User talk:Juandev/Archive 2

cs, en-3, es-3, pl-1
XHTML-2, CSS-2

User talk:Juandev/archive 1

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by ŠimekMT

Děkuji za odpověď. Na email info-cs@wikimedia.org jsem zaslal text se zněním: Dobrý den. Já, autor fotografií: MT 2005.jpg, MT 2010.jpg, MT 2000.jpg, MT 1995.jpg, MALIGNANT TUMOUR.jpg, Promophoto.jpg, souhlasím s tím, aby tyto moje fotografie byly zveřejněny prostřednictvím Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MALIGNANT_TUMOUR.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MT_1995.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MT_2000.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MT_2005.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MT_2010.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MT_2013.jpg) pod licencí Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (zkrácené české znění: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.cs; plné znění: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode). Beru na vědomí, že toto dílo může být libovolně upravováno a přebíráno dalšími stranami k jakémukoli účelu včetně komerčních.

Tuto zprávu pro jistotu pošlu rovněž z emailu skupiny MALIGNANT TUMOUR, které jsem členem. S pozdravem Robert Šimek

Snad to bude stačit. 07:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Kost

Tady jsem Ti něco nahrál do odborné fotografie. --Gampe (talk) 16:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Díky. Příště použij správnou šablonu.--Juandev (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Která je ta správná? --Gampe (talk) 19:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promiň, mýlil jsem se. Fotografie jsou ze srpna 2011 a to téma Odborná fotografie, ještě neexistovalo, takže šablona je správná.--Juandev (talk) 05:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ta skříńka nemohla být vyrobena v roku 1982, to se již nevyrábělo....bude to 1962

File:Roudný (Karlovice), roubenka č. 27.JPG

Ahoj. Taky jsem dostal maila (předtím jsem s tím člověkem vyřizoval něco ohledně jednoho článku, tak si na mě vzpomněl), takže se chci zeptat, co s tou fotkou zamýšlíš. Imho by stačila odmazat SPZ, odstraňovat číslo popisné by byla z encyklopedického hlediska blbost. --Harold (talk) 19:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hele, já tomu nerozumím. Pán chtěl dát pryč čp. a SPZ, tak to teď nahraju podle jeho přání.--Juandev (talk) 07:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SPZ ok, to chápu, ale opravdu nevidím důvod v popisku neuvádět přesná, veřejně dostupná data v podobě čísla popisného. Tvoříme encyklopedii, ten dům je vyfocený z veřejné cesty, číslo popisné asi bylo taky vidět, dá se zjistit na mapách.cz, čili jsem ho do popisu vrátil. Přímo v názvu souboru být nemusí, to je pravda. --Harold (talk) 08:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK.--Juandev (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to use photo of drying fish

Dear Sir/Ms May I use photo of drying fish for school books? Contact me at sandra.poon@pearson.com

Thanks Sandra Poon Pearson Malaysia

ESO ?

Ahoj Juane, ono se řekne ESO, ale když některý bych namísto to be sorted dal do to be deleted. Ne, neboj, bylo to nadsazený, ale jeden příklad popisů za všechny špatné: File:Kabel na čokoládě.JPG .. kabel, no budiž, ale čokoláda? Stačí zadat do googlu, abys měl ponětí, co to je čokoláda. A jen tak mimochodem, to co je na obrázku nejspíš tady nenajdeš, protože google sortuje taky podle popisků. Sorry, nemám ambice všechny ty špatné, nebo nedostatečné popisky fotek opravovat, to předpokládám u autora .. už jen proto, aby tu fotku někdo našel a mohl použít k textu. Je to snad ten hlavní smysl commons, ne? Užívej dne --Krochoman (talk) 16:17, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No to je těžký. Pokud si myslím, že vím co je čokoláda - tak si to nebudu hledat na Internetu.--Juandev (talk) 23:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ETA 314

Ahoj Juane, přijde mi divný název kategorie Category:ETA 314, když názvy soborů, které jsi tam vložil začínají "ETA 412"? Nesplet jsi název té kategorie? Jinak chápu, že na Commons někdo uploaduje i snímky mající pro něj hlavně osobní význam, ale domníváš se, že snímky takovéto kvality/obsahu jsou pro Commons přínosné? Díky za porozumění a odpověď, s pozdravem --Krochoman (talk) 19:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ano, máš pravdu - je to chyba, samotný snímek ukazuje, že se jedná o jiný typ. Nicméně to již někdo odstranil, což je škoda. Ano kvalita je velmi špatná, nicméně zatím lepší snímky nemáme. Nemyslíš, že je lepší něco, než nic?--Juandev (talk) 04:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ad 1) Nevím kam ses díval?!?, ale chyba je tam stéle - Category:ETA 314 stále obsahuje snímky vysavače ETA 413 ... ad 2) Na první velice tmavé a zrnité fotce je obyčejná šňůra se zástrčkou, která ŽÁDNÝM způsobem nedokumentuje vysavač ETA 413. Na druhé fotce, technicky stajně nekvalitní, je pouze část s tlačítky. Ani tenhle fragment dostatečně neukazuje, jak zmíněný vysavač vypadá. A když se ptáš, pak tedy ano, já si myslím, že lepší nic než tu mít tyhle fotky. Nedoufáš přeci, že by je někdo vložil na stránku wikipedie, že ne? Stejně tak si nedokážu představit praktické využití fotek z Category:Diazid SD a Category:Logarex products, přestože ty jsou už v lepší kvalitě. --Krochoman (talk) 05:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nemám čas tady o tom diskutovat, takže takhle. Až se k tomu dostanu tak to přejmenuju a přefotím. Jinak využití těchto fotek vidím. To že zatím nejsou články o těchto předmětech neznamená že nebudou v budoucnosti a pokud nebudou v budoucnosti, tak se hodí do obecných článků jako například "vysavaš" - bude to velmi hodnotné spestření těch hesel.--Juandev (talk) 07:28, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Myslím Juane, že hlavně nemáš čas (i chuť) o své práci (snímcích a textech, které tady zanecháváš) dostatečně přemýšlet - a to je veliká, veliká škoda. --Krochoman (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated License

Hello. Thank you for uploading File:Dolní Stropnice, památná lípa malolistá a sýpka (2).JPG, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the file correctly? If you are not able to do this, the file will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the Help desk. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 08:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for uploading File:Dolní Stropnice, památná lípa malolistá a sýpka (1).JPG, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the file correctly? If you are not able to do this, the file will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the Help desk. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 08:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for uploading File:Dolní Stropnice, kaplička u rozcestí.JPG, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the file correctly? If you are not able to do this, the file will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the Help desk. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 08:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for uploading File:Dolní Stropnice, kaplička.JPG, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the file correctly? If you are not able to do this, the file will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the Help desk. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 08:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for uploading File:Dolní Stropnice, dům čp. 16 s předzahrádkou.JPG, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the file correctly? If you are not able to do this, the file will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the Help desk. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 08:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Photographer's Barnstar

Hello,

I love your image of the hair in a microscope (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Human_black_hair_surface.jpg) and was hoping to use it in a book of my poems that is coming out next summer. I realize it's in the Creative Commons; however, it has the "Share Alike" license, I need to obtain written permission since the publisher would likely not issue the entire book with that license. You will of course be attributed and I would be happy to send you a copy of the book. Please let me know -- & thanks for the great pics! -Nate nshoks (at) gmail (dot) com Nshoks (talk) 21:10, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Google maps spendliky.jpg

File:Google maps spendliky.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.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--NNW (talk) 10:54, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ русский ∙ slovenčina ∙ српски (ћирилица) ∙ srpski (latinica) ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Dear Juandev,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world!

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

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 in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 11:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello and thanks

Hi Juan. Thank you for the cup of coffee on my talk page. I see you take beautiful photographs! I looked at some of your photos and I added a caption to one great barn photo. I need to go to work, but I will look at more later. Thanks again. Jim Derby (talk) 12:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unidentified disease on Opuntia ficus-indica (001).jpg

Hi Juandev, this is a typical infestation with Dactylopius coccus. Greetings, -- Ies (talk) 06:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I was coining the idea if it is coshenille.--Juandev (talk) 06:25, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wrocław (003).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The description of the image is incomplete! Can anybody identify the building?

Promiň Juane, obrázek je to hezký, ale zcela nedostatečně identifikovaný. Který je to kostel či stavba? Souřadnice? Dík za info! --Gampe (talk) 11:29, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Viz category. No problem to add it.--Juandev (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Teď jdu ale spát.--Juandev (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Čížová, hřbitov (009).JPG

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Čížová, hřbitov (009).JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Ju Ta 20:21, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Knihovna geografie PřF UK/Stereo-diapositives

Proč skrytá? --Gampe (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Je to normální praxe, že se technické kategorie označující původ skrývají. Na Commons se totiž kategorizuje, podle toho co je na snímcích vidět, ostatní kategorie technického charakteru jsou skryté.--Juandev (talk) 21:55, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dobře, díůk! --Gampe (talk) 06:35, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing a }

You have a typo in Your recent uploads, like here.

feydey ^(talk) 21:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Err, thank you. Good work for bot.--Juandev (talk) 21:47, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Tvary nekrotickych zon carodejnych kruhu.png

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Tvary nekrotickych zon carodejnych kruhu.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Ju Ta 19:29, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oslava, Nové Veselí.ogv

File:Oslava, Nové Veselí.ogv 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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Pristurus (talk) 08:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cs-Benin.ogg

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

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

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

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

INeverCry 16:27, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wrocław (054).JPG

File:Wrocław (054).JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Pnapora (talk) 22:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

⧼Wikibase-terms/Archive 2⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth 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 (2013) 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. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation Recording Gadget

Visual workflow draft for pronunciation recording gadget; If you have trouble watching this video here, watch it on vimeo. A more extensive/explanative version is available.

Hey Juandev, as a contributor of pronunciation audio samples, please share your opinion on the creation of a gadget guiding through the whole process (recording, uploading and inclusion) and, provided that you’ll attend Wikimania, please feel invited showing your interest in a proposal for a presentation that will cover the gadget for 5-15 minutes (depending on the audience).

Questions? Do not hesitate asking me on my talk page. Thank you.

Message sent by Rillke (talk), delivery by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:21, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

Dear Juandev,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Photographer's Barnstar

Guten Tag,

wir möchten darüber informieren, dass wir Dein/Ihr Bild (Wiki-Commons)

zum Blick auf den Kozákov / Svatoňovice, Karlovice (CZ)

- selbstverständlich inklusive der Copyright-Hinweise und Urheber-Angaben - in unserem nicht-kommerziellen Projekt << FVKS-Kalender "Unterwegs" 2014 >> zum Thema „Ausblicke" verwenden.

>> http://www.kalender.fvks.eu

>> http://kalender.fvks.eu/2014/04/11/blick-auf-den-kozákov-svatoňovice-karlovice-cz/

Wir hoffen, alles korrekt umgesetzt zu haben.

Der Kalender begleitet auch unseren im Jahr 2014 laufenden Fotowettbewerb (fotowettbewerb.fvks.eu), ebenfalls zum Thema „Ausblicke".

Grüsse FVKS - Förderverein Kulturstadt Görlitz-Zgorzelec e.V. kalender@fvks.eu, Agata, Cornelia, Matthias fvks (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zlonice, výtah.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zásmuky, mariánský sloup, svatý (001).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Železniční trať Bošice - Bečváry u Zásmuk (002).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support --Christian Ferrer 04:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zásmuky, družstvo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Comment IMO the image is tilted CW, CAs at the clouds. Another crop would improve the image.--XRay 06:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)// I have tried to rotate it. Is it good? I have cropped it. I have no skill to remove CA, so maybe later.--Juandev 22:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO it's QI.--XRay 15:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PP Hradiště, stromky.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Comment Another crop would improve the image.--XRay 06:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)//Cropped as recomended.--Juandev 22:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support At the top it'S OK. I would change the crop at the bottom too. Anyway, IMO it's QI now.--XRay 15:32, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Český Krumlov, Široká ulice.ogv

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

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

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

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

JiriMatejicek (talk) 18:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Golf Resort Karlštejn

The Sand Mine is next to GRK. Look at google maps. Greetings Tiefkuehlfan (talk) I have it changed ! Greetings Tiefkuehlfan (talk)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pískovna u Golf Resortu Voškov, profil.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Slaunger 17:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! NPP Vosek, struska (001).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Steindy 00:09, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lovčice (okres Hradec Králové), znak na kostele.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 13:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! NPP Vosek, struska (005).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Bgag 17:14, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lanová dráha Diana, kolečko.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality.--ArildV 13:00, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Štěrk se struskou.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 10:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Železná struska.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 10:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! NPR Kněžičky, majka obecná (002).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Ugh. –Be..anyone 10:19, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Medoújezdský potok, obnažený břeh.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 19:55, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PR U Eremita, cesta.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 11:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PR Vysoký tok, slepýš.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 08:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! NPR Kněžičky, prvosenka jarní.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments It could be sharper, but it's enough. --Ram-Man 02:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hořejší Kařezský rybník, neznámé rostliny.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Řebřík, sklep.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --XRay 08:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tažná tramvaj 03.jpg

File:Tažná tramvaj 03.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Ju Ta 21:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Miocenní sladkovodní vápence

Hi, even if theese pictures are clearly some "geological cross sections" (term used in my mother language too), on commons this category is more useful for diagrams/schemes images. All the pictures you cited, are indeed yet categorized as "outcrops", and so part of geological pictures metacategory. Because theese photos are of great quality, i take the initiative of categorize "Miocenní sladkovodní vápence" in "geotopes" too. If you know more of the legal status of the park, fell free to move it ina more specific category as "Geological parks" or even "Geoparks‎". Regards. --Ciaurlec (talk) 21:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thx. I dont know much about geology. Pictures are from the natural monument site. In the Czech republic I am not sure if we have geoparks, probably not, because geological sites are parts of natural protection.--Juandev (talk) 13:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rdestice hustolistá

Plants on photoes described as Groenlandia densa belongs to genus Callitriche. Certainly it is not Groenlandia. Kenraiz (talk) 13:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I was not certain. As I have seen some originaly uploaded images if G. densa, they looked different. I will move it away from the category.--Juandev (talk) 15:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chemický vzorec (001).jpg

File:Chemický vzorec (001).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Rhadamante (talk) 03:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chemický vzorec (002).jpg

File:Chemický vzorec (002).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Rhadamante (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chemický vzorec (003).jpg

File:Chemický vzorec (003).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Rhadamante (talk) 03:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chemický vzorec (004).jpg

File:Chemický vzorec (004).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Rhadamante (talk) 03:07, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rotate pictures

I beg you, please don't rotate pictures under the same name, because they often are used exact that way, and you may destroy an exact calculated composition. Make it a new picture, for instance: xy.jpg will become xyrot.jpg or something like that. --Siga (talk) 20:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any example? I use the rotate bot, so I cannot do it the way you want. BTW, you cannot rotate it back? Sure you can, its a wiki.--Juandev (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does the bot give a new name after rotating? The case: User:Olyngo asked to rotate of Blbunder.jpg by template, but I want to use the picture unrotated. So there should be two pictures. If I realize by chance, that someone rotates the pictures in use, I can make a second picture. But it would be better, if the bot gives a new name. So in this case I removed the template rotate'90, till I know, what will happen exactly. Is it your bot, can you chance it? --Siga (talk) 10:40, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of breaking any rule. If you want to change it propose it to the community.--Juandev (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jiří Helekal, portrét.jpg

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

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

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

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

Josve05a (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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!

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

Affected:

File:Predrag Bjelac (cropped).jpg

And also:

File:Predrag Bjelac.jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ok

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Praha,_Wenzigova,_film.jpg - but there is the issue of the duplicate occurring. JarrahTree (talk) 11:11, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So we delete the other one.--Juandev (talk) 16:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images

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

Hello, Juandev!

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

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

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

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

--Gampe (talk) 05:26, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Borová Lhota, kaplička.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. Really not bad for a flash situation --Hubertl 16:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Veletín, sušení.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 16:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vicugna

Stáhl jsem si Vámi doporučený Vicugna uploader ale musím říci, že z něj nejsem příliš nadšený. Vadí mi následující:

- při načítání souborů do uploaderu nejsou vidět miniatury snímků v adresáři, ale pouze jejich popis

- Není mi jasné, jak mám pojmenovat a popsat soubory najednou v dávce (wizzard má možnost kopírovat údaje ke všem následujícím souborům s možností výběru požadované možnosti), zde jsem našel pouze kopírovat pouze údaje předchozího snímku bez možnosti výběru požadovaného

- dále mi vadí nemožnost jednoduchého kopírování například jména souboru jednoduchým přetažením názvu do pole popis --Petr1888 (talk) 07:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chválov (Nechvalice), pastvina.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 07:34, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 06:40, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Juandev,

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.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce (170).jpg

File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce (170).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Bělehradská (Prague), rekonstrukce (004).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 09:20, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce 15 (004).jpg

File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce 15 (004).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Bělehradská (Prague), rekonstrukce (004).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 09:20, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce 15 (002).jpg

File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce 15 (002).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Bělehradská (Praha), rekonstrukce (168).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 15:28, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:VW Golf, stěrače, oprava (002).jpg

File:VW Golf, stěrače, oprava (002).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Stěrače, část 14.jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 20:02, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unknown organic object (01).jpg

File:Unknown organic object (01).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Hiddenhauser (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:VW Golf, stěrače, oprava (002).jpg

You: "What is this?" Me: "Orphaned talk page of a duplicate you uploaded." Revent^talk 13:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The duplicates listed above were all 'identical' files, as in SHA-1 matches. Images you accidentally uploaded twice. Revent^talk 13:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK thx.--Juandev (talk) 06:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (014).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (014).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (014).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 21:39, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Struhařov (okres Praha-východ), duha.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 16:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zvánovický potok (003).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments - Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 11:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Český Dub II (022).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Basotxerri 20:45, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jihlava, Masarykovo náměstí 58, horní síň, strop, svorník.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ermell 13:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (020).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (020).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (020).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 02:27, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (019).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (019).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (019).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 02:30, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (018).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (018).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (018).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 03:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (001).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (001).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (001).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 04:03, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Boženy Němcové (Český Dub), č. 18, narušená omítka II.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Almost there with the categories. Some were way too wide, I have changed them for you. Please take a look and remember to look further down into the sub-categories in the future. Good quality. --W.carter 15:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (015).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (015).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (015).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 21:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Boženy Němcové (Český Dub), č. 18, narušená omítka.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moroder 16:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Janov nad Nisou, socha IV.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments - I have no idea what a "faight" is (Google translate said "sculpture"), but this is a QI to me, except for one thing: You don't have sufficient categories. Should this statue have its own category? If not, does it belong to any of the subcategories that currently exist in Category:Janov nad Nisou? -- Ikan Kekek 06:15, 13 October 2016 (UTC) Comment I have fixed its description here, in the file and sorted it to proper cat.--Juandev 09:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. QI now. -- Ikan Kekek 07:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Klívie, nemoc (001).jpg

File:Klívie, nemoc (001).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Clivia miniata, leave discoloration 02.jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 14:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (013).jpg

File:Belgická (Prague), rekonstrukce (013).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (013).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 23:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Category

Moved to User talk:Allforrous#Category.--Juandev (talk) 21:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kamenitý rybník, plocha II.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 19:36, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Topělecký rybník, rákosiny.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 13:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Topělecký rybník, konstrukce hráze.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 08:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Krašovický rybník (Čížová), kachny II.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 06:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Zálesný rybník, plocha II.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Not the sharpest but OK for me. --Basotxerri 09:20, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (017).jpg

File:Praha, rekontrukce Belgické (017).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Taivo (talk) 07:19, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kategorizace pražských domů

Nazdar. Koukám, že děláš v té kategorizaci pěkný čurbes. Za ty roky už sis možná mohl všimnout, že v Praze (a prakticky všude jinde, snad kromě Ostravy) kategorizujeme území i budovy primárně podle evidenčních částí obce, tedy podle čtvrtí, nikoliv podle městských obvodů nebo samosprávných městských částí. Pokud by sis toho dosud nevšiml, tak by tě to mohl trknout nejpozději ve chvíli, když jsi založil kategorii Category:Houses in Prague 5, která naprosto nezapadá do existujícího systému kategorizace, a musel sis všimnout, že zůstala sirotčí, zařazená jenom v jedné neexistující kategorii. Že kategorie domů v Praze 5 není zařazena vůbec v žádná nadřazené kategorii domů, to už je zase asi spíš o nepochopení principu kategorizace než o nepozornosti. O tom, že i při názvech kategorií jednotlivých domů je vhodné respektovat obvyklé zvyklosti, v jakém formátu se české adresy zadávají, ani nemluvě. To "no." tam ani nenese žádnou informaci navíc, například že bys tím vyjádřil, o jaký druh čísla jde. Půlku těch kategorií máš stejně duplicitních, protože tě vůbec nenapadlo se podívat do kategorie dané ulice, jestli náhodou ta či ona vila už svoji kategorii nemá... a že slovo "Helenka" má primární význam zcela určitě jiný než vilu na Smíchově, to tě aai taky samo netrkne, co? --ŠJů (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Čili kategorizovat podle částí obce ne obvodů. Tak já moc poslední dobou v Praze nefotil, takže jsem to zapoměl.--Juandev (talk) 12:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Helenka a jaký prostímtě? --Juandev (talk) 12:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No pardón, ale snad je jasné, že ty smíchovské vily dostávaly názvy podle běžných ženských jmen (většinou asi manželek nebo žen investorů), a ne že ty ženy se jmenují podle těch vil. Samotné jméno "Helenka" rozhodně neoznačuje vilu na Smíchově, to jméno funguje v běžném jazyce jenom jako přívlastek ke slovu "vila" a ve spojení s ním (podobně jako okresu Semily nelze říkat jen "Semily", pokud to není v tabulce, kde slovo "okres" je v záhlaví). Tímto stylem byly na přelomu 19. a 20. století pojmenovávány vily ve stovkách čtvrtí, obcí a měst. Těžko jde tuctové ženské jméno samo o sobě považovat primárně za označení jedné pražské vily. "Vila Helenka", to už by šlo, protože to opravdu je asi silně dominantní význam, ovšem jako plně jednoznačné označení se, jak Google napoví, používá "Kordova vila Helenka" - pak už by nám nemělo hrozit, že do té kategorie budou padat i stejnojmenné vilky ze všech koutů naší vlasti, třeba ta Rychtářova říčanská vila Helenka. A názvy kategorií v Commons by pokud možno měly být od počátku výstižné a jednoznačné.

A co se týče toho "zapomněl" - no tak pokud zapomenu, tak věnuju dvě tři vteřiny, nanejvýš minuty, tomu, abych se znovu rozkoukal, než tam začnu vkládat fotografie. A zakládat kategorie aniž bych se napřed rozhlédl po existujícím kategorizačním stromu, to už je vyloženě absurdní. Přece vůbec ani není možné zakládat kategorie, aniž bych se podíval, do jaké nadkategorie ji zařadím, a tedy jaké kategorie už existují kolem. Nepřijde ti divné, když zakládáš kategorii, pro kterou ani neexistuje patřičná nadkategorie (nebo je skoro prázdná, protože slouží něčemu úplně jinému), a nenajdeš tam ani žádné sesterské kategorie, i když musíš tušit, že fotografií k těmto tématům tady jsou nahrané tisíce?

Jinak tu ještě máme problém "Buildings" versus "Houses". Je otázka, proč se to tak stalo, ale z praxe vyplynulo, že základní větví kategorizačního stromu, která je nejpodrobněji územně členěna, jsou kategorie "Buildings" tedy kategorie budov. K ní je spíše sekundárně jako nadřazená kategorie někde doplňována kategorie "Structures" (stavby) a různé podřízené kategorie, mezi něž může patřit i "Houses", tedy domy. Kategorie "houses" je nepraktická proto, že zahrnuje příliš různých typů staveb (od venkovských zemědělských usedlostí přes venkovské i městské rodinné domky (to jsou v podstatě "Villas", ale my ten termín používáme spíš jen pro výstavní architektonicky cenné vily, i když vlastně znamená všechny rodinné domky) až po městské blokové domy, kde zase zahrnuje celý přechod od starých gotických či renesančních domů po "činžáky", přičemž není jasné, jestli mezi "Houses" mohou patřit i bytovky, paneláky, věžáky. Takže vlastně ta kategorie "Houses" nedává moc velkou přidanou hodnotu oproti té kategorii budov (Buildings). Kancelářské budovy typu "skleněná krabice" asi už "Houses" nejsou, ale co s domy, kde byly byty postupně nahrazeny kancelářemi? Jsou to stále "houses", i když už neslouží pro "housing"? Tedy, existence kategorie "Houses" v zásadě sice není špatně, ale pokud nechceš tuto kategorizační větev pro dané město vytvořit a naplnit systematicky, tak nahodilé zakládání těchto kategorií opět vytváří spíš duplicitu a čurbes v systému - krom toho když už, asi by právě bylo třeba vytvářet spíš specifičtější kategorie pro konkrétnější typy domů, a to už by asi bylo natolik komplikované a bylo by tolik mezních a smíšených případů, že by taková kategorizace nakonec nebyla funkční. Takže prosím, zůstaň radši primárně u těch existujících kategorií "Buildings", které máme systematicky založené ve všech krajích, okresech, pražských čtvrtích i ve všech významnějších městech, a jakékoliv specializované podkategorie zakládej jen v případě, že to máš důkladně rozmyšleno a chceš to dotáhnout do konce, ne tam šoupnout jen dva tři domy a "po mně potopa", tu dřinu ať dodělá někdo jiný. Výhledově by asi bylo dobré vytvořit i systematické kategorizační větve pro jednotlivé typy domů, ale vůbec to není jednoduché, proto taky se to asi ještě nepodařilo. --ŠJů (talk) 14:14, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kategorizace provozoven a závodů

Ještě jednou zdravím. Nejsem si úplně jistý, jestli je šťastné kategorie jednotlivých závodů, provozen, dep atd. nějaké firmy nazývat zrovna pořadovým číslem. To bychom pak takhle mohli přejmenovat i kategorie vozoven a garáží pražského Dopravního podniku (klíčovskou garáž na "Garáž 2", žižkovskou vozovnu na "Vozovnu 8" atd. Ale budiž, pokud je to u firem jako PPL nebo JUTA nejobvyklejší způsob, tak nezbývá než to akceptovat, i když samozřejmě srozumitelnější by bylo označovat je podle lokality, popřípadě podle původního účelu dané budovy atd. Každopádně pokud už pro názvy kategorií zvolíme tato krycí čísla, tak pak je bezpodmínečně nutné, aby kategorie měly pořádný popis (nejlépe úplnou adresu budovy, pokud ji mají přidělenou), a aby byly patřičně kategorizované podle adresy (město, příp. ulice), případně podle určení budovy (závody JUTA by asi šly do příslušné kategorie Factories nebo Industry, pro logistické areály zatím žádnou specifickou kategorizační větev lokálně nemáme). --ŠJů (talk) 23:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ano, ideální to není. Například v případě Juty se navíc čísla závodů měnila - může pak vzniknout pěkný čurbes. Nevím ale jak jinak to přehledně dělat. Podle lokality myslíš jako podle sídla toho závodu?--Juandev (talk) 12:32, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nevím, jak je to dneska u těch logistických firem. V dobách socialismu bylo obvyklé, že podniky měly velmi systematicky číslované provozovny (ČSAD závod 512, Fruta závod 05, Laktos závod 04 atd.), ale téměř vždycky tomu číslu odpovídalo místní označení, tedy ČSAD závod Semily, Fruta závod Mochov, Trojská nebo Kyjská mlékárna atd. Tipoval bych, že i normální řidič PPL spíš ví, že jede z Hradce do Malešic, než je by jel z 35 do 14.

Když se podívám na web PPL, tak tam názvy dep najdu v rolovací nabídce menu u položky Nabídka zaměstnání - takže depo 14 tam má název "Praha sever", depo 31 tam má název "Praha (Jažlovice)", depo 10 má název "Praha západ", depo 01 název "Praha východ", jinak je většinou názvem depa jméno města, kromě depa 80 "All You Need".

JUTA taky používá k označní závod normálně názvy měst, viz [1], akorát je problém, že půlka těch závodů je ve Dvoře Králové nad Labem (01, 03, 07, 11, 14, 15), takže pak je potřeba použít zároveň číslo i název města ("JUTA závod 03 Dvůr Králové nad Labem"). Asi tedy bude vhodné uvádět v názvu kategorie vždy obojí, číslo závodu i místo závodu, stejně jako se to používá na těch webech. --ŠJů (talk) 13:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Respektování kategorizačního stromu

Juane, prosím tě, zkus při zakládání nových kategorií aspoň trošku respektovat existující kategorizační strukturu a nové kategorie do ní normálním způsobem začleňovat. Chápu, že nějakého začátečníka, kterého sem škola donutí nahrát dvacet fotek a pak už ho tady znovu neuvídíme, nemá cenu do toho zasvěcovat, ale ty přispíváš dlouho a intenzivně, tak by se asi vyplatilo, abys na sobě zapracoval a pokusil se osvojit si ty základy, které mnozí jiní pochopí hned a intuitivně.

Teď před pár dny jsi založil Category:Streams in Bruntál District. Tu jsi ovšem nezařadil do žádné nadřazené kategorie potoků, tedy Category:Streams in Moravian-Silesian Region. Bodejť, protože pokud bys tuto kategorii hledal a podíval se do ní, tak by sis všimnul, že moravsko-slezské potoky zatím nejsou rozděleny podle okresů. Tedy se rozhodni: buď budeš respektovat existující stupeň kategorizace, tedy to zařadíš do té existující kategorie, anebo se tedy rozhodneš vytvořit v tomto kraji podkategorie podle okresů, ale to pak tedy s sebou nese tu práci, že musíš roztřídit všechno, co už v té nadřazené kategorii je. Pokud děláš polovičatou práci, že založíš novou podkategorii, strčíš do ní něco svého, ale zároveň nevytvoříš celou sadu kategorií dané úrovně a nepřetřídíš do ní obsah nadřazené kategorie, tak tím v kategorizaci děláš chaos (protože v té tvé nové kategorii pak chybí to, co by v ní mělo být) a samozřejmě tím přiděláváš práci ostatním, kteří pak po tobě ty nedodělky musí nahonem dodělávat. V daném případě řekněme založení té kategorie z hlediska budoucnosti nebyla chyba, protože v některých krajích už potoky podle okresů začínáme třídit, ale zkus prosím respektovat existující kategorizační strom a rozvíjet ho systematicky a nikoliv nahodile, a pokud nemáš dokonale zažité základní principy, například do jakých kategorií musí patřit podkategorie křížící dvě témata, tak pak je snad lépe nebýt v zakládání nových kategorií tak iniciativní a měl bys radši preferovat umísťování souborů do těch již založených úrovní kategorií.

Kdyby ses trochu rozhlédl po kategorizačním stromu (u letitého uživatele bych čekal, že to udělal už dávno), věděl bys, že potoky standardně patří do nadřazené kategorie "Bodies of water". Pokud to náhodou nevíš, dvouvteřinovým nahlédnutím se to dá zjistit. Ty jsi ovšem založil úplně mimo jakýkoliv systém kategorii Hydrology in Bruntál District. Pochopitelně jsi vůbec nepřemýšlel o tom, kam tato kategorie patří do kategorizačního stromu, o čemž svědčí, že jsi ji nezařadil vůbec do žádné nadřazené kategorie hydrologie. Jinak by sis asi všiml, že kategorie Hydrology vůbec ani nemá podkategorii Hydrology of the Czech Republic, natož podle českých krajů, natož podle českých okresů (a pochopitelně používá předložky "of", tedy hydrologie něčeho, nikoliv předložky "in", tedy hydrologie někde). Protože v Česku podrobně kategorizujeme hydrologické jevy, nikoliv hydrologickou vědu (ta obvykle nemá územní podkategorie do takové hloubky). Opět: pokud by ses byť jen pokusil svoji novou kategorii zařadit do správné nadkategorie, musel by ses porozhlédnout po kategorizačním stromu a musel by sis všimnout toho, jaké kategorie existují a pro daný účel se používají. Musel by sis všimnout, že Bodies of water in Bruntál District tu existuje už od října 2014 a že stejným způsobem se vodní toky a plochy kategorizují ve všech 14 krajích a 76 okresech Česka. Ano, některé věci člověk fotí častěji a jiná témata třeba jen výjimečně, ale jde pořád znovu a znovu o ten samý princip: respektovat existující kategorizační systém a nezakládat kategorie bez rozmyslu, živelně, naslepo, nahodile, bez kontextu a návaznosti na tu existující strukturu. Kategorizační systém nemůže fungovat tak, že si každý založí takovou kategorii, jaká ho zrovna napadne, aniž by se vůbec podíval, jestli pro stejné téma už neexistuje kategorie pod jiným názvem, a ještě k tomu ji do toho systému nezařadí na správné místo (pokud to místo ani nehledáš, tak pak není divu, že ten kontext nenajdeš). Někomu možná dělá problém angličtina, ale vždyť proboha nikdo nefotí tolik různých témat, že by se těch pár slovíček a jednoduchých syntaktických pravidel prostě nemohl naučit, jako se člověk učí programovací jazyk... A když něco fotím poprvé, tak prostě strávím pár minut fulltextovým hledáním a u slovníku, než dané téma v kategorizačním stromu najdu. Nebo to najdu přes interwiki pomocí české Wikipedie. Jen jde o to, aby člověku došlo, že nelze kategorizovat, aniž by člověk respektoval kategorizační systém. Kategorie nejsou nahodilé hashtagy. --ŠJů (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dneska ráno při kategorizování jsem konečně zjistil, jaký je správný kategorizační strom. Takže už to dělám. Ale je to pěknej záhul, když není vytvořenej. Já tolik času nemám, respetive mě to nebaví. Otázka pak taky je, jestli při přechodu na tagy bude vůbec potřeba, podle mě moc ne, protože pokud něco bude zařazeno v kategorii obce nebo okresu, tak si Wikidata vytáhnou od jinut informace o tom, jaký je to kraj a země.

Takže bych to rád dělal tak abych moc nenarušil současnou praxi. Bohužel ale nexistuje cesta, která by kombinovala přidání podrobných kategorií a snadného zjištění kam to zařadit. Do obecných kategorií, nebo národních kategorií to řadit nechci, protože protože mi nižší správní zařazení přijde ochuzení.

Nechci tě, nebo někoho otravovat, špatnou prací, ale mě to nebaví. Znamená to trávit nad tím dny a týdny a to mě nebaví. Máme rok 2017, dneska by šlo všechny tydle věci dělat poloautomaticky, což by hrozně urychlylo celej systém. Všude jinde to mají jednoduší (zonerama, rajče, Picassa) a naše Nadace nedokáže za 10 let naprogramovat usnadnění. Takže bych byl rád, kdyby se více lidí zapojilo do nátlaku na Nadaci, aby se s tím konečně pohlo.--Juandev (talk) 14:30, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tak on každý systém má své výhody a nevýhody, a každý systém se dá nějak zdokonalovat. A zrovna systém kategorizace používaný na wiki projektech má docela hodně těch výhod, je docela dost intuitivní (i když pro tebe asi ne dost) a zároveň geniálně jednoduchý a univerzální. Mně tedy připadá, že je docela velmi jednoduché nahlížet do kategorizačního stromu a zorientovat se v něm, a je dost lidí, kteří to zvládají téměř napoprvé. Ty máš takový velmi svérázný styl, který vypadá, jako že se po existujících kategoriích a jejich logice a zvyklostech moc nerozhlížíš, ale asi je to opravdu jen nedostatek určitého citu a ne nedostatek vůle. Někdy to může být přínosem, když se na věci díváš jinak a třeba začneš kategorizovat podle nějakého kritéria, podle kterého tu nikoho předtím ještě kategorizovat nenapadlo, ale pokud se přitom dostatečně neorientuješ v existující struktuře kategorií a nezačleníš do do ní, tak tím dost pravděpodobně vnikne spíše chaos nebo nějaká mrtvá kategorizační větev, která nemá šanci se ujmout.

Proti Rajčatům a Picassům s jejich tagovacími systémy má wiki kategorizace právě tu výhodu, že při vší své jednoduchosti je strukturovaná. Proti tomu jsou bohužel Wikidata jen velmi nedomyšlený nedodělek, který skončil docela brzo ve slepé uličce. Za ty čtyři roky od jejich ukvapeného nasazení se už bohužel nepodařilo pořádně vyřešit ani jednu ze zásadních chyb v jejich koncepci, a vypadá to, že je snad nikdo ani vážně neřeší. Pokud někdo plánuje zbourat funkční kategorizační systém a nahradit ho nějakými tagy, tak se obávám, aby to nedopadlo ještě hůř. --ŠJů (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Church_of_Saint_Martin_in_Okrouhlice_(Benešov)

Category:Church_of_Saint_Martin_in_Okrouhlice_(Benešov) 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Radek Linner (talk) 22:32, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello Juandev, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Huh, thx. I was wondering whats wrong.--Juandev (talk) 17:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goethova lávka

Ahoj Juane, mám dotaz k této tvé editaci. Goethova lávka je ta, kterou v Mapách.cz mají označenu jako Gogolovu lávku? Z jakého zdroje máš ten název? --ŠJů (talk) 14:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pokud to vzadu je Lázeňský most, tak to vpředu nemůže být Goethova lávka. Ta je úplně jinde, pokud tedy ještě vůbec stojí. --ŠJů (talk) 18:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Díky za upozornění. To jsem se asi zmílil.--Juandev (talk) 02:25, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category move request.

Hi! SjU asked to move the Category:Jesuit garden you created. I did some digging and came up with the name in Czech. Could you please have a look? Thanks! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 00:37, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extrahované fotografie

Zdravím. Všiml jsem si, že jsi už v roce 2011 extrahoval řadu fotografií z Fredyho "kolážových" scanů, například tuto. Bohužel jsi ovšem do zdroje (parametr "source") neuvedl správně odkaz na zdrojový obrázek, z něhož jsi dělal výřez, a ani k původním obrázkům jsi nepoznamenal, že už z něj byly jednotlivé obrázky extrahovány, takže bude teď celkem těžké ty obrázky spárovat (a dost možná tím přiděláš práci někomu, kdo je bude časem extrahovat znovu, protože nebude tušit, že už jsi je extrahoval). Asi by bylo dobré tu sadu fotek znovu projít, k extrahovaným fotkám doplnit odkaz na zdrojový obrázek a ke zdrojovým obrázkům doplnit odkazy na extrahované fotky.

Krom toho jsi k extrahovaným obrázkům dal licenci PD-self, jako bys ty sám byl jejich autorem a uvolňoval k nim autorská práva, ačkoliv autorem je podle původních údajů Fredyho dědeček. Pozor na to, pokud nahráváš cizí obrázek, tak nemůžeš použít žádnou šablonu "self". Podobnou chybu ovšem udělal i Fredy, protože ani on nebyl autorem těch fotek, ale nanejvýš by mohl být dědicem majetkových autorských práv nebo mít hypotetický konkludentní dědův souhlas ke zveřejnění. Ale do toho bych radši nešťoural, protože Fredy mnohdy zjevně svému dědovi připisoval i notoricky známé historické fotky, které pravděpodobně sehnal úplně jinde – u těchto scanů je aspoň pravděpodobné, že to je fakt v rodině. --ŠJů (talk) 14:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Když už mě takto peskuješ, tak s tím samozřejmě nic dělat nebudu. Měj se.--Juandev (talk) 07:13, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Files by Juandev without description

Hi Juandev, does it really make sense to have this special category for you? --Arnd (talk) 05:42, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Still it make sense as other simmillar categories. In this case i.e. there is no English description. I am awaiting some tools which may help with this.--Juandev (talk) 18:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:MOV 0311.webm

File:MOV 0311.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Hiddenhauser (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:MOV 0313.webm

File:MOV 0313.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Hiddenhauser (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:MVI 4969.webm

File:MVI 4969.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Hiddenhauser (talk) 20:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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!

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

Affected:

File:Slaný (001).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, — Jeff G. ツ 03:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (007).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (007).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (008).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (008).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (009).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (009).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (010).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (010).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (011).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (011).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (012).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (012).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (013).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (013).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (014).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (014).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (015).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (015).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (017).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (017).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Picea abies, nemoc (019).jpg

File:Picea abies, nemoc (019).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Richard Avery (talk) 08:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Osobní fotky

Zdravím, Juane. Mrkni prosím na tyto fotky od User:Art Jarka, jestli má být doplněno do popisu, kdo je na fotce, a fotka podle toho zakategorizovaná, nebo jestli má být navržena na smazání podle Commons:Deletion policy#Not educationally useful: Examples of files that are not realistically useful include: Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. (pokud tu fotku někdo nehodlá použít např. na uživatelské stránce).

--ŠJů (talk) 01:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Čau, já bych to smazal, to se moc nepovedlo.--Juandev (talk) 16:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dal jsem žádost o rychlé smazání s odkazem na tuhle diskusi, s odůvodněním, že je to "out of scope" (mimo účel projektu) a nahrané zřejmě omylem bez souhlasu zobrazené osoby, takže během pár hodin to asi někdo smaže. Jinak díky za spousty nových fotek. Zatím jsem zkategorizoval Slaný a Buštěhrad. Je skvělé, že se ti k fotkám podařilo nahrát aspoň souřadnice - naprostou většinu fotek se tak podařilo úspěšně lokalizovat. --ŠJů (talk) 00:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wall_beds

Category:Wall_beds 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Themightyquill (talk) 15:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Unidentified_babies

Unidentified babies 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Headlock0225 (talk) 16:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lípa u fary

Zdravím. Tu myšlenku, že "lípa u fary" nepotřebuje rozlišovač, jsi asi myslel žertem, ne? Jednak i selským rozumem je jasné, že lip u far budou v Česku i po světě tisíce, a za druhé i Google vyhledá spoustu významných lip u fary: Horní Maršov, Dolní Olešnice, Kunžak, Kravaře, Bečov, Hrušice, Žežice, Křeč... Ale je fakt, že ta typografická prasárnička (chybějící mezera před závorkou) si opravu žádala. --ŠJů (talk) 00:30, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dolní Maxov, dům I.jpg

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

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

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

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

185.147.47.73 21:01, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Autor fotky z doby před rokem 1948?

Zdravím. Opravdu jsi autorem této fotky z doby před rokem 1948? Představoval jsem si, že jsi mladší. --ŠJů (talk) 02:36, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Díky za upozornění. Opraveno.--Juandev (talk) 11:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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!

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

Affected:

File:Dětské hračky, bagr.JPG

Yours sincerely, DriscollAmok (talk) 02:41, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Poděkování

Díky za roztřídění obrovského množství obrázků Vřídla a Vřídelní kolonády do příslušných kategorií. --Lubor Ferenc (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Děkujete asi předčasně. Hotovo ještě není a za druhé nejsem šťastný z těch českých názvů kategorií a dokonce mám pocit, že jsem jednu blbě pojmenoval no.

Code issues in User:Juandev/vector.css

Hi Juandev, I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

You edited User:Juandev/vector.css. Glad to see you coding in css! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
Though, that change appears to introduce 1 new prettyCss issue — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in css writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page or cmb-opt-out anywhere on your your global user page on Meta. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!

WARNING: invalid-value: line 5 char number 25 - Evidence: 3

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 14:12, 4 January 2019 (UTC).[reply]

File:Křižovatka Bulhar.jpg

This file has not been uploaded completely due to a software problem (see phab:T190988). Please re-upload it by clicking on "Upload a new version of this file" link below the section titled "File history". Then, please remove the {{Incomplete upload}} tag from the file description page.
At least 30 days after the addition of the tag, volunteers will assess the quality of image and may crop it if being in use or deemed useful. Otherwise, the image may be deleted summarily (CSD#F7).

4nn1l2 (talk) 12:11, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiekspedycja Dolny Śląsk

hej, niestety w tym terminie mi nie pasuje, a czym zajmuje sie Wikiekspedycja ? Makary (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fotografujemy wieś razem, głównie wioski, przez kilka dni. Juandev (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Również dzięki za zaproszenie, ale jestem z rodziną w Czechach. Pzdr. MOs810 (talk) 07:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Czesi w Polsce, Polacy w Czechach. Szkoda, innym razem. Juandev (talk) 23:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Categories without pictures / Kategorie bez zdjęć

1. Wytłumacz proszę co mają znaczyć tworzone przez Ciebie kategorie bez zdjęć taka jak ta Category:Ptaszków 2. W Polsce nie ma żadnych dystryktów (district) i hrabstw (county). Są tylko województwa (voivodeship), powiaty i gminy. Uszanuj proszę nasz polski porządek nazewniczo–administracyjny 3. Zakładam że Znasz zasady commons i Wiesz że nie zakłada się kategorii bez mediów. Falls Du es nicht verstanden hast ... jetzt auf deutsch 1. Erklaere bitte was bedeuten von Dir geschaffte Kategorien ohne Bilder wie diese Category:Ptaszków 2. In Polen gibts keine districts und keine counties. Es gibt nur woiwodschaften, powiats und gminas. Bitte respektiere unsere polnische administrative Ordnung. 3. Ich gehe davon aus dass Du die Regeln der commons kennst und dass Du waisst dass mann keine Kategorien ohne Medien schafft. 5.173.16.201 09:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know that rule. I have created those categories to ease people the upload which follows.
I understand that. So I will not create district like disambiguations. I thought "district" is a British English translation of powiat and "county" is american English. In Czech we have "okres" and we translate it as "district". So if powiat does not have a translation, I will use powiat. What is a format of disambiguation? Breakets () or coma, - now I can see all for polish villages. There were even Polish contributors, who were using English district before.
Replied above. BTW do you know, you can use # to do your text more readable? Juandev (talk) 10:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
1. Dziękuję. Pozdrowienia 5.173.49.84 13:34, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

foto hrobů - hřbitov Malvazinky

nemáte náhodou foto hrobky BII - 402 - hrabě Kounic. děkuji--Martin wolf (talk) 09:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kdybych ho měl, tak je tady. Já ukládám na Commons.Juandev (talk) 17:13, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prosba - šablona Fotíme Česko

Ahoj, prosím vkládej šablonu ve tvaru {{Fotíme Česko|rok=2019}} a nikoliv pouze {{Fotíme Česko}}. Šablona pak neví, ke kterému roku se fotografie vztahují, a brání nám to v efektivním reportingu. Ale díky moc za fotky z Lázní Toušeň (které jsem automaticky překategorizoval do správné šablony). --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Juandev/Archive 2

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by ŠimekMT

Kost

File:Roudný (Karlovice), roubenka č. 27.JPG

Permission to use photo of drying fish

ESO ?

Category:ETA 314

Deprecated License

A barnstar for you!

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Hello and thanks

Quality Image Promotion

Copyright status: File:Čížová, hřbitov (009).JPG

You are missing a }

Copyright status: File:Tvary nekrotickych zon carodejnych kruhu.png

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

Pronunciation Recording Gadget

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

A barnstar for you!

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Golf Resort Karlštejn

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Miocenní sladkovodní vápence

Rdestice hustolistá

Rotate pictures

Notification about possible deletion

ok

Tip: Categorizing images

Quality Image Promotion

Vicugna

Quality Image Promotion

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Re. Category

Categories

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Kategorizace pražských domů

Kategorizace provozoven a závodů

Respektování kategorizačního stromu

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Goethova lávka

Category move request.

Extrahované fotografie

Notification about possible deletion

Osobní fotky

Lípa u fary

Autor fotky z doby před rokem 1948?

Notification about possible deletion

Poděkování

Code issues in User:Juandev/vector.css

Wikiekspedycja Dolny Śląsk

Categories without pictures / Kategorie bez zdjęć

foto hrobů - hřbitov Malvazinky

Prosba - šablona Fotíme Česko

Navigation menu

Search