spelling of this family name, while the unaccented form, used by Benezit, is given as an alternative. Charles-Marie Caffiéri was a member of the family. Wikidata may not be the best source for the spelling of the name. --Robert.Allen (talk) 23:44, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Then you may like to fix his (and his relevants) wikidata/wikipedia entries based on this source? --JuTa 23:46, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Touché! LOL --Robert.Allen (talk) 23:48, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Smile --JuTa 23:50, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Your closing of deletion request

You've recently closed this request: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Cmbr-ar.svg. In reality, this file is now an inferior duplicate of an identical multi-language file. Such duplicates are routinely deleted. Please reconsider. Cherkash (talk) 15:13, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Its still in use. --JuTa 15:15, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

No more. Cherkash (talk) 16:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Another one

There is another one: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Diagram Anomalies Kepler orbit-fr.svg. Please review as well: it's not used anywhere on other projects. Cherkash (talk) 16:07, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Where do you see that Such duplicates are routinely deleted? Please give me some links. --JuTa 20:06, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Some recent examples:

• Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Anatomy_of_the_Human_Ear-bn.svg
• Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Anatomy_of_the_Human_Ear_de.svg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anatomy of the Human Ear fi.svg

Cherkash (talk) 23:10, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

And one more

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Diagram Anomalies Kepler orbit-eo.svg. Thanks. Cherkash (talk) 23:11, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

OK. --JuTa 01:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Please do this one as well (you missed it): Commons:Deletion requests/File:Diagram Anomalies Kepler orbit-fr.svg. Cherkash (talk) 02:43, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Undelete category

Not empty anymore:

• Category:Lisbon tram 738 11:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• Category:Lisbon tram 738 (standard) 16:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• Category:Lisbon tram 738 (caixote) 16:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
• Category:Lisbon tram 204 (standard) 21:35, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
• Category:Lisbon tram 467 (standard) 22:38, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇

 Done --JuTa 13:57, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

1  Done, 1 not cause still empty. --JuTa 16:31, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• Of course. That’s your whole schtick, after all. Why undelete when I ask when I’m obviously working on the matter, when you can waste your time with this kind of messages and make me waste mine, with the added bonus of having red cats for a couple hours? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:02, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

You spray again today with courtesy --JuTa 18:07, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• Your love for deletion of empty cats may be formally correct but it hinders the work of people doing categorization. I am all out of courtesy when I am forced to interact with you (or with anyone else doing the same) to deal with the eventually needed undeletions. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

PS: The non-empty red cat was there for 8 Minutes. --JuTa 18:17, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• Still more than zero. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

PPS: Perhaps you like to work on the wanted cats to reduce the number of non-empty red cats. --JuTa 18:19, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• Perhaps you’d like to stop deleting empty categories which obviously will be filled in the future? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

obviously? These cats were empty for at least 18 months. --JuTa 19:10, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

• "Obviously" refers to empty cats like Category:March 1843 in France not like Category:Square circles: Your’re welcome to delete the latter, but leave the former alone, please. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:05, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

PS: Why you dont create i.e. Category:Lisbon tram 772? Its non-empty by the same file and red since several months --JuTa 14:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

• Because it’s not trivial to do so. To properly harbour this new Category:Lisbon tram 772 within the system I had to make changes in, and/or check details of, half a dozen of other categories — I would have done that later, NeverDoING made me do it sooner.

Either way, this map refers to 271 separate trams — I am not going to blindly create categories for all them: Media files about some of these are likely to be added to Commons (or even be already here, awaiting categorization), such as these two in Colorado mining towns, this one integrated in a restaurant hall in Coimbra, or these four (!), repurposed as hippie teepees — but there’s no such hope for the many other former Lisbon tramcars, such as the ones sent to the scrapyard marked ✽ on the map, back in 1973, which got transformed into steelmill fodder and bonfire fuel long before easy photography and enthusiasm for free imagery become commonplace.

I will create as many or as few categories I deem necessary based on my knowledge of the subject, and I would thank you very much if you trusted your fellow established editors and stoped treating our empty cats as those of a drive-by troll.

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:05, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Seat distribution European Parliament

Hi! Why did you remove the File:European Parliament composition by political groups election 2019.svg? Don't you understand that just now for the moment it is identical to File:European Parliament composition by political groups.svg, but as the composition changes over the new term it will not be identical any longer? Please discuss these kinds of things before you remove things in the future. It causes extra work for me. --Glentamara (talk) 19:13, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

For some reason I cannot revert your changes, so please do it yourself a.s.a.p. --Glentamara (talk) 19:46, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Now I managed to upload the file again. To revert your changes has taken me 50 minutes, please don't remove files without asking next time. --Glentamara (talk) 19:52, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Raqs sharqi in Luxor.jpeg

Hi there, why did you delete this file? Does the absence of EXIF automatically mean it must be deleted? I'm really angry about this. I've uploaded several digital versions of analogue photo's. Will these ALL be deleted now? --Judithcomm (talk) 02:50, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Judithcomm, I restored the image after checking your contributions. Sorry for the trouble. --JuTa 17:58, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --Judithcomm (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Indonesia (Pantone).svg

The flag is unlinked now, can it be deleted now? Hddty. (talk) 02:36, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You may like to try a new deletion request. --JuTa 05:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Adminship request

Can you please support my adminship request? Commons:Administrators/Requests/PlanespotterA320 --PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:23, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hermannstal (Teistungen)

Du hast gerade die Kategorie Category:Hermannstal (Teistungen) gelöscht, wegen Übereinstimmung mit der Landschaftskategorie. Hermannstal oder Hermerthal ist aber eine kleine Siedlung /Weiler der Gemeinde Teistungen. Könntes Du deshalb die Kategorie wieder herstellen oder ich würde sie wieder wie gewohnt erstellen (gehört dann aber in die Kategorie Teistungen).--79.214er (talk) 10:42, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Erstell sie einfach neu. Gruß --JuTa 10:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Löschen commons Leo De Maeyer

Hallo JuTa, ich sehe gerade, dass Du heute Morgen Fotos und 2 Artikel aus den Commons meines Vaters gelöscht hast. Leider habe ich niemanden gefunden, der mir helfen konnte seit EugeneZelenko diese Fotos markiert hatte, denn ich nehme an, dass ich beim Hochladen etwas falsch gemacht habe. Das Foto, das für die Infobox (auch in der niederländischen und in der englischen Version) verwendet wird, wurde leider auch gelöscht, es war von der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft hochgeladen worden. Kannst Du mir helfen, das wieder einzurichten? Viele Grüße --Hexe22 (talk) 08:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hallo Hexe22, Du hattest als Quelle und Autor "MPG" angegeben, also hast Du die Bilder nicht selbst geschossen und kannst sie auch nicht unter einer Lizenz veröffentlichen. Es müsste also der Fotograf (wahrscheinlich nicht die Max-Planck-Gesellschaft) eine sog. Freigabe-Erklärung an das Commons-Support-Team schicken. Siehe dazu Commons:OTRS/de. Gruß --JuTa 09:08, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hallo JuTa, ich kann das trotzdem nicht verstehen: 1. bei dem gelöschten Porträt handelt es sich tatsächlich um ein Foto der MPG, das sie selbst auch verwenden, z.B. unter "ehemalige Abteilungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für biophysikalische Chemie", und das sie - wie die der anderen Abteilungsdirektoren - verwendet haben, um es dort im Hörsaal aufzuhängen. Ich nehme an, das sie es selbst hochgeladen haben, denn ich war das nicht. Es war - soweit ich mich erinnere - auch nicht für die Löschung markiert. Das waren tatsächlich nur die, die ich selber hochgeladen habe und wo ich offensichtlich einen Fehler gemacht habe, und für deren Korrektur mir bis heute (und auch trotz Deines Links) die Kenntnisse fehlen um es richtig zu machen. Kannst Du es wiederherstellen? 2. bei den anderen Bildern handelt es sich um Aufnahmen aus dem Jahr 1954/1955, die ich im Nachlass gefunden habe. Kann ich als Autor meine (inzwischen ebenfalls verstorbene) Mutter angeben, die sie vermutlich geschossen hat? Wie wird das sonst mit historischen Bildern gehandhabt? Immerhin geht es hier nicht um "irgendein Ereignis", sondern es ist das Aufeinandertreffen der beiden Wissenschaftler, die erstmalig die Messung der Neutralisationsreaktion ermöglichten, wofür es 13 Jahre später einen Nobelpreis gab. Gruß --Hexe22 (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi welches meinst Du mit 1. und 2. Bild? Bitte die Namen angeben. Du kannst versuchen selbst die Einverständniserklärung an das Commons-Support-Team zu schicken, und dabei anzugeben das die Fotos von Deiner Mutter gemacht wurden und Du der einzigte Erbe bist. Wenn das akzeptiert wird, werden die Dateien wieder hergestellt. Gruß --JuTa 11:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Danke für die Info JuTa. Naja, aber wenn das so kompliziert ist und ich die ganze Zeit irgendwie das Gefühl habe, etwas Verbotenes zu tun, dann ist mir das auch nicht so wichtig. Dafür bin ich auch irgendwie zu alt. Ich werde jetzt auch nicht die MPG anschreiben, damit sie das Bild suchen um es erneut hochzuladen und jemand es dann vielleicht wieder löscht. Schade, der Artikel war mit dem Bild in der Infobox so schön, auch gerade weil er auf englisch gerade auf seine Veröffentlichung wartet. Versteh' mich nicht falsch, es macht sicher Sinn, Bilder zu prüfen. Ich hatte allerdings - so wie ich in den contributions geschrieben hatte, um Hilfe und Rat gebeten und es wäre einfach schön gewesen, mich anzuschreiben bevor die Bilder gelöscht werden, vielleicht hätte man dann den Löschungsantrag auch unkomplizierter aufheben können. Diese hier aus 1955 und 1971 waren auf jeden Fall harmlos. Viele Wikipedianer haben mir beim Artikel geholfen, aber historische Bilder zur Verfügung zu stellen erscheint unendlich komplizierter. Grüße und alles Gute--Hexe22 (talk) 12:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Clouds types, varieties, etc..

Hi:

The categories on Accessory clouds, Cloud species‎, Cloud types‎, Cloud varieties‎, Special clouds‎, Supplementary feature clouds‎ are WMO calssification categories. Please do not do change to them like this. Just change to Category:Unidentified clouds instead if you don't know were to send them.

Thanks,

Pierre cb (talk) 14:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, that was the translation of the indian cat name used. --JuTa 18:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Contrary Photos

Hello.I have a list of images that violate our policies, can you delete them or suggest deleting them? ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 08:16, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, why you don't request deletion for them yourself? --JuTa 09:49, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

The community is upset with my requests so I prepared a list of Wanted categories I could not create myself so I need help ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 12:06, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

What does the creation on categories has to do with deletion requests? --JuTa 12:12, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

These categories contain non-free files.They must be deleted speedily or after a discussion ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Then start regular deletion requests for them (thats not forbidden as far as I can read in your link) and explain detailed why do you think these images should be deleted. PS: see Help:VisualFileChange.js for "batch" DRs. --JuTa 16:07, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

JuTa and @Racconish: I want someone else to act with these files ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 06:59, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Which categories are you talking about? Some links would be nice. --JuTa 07:53, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

This List:User:ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2/Wanted categories needs someone else ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 08:11, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Again, please use Help:VisualFileChange.js to create mass deletion requests (each time with detailed reasoning). You are NOT banned from regular deletion requests. --JuTa 08:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

No permission/OTRS pending

File:Yellow Billed Babbler captured at Shimoga.jpg

There is {{OTRS pending}} which will turn into {{No permission since}} automatically if no permission is received. Why does {{OTRS pending}} even exist if it's ignored? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 10:57, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed that. --JuTa 11:01, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Colani-LKW.jpg

File:Colani-LKW.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!

2003:E3:D713:B600:2109:5BA9:3F81:5043 09:05, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

account creator

Hi JuTa. I am writing to see if you could assign me the account creator right so I can move pages with no rate limits. Currently, there are many (many in terms of thousands) aviation files that contains naming errors such as Boeing B.777 instead of Boeing 777. Boeing aircrafts either go by Boeing 7X7 or B7X7, Boeing B7X7 is not the correct usage, and saying Boeing Boeing 777 is definitely wrong (Boeing B.777) In addition, Airbus files have similar naming errors too, although they aren't as bad as Boeing's. The dot (.) in Airbus A.320 should not be there at all. I did some checks and all of the websites either use Airbus A320 or A320, with the former being more common. I've already moved 1k-2k files already but I'm always hit by the ratelimit and for unknown reasons, the massrename stops. I believe that I will use this right wisely. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

I would say: no. I dont see the need of renaming all those images only because of one or 2 redundant letters. But you might ask on Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard, perhaps you can convince other colleages. --JuTa 14:38, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

MSWiA Fotos

Hi JuTa, traust du da der Lizenzierung auf Flickr nicht? Der Credit (A. Mitura / MSWiA) bei jeder dem 9 Fotos stimmt doch mit dem Namen des Flickrkontos[1] überein.

• File:Kolejni „Młodzi Bohaterowie” nagrodzeni medalami (20.07.2018) (1).jpg [2]
• File:Kolejni „Młodzi Bohaterowie” nagrodzeni medalami (20.07.2018) (2).jpg [3]
• File:Kolejni „Młodzi Bohaterowie” nagrodzeni medalami (20.07.2018) (3).jpg [4]
• File:Kolejni „Młodzi Bohaterowie” nagrodzeni medalami (20.07.2018) (4).jpg [5]
• File:Kolejni „Młodzi Bohaterowie” nagrodzeni medalami (20.07.2018).jpg [6]
• File:Przekazanie wozu ratowniczo-gaśniczego OSP w Radzyminie (5.10.2018) sztandar.jpg [7]
• File:Przekazanie wozu ratowniczo-gaśniczego OSP w Radzyminie (5.10.2018).jpg [8]
• File:Wizyta Ministra Joachima Brudzińskiego w Chełmie (5.12.2018) (1).jpg [9]
• File:Wizyta Ministra Joachima Brudzińskiego w Chełmie (5.12.2018).jpg [10]

--Túrelio (talk) 15:26, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

The flickr public domain mark is not accepted on commons - see Commons:Flickr files and here. regards. --JuTa 16:31, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Cat

Hi, Could you undelete Category:Iveco Daily (2011) buses please - I created it but I'm assuming I forgot to move images into it, Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 11:13, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done --JuTa 11:14, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Brilliant many thanks :). –Davey2010^Talk 11:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi again, So sorry to be a pain but could you delete the bus category and Category:Iveco Daily (2011) in police service‎ please?, I'm assuming these were created purely on the basis that images might be uploaded however the police one was created back in December and it's still empty ... no point keeping empty categories for the sake of it :), Sorry to be a pain again, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:32, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done --JuTa 16:38, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Brilliant many thanks :) –Davey2010^Talk 20:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Bilder zur Freigabe

Hallo JuTa! Ich habe wieder einen Timoresen für den ich Bilder hochladen soll. Er hat heute bereits eine Mail an Commons geschickt, aber mich leider nicht CC gesetzt. Es handelt sich um die Bildr von Tiago Amaral Sarmento:

• File:Liurai Angelo , the current Liurai of Uma Ua'in Craic.jpg
• File:Raitahu 1.jpg
• File:Raitahu 2.png
• File:Raitahu 3.jpg
• File:Raitahu 4.jpg

Kannst Du die Freigabe veranlassen? Schönen Gruß, --JPF (talk) 12:54, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Kann ich leider nicht, da ich kein OZRS-Member bin. Du kannst auf Commons:OTRS noticeboard nachfragen. Außerdem solltest Du die vom Urheber gewünschten Lizenzbaustein verwenden und jeweils {{subst:OP}} auf die Bildbeschreibungsseite setzen. Gruß --JuTa 13:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Danke! --JPF (talk) 13:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Matthew Paris - William Marshal.jpg

File:Matthew Paris - William Marshal.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!

- REAL TUBE  | ^Talk 00:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Duplicates

No big deal and no need for further action, but please check which of two duplicate files is the oldest when deleting one – I uploaded File:2019-06-08 32a.GayPrideParade.WDC.8June2019 (48049354577).jpg and another image from the album a bit earlier than the one you kept, if I'm not mistaken. Again, no big deal at all, certainly not in this case, and I appreciate your work, but still an unnecessary cause of little unease. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 09:40, 3 August 2019 (UTC).

Hi, I check the age, but this time it seems I went wrong. But it was only a few hours. regards. --JuTa 15:08, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi JuTa! Thanks again for all your hard works and specifically cleaning up my bulk uploads and taking care of the redirects. I owe you a proper [Reinheitsgebot-compliant] beer. Cheers!

PS: Apparently, the VisualFileChange resolves the redirects by default before adding the text to the uploaded files list! -- Meisam (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Just did that :) Thx. --JuTa 21:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

BBC Your Paintings

Hi per Commons:Deletion requests/Template:BBCYourPaintings this template should have been deleted. But it keeps reappearing, most recently at Template:BBC Your Paintings. Could you delete this one also? It has a few use cases, most added by the same User:Trzęsacz who is trying to skirt the deletion request by using a differently worded template, an old redirect created by Trzęsacz. -- GreenC (talk) 20:26, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

No, please try a new DR, but I currently no reason for deletion. regards --JuTa 05:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Why would you delete Template:BBCYourPaintings but not Template:BBC Your Paintings? The only diff is spaces in the template name they are the same exact template. Either we have a template for the BBC Your Paintings website or we do not. This is double jeopardy, I would have to make the same arguments over again for the same exact template. Does this mean if Template:BBC Your Paintings gets deleted, and they re-create it as Template:BBC-Your-Paintings I have to DR that one also? Where and when does this nonsense end? -- GreenC (talk) 03:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Because the current template is in use, the other one wasnt. --JuTa 06:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

No problem, I will remove all usages. The template needs to be deleted first, however. Otherwise they just keep re-creating it under different names and re-adding uses. The Deletion request was for the template, and the template has not been deleted it was forked to game the system avoid deletion. -- GreenC (talk) 04:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

See also COM:VP#Commons:Deletion requests/Template:BBCYourPaintings.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 10:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

About unexpected deletion without warning

Hi JuTa!

Do you understand Ukrainian?

Сьогодні Вами було вилучено File:Session VRU 27042010.jpg. Пояснення: (No permission since 14 July 2019).

Перше

Цей файл використовується 18 times in ukwiki + 2 times in ruwiki.

На жодній сторінці обговорення цих статей не було попередження. Жодного запиту на permission. Як грім серед неба.

Commons Delinker міг би своєчасно на СО кожної з 18 статей розмістити попередження про якісь проблеми з файлом.

Програмісти Wikimedia могли би це досить легко зробити таку модифікацію Commons Delinker. Наприклад, на замовлення Фонду. Я математик, програміст, і знаю, що тут проблема лише у відсутності замовлення.

Друге

Я ніде у Commons не можу знайти обговорення цього вилучення.

Де знаходиться запит на permission 14 July 2019? Не можу знайти.

In Commons:Deletion requests/2019/07/14 isn't "Session VRU 27042010"

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Session VRU 27042010.jpg is red

Best regards - З повагою,

— Yuriy V Dzyadyk (t • c), 18:36, 11 August 2019 (UTC).

Hi, there was a warning on the uploaders talk page User_talk:Bogomolov.PL#File_tagging_File:Session_VRU_27042010.jpg. And the image was simply a copyright violation because copied from the internet without permsission. regards --JuTa 05:44, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

The copyright policy of the Hermitage Museum

Hi JuTa

The Hermitage Museum has some really nice images of pieces of art that I want to upload. However I'm not too sure about their copyright policy. What do you think?[11] --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:19, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

That sounds like NOT compatible with commons, cause they must be free for ANY use, like printing on selled T-shirts or similar. --JuTa 05:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

OTRS permission

HiJuTa , Hope all is good . Can you please take a look on Jcb Talk page . Thanks --Sallustinus (talk) 15:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done --JuTa 16:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Please undelete

Please restore the edits deleted by you into the edit history of newly recreated Category:Psalm 54. (If your goal with these deletions is to waste both your time and others’, then mission accompleshed — why would you do that I cannot fathom. If your goal is to to trump up your edit count, well, deleting and undeleting makes indeed two extra edits, as opposed to doing nothing — which would have been the sensible thing, though.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done. My goal is to get rid of the lot of empty and disturbing categories. Perhaps your goal ist to stay the creator of these cats? Because it of allready recreated, so no real need for the restore. --JuTa 01:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

• My dear fellow, if my goal was to be famous I’d have packed my bags and stopped wasting my time with this kind of annoyances back in 2004, when I was invited to co-author what become the official specs for the national flag of my country — so, no: I have no particular interest in being listed as the author of one category among 150 concerning a subject I particularly despise. I have however keen interest in making Commons the most interesting and useful as it can be, and that includes, in this case, not only the merely adminstrative record of what was created when by whom, but especially the content that was not reinstated upon recreation: Not only a mistake was made in the filling of the template argument, but also two categories previously inserted were lost. My goal, in cases such as these, is to avoid that.

That accounts for your argument that a recreated category doesn’t need to have its history restored — it certainly does. As for your first argument, here we go again: Yes, senseless categories such as Category:Photographs of racing cars in the 15th century or Category:Blueish yellow should be deleted without qualms — but to even entertain the notion that we wont need pre-made categories for a handful of psalms among 150 while all the others keep accreting media files as our work progresses is as ludicrous as it is patenly false, to witness the number of times me and others need to come to your talk page and beg for cat undeletions. Frankly, I think your way of dealing with these empty, non-trivial categories only creates animosity against you among other editors — which is bad for Commons and needlessly so.

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 11:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

You wont convice me, and I will not convince you. Lets both try not to try that anymore... --JuTa 14:30, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Skjoldeland Nasjonalforsamling 2017.svg

File:Skjoldeland Nasjonalforsamling 2017.svg 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!

Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Cray-1_at_Computer_Museum_of_America.jpg

Hello. I converted your "missing permission" tag to a deletion request, since I was unable to figure out what sort of "permission" was missing. See/discuss at: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Cray-1_at_Computer_Museum_of_America.jpg Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

photo

About File:Cray-1 at Computer Museum of America.jpg, yes, my real name is Judson McCranie, I usually go by Jud McCranie. Bubba73 (talk) 04:06, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Questions raised on deleting a series of railway map

Hello, dozens of railway maps including File:Route map of whampoa railway without logo.png were deleted with the reason of "Dw no source". May I understand what information was missing and how can I reupload them? Thanks. Cypp0847 (talk) 15:46, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, its hard to believe that you drawn these maps yourself from scratch. Where did you copied them or their underlying bases? Please name the source in the file decriptions and only reupload them when the sources are licensed free and with commons compatiple. Thx. --JuTa 18:27, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

@JuTa: Thanks for the quick response. It is okay to take OpenStreet Map as the reference to draw the map? Cypp0847 (talk) 16:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes. But the deleted files were not based on openstreet. Please link to the specific openstreet-map in the file-desscription, you may use the template {{OpenStreetMap}}. --JuTa 16:22, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Would it be okay for me to recolour the OpenStreet Map for the use of my maps' backgrounds? Or do I have to directly copy the original map? Cypp0847 (talk) 07:22, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, and better you notice your modification on the file desciption pages. --JuTa 07:53, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Southern California Regional mini Unconference group photograph.jpg

I see that the image was deleted earlier this month, and it was taken by @DrMel: . It is my understanding that she sent an OTSR email, but is it possible for her to re-upload the image?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, there was no confirmation of an OTRS-agent since March. You better ask on Commons:OTRS noticeboard for this case. regards --JuTa 06:09, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Kargil war.jpg

Hi, please make sure that a recognized valid license is at the file before removing the 'no license tag'. The poorly worded half work that is currently there can hardly be seen as a license and the file is in Category:Files with no machine-readable license. Jcb (talk) 18:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I changed it to a regular DR now. --JuTa 22:37, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

File:The Bugle Live (LR)-28.jpg

Hi. If you have a moment, could you clarify why this image was deleted as "no permission" when the user uploaded it as their own work? I questioned the deletion-flagger when it was flagged (as my derivative also got flagged) but only got a series of unhelpful "it is because it has no permission, this is none of your business anyway" non-explanations in response. If I've misunderstood something about the permission process, it'd be good to know what to look out for in future. Thanks. --Lord Belbury (talk) 16:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I didnt marked as no permission, it was User:Patrick Rogel. But it was likele the EXIF data stated "Copyright holder: 2017 Mo Baig Images". regards --JuTa 17:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Patrick was the one who didn't want to explain why he'd flagged it. Thanks for taking the time to point out the EXIF, which I hadn't noticed. The assumption such cases is that the uploader might not be the person in the EXIF and may have been mistaken when they claimed "own work", then? That if I upload a photo myself and leave my real name in the EXIF, Commons plays it safe and deletes it as "no permission" in case that's not me? --Lord Belbury (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

We dont know if that is a image of you, cause we dont know how you look like. The copyright of images of you (except selfies) are not owned by you, but by the photographer. And yes, that is a reason to delete such files. --JuTa 09:19, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

That's not what I mean. If I am the photographer, but I leave my real name in the EXIF, you will (if you can't get hold of me within a week) delete it because you don't know whether the EXIF's "John Smith" is the same person as "Lord Belbury"? --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:03, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

If it is a single image with that mismatch, yes. But you could confirm your authorship through Commons:OTRS. I had the case Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cray-1 at Computer Museum of America.jpg recently, where the user allways uploaded a lot of images with such EXIFs. I withdrown the request after checking his other uploads. regards --JuTa 17:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2019

Hallo JuTa,

bald ist es soweit: Vom 1. bis zum 30. September 2019 findet zum neunten Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Dabei können Bau- und Kulturdenkmale fotografiert und die Fotos hochgeladen werden. Du hast an einem der vergangenen Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen. Deshalb laden wir dich ein, dieses Jahr wieder mitzumachen. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos!

Es sind viele spannende Motive überall in Deutschland zu fotografieren. Neben beeindruckenden märchenhaften Schlössern, Burgen und Kirchen können auch andere Kulturdenkmale wie Brücken, Industrieruinen, Bauernhöfe oder Parks fotografiert werden, um sie unter anderem in der Wikipedia zu dokumentieren. In den letzten Jahren sind zahlreiche neue Denkmallisten entstanden, die sich über Fotos freuen. Für die Suche nach Motiven gibt es bei Wikipedia zahlreiche Listen und Karten. Als Einstieg hilft diese Übersichtsseite. Weitere Informationen erhältst du auf der Mitmach-Seite.

Du bist interessiert, am Wettbewerb mitzuwirken, dir fehlt aber die richtige Technik? Dann wirf doch mal einen Blick in den Technikpool und das Technikleihportal von Wikimedia Deutschland! Dort findest du Kameras, Objektive und Zubehör verschiedenster Art. Sollte noch Technik fehlen, die aber in Zukunft unbedingt benötigt wird, dann freut sich Wikimedia Deutschland über dein Feedback zum Technikpool.

Außerdem laden wir Dich ein, ab Mitte September 2019 an der Vorjury teilzunehmen. Diese bewertet die hochgeladenen Bilder und ermittelt so gemeinsam mit der Jury, die im Oktober tagt, die Sieger von Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in Deutschland. Das Vorjurytool ist hier bald freigeschaltet. Du benötigst dafür nur deinen Benutzernamen und das Passwort.

Für Fragen steht das Organisationsteam gerne auf der Support-Seite zur Verfügung.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg bei größten Fotowettbewerb wünscht dir im Namen des Organisationsteams --Z thomas 14:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)