User talk:Mef.ellingen
Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
| |
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) |
Kameraad Pjotr 17:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Image deletion warning | Image:Heinz_Schillinger.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. |
Mef.ellingen 18:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 11:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 11:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Tip: Categorizing images
[edit]
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.BotMultichillT 20:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- Image:Dennenloher See.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
File source is not properly indicated: File:Patenschaftsteller.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Patenschaftsteller.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
Eusebius (talk) 17:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 15:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
TUSC token 8738e00194f47ca40afefdec0a51c212
[edit]I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
File source is not properly indicated: File:Angelika Schorer.jpg
[edit]This media was probably deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Angelika Schorer.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file (
[[:File:Angelika Schorer.jpg]] ).
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
Motopark (talk) 19:26, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
- Why remove the information template? And after the removement ask for this information????? I did not understand...... --Mef.ellingen (talk) 08:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Now the template are OK but it's needed OTRS-permision, please send it.--Motopark (talk) 10:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Dazu gibt es keine OTRS-permission. Das Foto wurde mit einer Pressemeldung der CSU an einen öffentlichen Presseverteiler verschickt. Nach deutschem Recht kann dann jeder Empfänger diese Pressemitteilung frei verwenden. Die Pressemitteilung war irgendwann 2009, die ist in meinem Pressebüro schon lange gelöscht worden. Sollte es auf Commons Probleme damit geben, müssen wir das Foto auf der de-Wiki unterbringen. Grüße --Mef.ellingen (talk) 18:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- @Mef.ellingen, eine Freigabe als Pressefoto entspricht nicht einer freien Lizenz in unserem Verständnis; das gilt m.W. auch für :de. Es spricht aber nichts dagegen, direkt beim Rechteinhaber um eine Erlaubnis (samt Erteilung einer Commons-kompatiblen Lizenz) nachzusuchen. --Túrelio (talk) 19:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Dazu gibt es keine OTRS-permission. Das Foto wurde mit einer Pressemeldung der CSU an einen öffentlichen Presseverteiler verschickt. Nach deutschem Recht kann dann jeder Empfänger diese Pressemitteilung frei verwenden. Die Pressemitteilung war irgendwann 2009, die ist in meinem Pressebüro schon lange gelöscht worden. Sollte es auf Commons Probleme damit geben, müssen wir das Foto auf der de-Wiki unterbringen. Grüße --Mef.ellingen (talk) 18:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Now the template are OK but it's needed OTRS-permision, please send it.--Motopark (talk) 10:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Stimme dem zu. Der Benutzer hat ja gesagt was benötigt wird: Schriftliche Freigabe des Urhebers bzw. dessen schriftliche Bestätigung, dass der Urheber alle Rechte aufgegeben bzw. ein unbeschränktes Nutzungsrecht für jeden eingeräumt hat. Deiner Vermutung das dass einer Pressemitteilung beigelegte Foto frei verwendbar sei (frei im Sinne von frei/gemeinfrei) glaub ich auch nicht ganz. Solche Freigaben in Pressemitteilungen
- 1) richten sich häufig an einen bestimmten Kreis, eben die Medien,
- 2) sind häufig an einen bestimmten Zweck gebunden, Veröffentlichung im Zusammenhang mit der Meldung,
- 3) beinhalten keine explizite Freigabe zur Bildbearbeitung bzw. schließen Bearbeitung die über kosmetische Änderungen hinaus geht explizit aus.
Im Sinne von Commons:Lizenzen (Bilder und andere Mediendateien, die von jedem und für jeden Zweck benutzt werden dürfen) sind solche Bilder nicht frei für 1) Jeden, 2) Jederzeit, 2)&3) Jeden Zweck. Dieser Eindruck wird noch verstärkt da ein gewisser "User:Cschorer" die Bildbeschreibungsseite des Bildes von Frau Schorer geleert hat und anschließend ein Bild mit dem vielsagenden Namen File:Mama.jpg hochgeladen hat auf dem gleiche Person abgebildet ist. --Martin H. (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Hallo Mef.ellingen. Ich arbeite nur einmal die Woche (Mittwochs) für 2 Stunden an der Franken-Wikipedia mit, hab Deine Nachricht darum jetzt erst gesehen. Ich habe im Eifer der vielen Arbeit schlicht übersehen, Deinen Namen unter den Link und den Bildverweis von wikicommons zu setzen und möchte mich hiermit herzlich bei Dir entschuldigen. Natürlich habe ich das jetzt nachgeholt. Vielen Dank für die schönen Bilder die jetzt weitere Honore für Dich im bekannten und gut besuchten franken-wiki.de einbringen.
Mit besten Grüßen
schmom
Seite Pleinfeld im Franken-Wki
[edit]Hallo Mef.ellingen. Ich arbeite nur einmal die Woche (Mittwochs) für 2 Stunden an der Franken-Wikipedia mit, hab Deine Nachricht darum jetzt erst gesehen. Ich habe im Eifer der vielen Arbeit schlicht übersehen, Deinen Namen unter den Link und den Bildverweis von wikicommons zu setzen und möchte mich hiermit herzlich bei Dir entschuldigen. Natürlich habe ich das jetzt nachgeholt. Vielen Dank für die schönen Bilder die jetzt weitere Honore für Dich im bekannten und gut besuchten franken-wiki.de einbringen.
Mit besten Grüßen
schmom
File source is not properly indicated: File:Nove Udoli4.JPG
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Nove Udoli4.JPG, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
High Contrast (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Own work --Mef.ellingen (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Szlaga.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.
|
Wiktoryn (talk) 12:30, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 23:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Paul Emile Victor.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Paul Emile Victor.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. |
JuTa 20:42, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Hallo!
Hast du das Bild gemacht? Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 09:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- Jou, ist von mir … Grüße --Mef.ellingen (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Arno-Holz-Medaille
[edit]Woher kommt denn die Medaille bzw. kann man sie irgendwo kaufen?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Holz-Medaille_2013.jpg
Sie wurde bei den Veranstaltungen zum 150. Geburtstag an Ehrengäste vergeben. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 07:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
[edit]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. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Eleassar (t/p) 21:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Ostküstenbahn 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 gallery, 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. |
JuTa 20:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Nachtrag: Ich hab den Baustein mal rübergeschubst, der kam versehentlich auf meiner Disk. an. -- Platte U.N.V.E.U. 08:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
File:Örebro - Svartå Järnväg.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. |
El Grafo (talk) 12:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
- Gilt auch für:
File:Logo US today Papier.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.
|
Yours sincerely, INeverCry 02:00, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Unterbreitenlohe alte Kapelle1.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Unterbreitenlohe alte Kapelle1.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. |
And also:
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- done --Mef.ellingen (talk) 22:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Löschantrag und File:Ruebenkopf Logo.png
[edit]20. März 2016
Sehr geehrte/r Mef.ellingen,
Sie haben einen Löschantrag der Graphiken Ruebenkopf Logo gestellt. Der Grund sei ein »private fake«.
- Wie ist »private fake« definiert, wann wird ein Löschantrag mit dieser Begründung gestellt?
- Inwiefern ist das Bild eine Fälschung (»fake«)?
- Warum darf man auf der Benutzerseite kein perönliches Logo einfügen?
- Gibt es Relevanzkriterien für hochgeladene Bilder bei Wikimedia Commons?
- Wenn ja, warum ist das Bild für die Benutzerseite nicht relevant?
Vielen Dank im Voraus.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Rübenkopf
Nachträglich unterzeichnet: --Rübenkopf (talk) 15:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Bahnhof Altenhof.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Bahnhof Altenhof.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. |
No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Assensunfall.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Assensunfall.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. |
Wdwd (talk) 05:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
File:Assensunfall.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. |
JuTa 04:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Lentini Diramazione.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Lentini Diramazione.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. |
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 05:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
File:Schleusingen 12 94.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. |
Monmowomno (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Mef.ellingen. Worum handelt es sich bei dieser von dir transferierten Datei? Wo ist das? --Leyo 20:04, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
- Das ist nicht mein Foto. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 09:52, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Partisan
[edit]Even the Danish Wikipedia says the ship was commissioned in 2000, and also according www.navalhistory.dk and here --Stunteltje (talk) 06:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for this information, i get my information from German Wikipedia. So we should rename all the pictures and delete my category wit 2001? --Mef.ellingen (talk) 09:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- I would prefer just reverting the action. --Stunteltje (talk) 10:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 10:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- I would prefer just reverting the action. --Stunteltje (talk) 10:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Image without license
[edit]
This message was added automatically by MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 23:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
File:Günther Felßner.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. |
Dandelo (talk) 23:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
E(II)?
[edit]Hello! What is the purpose of Category:SJ Class E(II)? Is it supposed to be E2 - that category exists already. No. 952 is an ordinary E class locomotive in any case, never rebuilt to the E2 class. Is there something special with this particular locomotive? ACo2c (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't know, whats your problem? See her: de:SJ E (II) and her: http://www.svenska-lok.se/damp.php?s=19&litra=E&typenr=2, this ist E(II). And No. 952 is not an ordinary E class locomotive, it is a E(II). It exists no ordinary E class in Sweden. After you reed the following, perhaps you have no more problem? Additional: http://www.svenska-lok.se/damp.php?s=19&litra=E&typenr=1 - this is E(I) and http://www.svenska-lok.se/damp.php?s=19&litra=E2&typenr=0 - this ist E2. Rather, the E(I) is an ordinary E, see description: Littera E från 1876. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, you have found a random website and an unreliable online encyclopedia :) referring to the type as E(II), or rather using "(II)" as a disambiguation, but SJ never did. The standard works about SJ steam locomotives, Normalspåriga ånglok vid Statens Järnvägar by Diehl, Fjeld and Nilsson (1973) and SJ:s ånglok by Lars Olov Karlsson (2008) both refer to the 1907 type as "E". Neither "E(I)" nor "E(II)" are designations ever used in reality. You will notice that even the "Svenska lok" page only uses "E(II)" in the heading, calling the type "E" in the body of the text and in the list of locomotives.
- And if you look in Category:SJ Class E, all images are of the 1907 type; at the very least, all images of the same locomotive type should be in the same category. Why have you put this particular one in its own category? I cannot find that we have any images of the 1876 type, and if we had, they could be categorized as class De, the designation they carried from 1898. ACo2c (talk) 13:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I know that in Sweden when the last locomotive of a serie was canceled, the serie was re-assigned. Unfortunately, the standard works on SJ steam locomotives are not found on the net. I also know that neither "E (I)" nor "E (II)" are terms that used in reality - but there must be distinguishing features - regardless of whether there are pictures of the first series of E. If there are any, you can sort them in Sweden, as you like. The article in the German WP can not be called Class De (the designation they wore from 1898), since in Germany, according to the rules, normally the first designation is to be used. I've moved the only picture in the category back to category E. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 22:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- I have no desire to change any German Wikipedia naming conventions, but they were a bit confusing when suddenly applied at Commons. Thank you for putting all images in the same category. ACo2c (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- I have no problem to do it the way it is normally handled in the country. Greetings. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 17:58, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- I have no desire to change any German Wikipedia naming conventions, but they were a bit confusing when suddenly applied at Commons. Thank you for putting all images in the same category. ACo2c (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I know that in Sweden when the last locomotive of a serie was canceled, the serie was re-assigned. Unfortunately, the standard works on SJ steam locomotives are not found on the net. I also know that neither "E (I)" nor "E (II)" are terms that used in reality - but there must be distinguishing features - regardless of whether there are pictures of the first series of E. If there are any, you can sort them in Sweden, as you like. The article in the German WP can not be called Class De (the designation they wore from 1898), since in Germany, according to the rules, normally the first designation is to be used. I've moved the only picture in the category back to category E. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 22:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Image without license
[edit]
This message was added automatically by MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 15:02, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Für die Nutzbarkeit wäre jetzt noch schön zu wissen, wo und wann das ist. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
- Gerne, du bist ja der Spezialist für Biathlon - 2012, Datum ist im Bild, WM Ruhpolding. Ich hab da im Laufe der Tage noch paar mehr. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
- Finde ich auch schön. Dennoch sollte das auch in der Beschreibung und möglichst auch in einer Kat auftauchen. Macht es einfach viel besser auffind- und damit nutzbar. Wäre doch sonst schade. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 00:28, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
- Im Text habe ich es hinzugefügt. Gibt es eine Kat. für die WM in Ruhpolding? Mach ich dann gerne. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 00:29, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
- Finde ich auch schön. Dennoch sollte das auch in der Beschreibung und möglichst auch in einer Kat auftauchen. Macht es einfach viel besser auffind- und damit nutzbar. Wäre doch sonst schade. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 00:28, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
town limits in Denmark
[edit]Please note that the limits of Højer and other towns in Denmark are at the signs: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/2IeJEJbbxm3Cesq_JjkupQ. Højer isn't a separate administrative unit either. It's just an urban area in Tønder Kommune.--Hjart (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- But it does not matter to forgive categories even for subgroups as Category:Buildings in Højer ... Commons does not require an exact demarcation, as is the case with Danish places in Denmark according to legal regulation - it is also the case with German groups. But it's okay if you do that. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Nochmal, aber warum steht folgendes im dänischen Artikel (i have found in da-WP): Højer (tysk: Hoyer) er en by i Sønderjylland med 1.176 indbyggere (2020) – "en by"? Und dann: "En by er en stor og permanent bebyggelse eller..." – en by -> deutsch (in German) "eine Stadt" - but not "a separate administrative unit"? And what is "Højer Borgmesterkontor"? --Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Hamnfärjan I in Marstrand.jpg
[edit]Copyright status: File:Hamnfärjan I in Marstrand.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Hamnfärjan I in Marstrand.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. |
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Category:SJ Class T (1879) 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 category, 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. |
In addition, I noticed that you've made a malformed deletion request. Here, {{Delete}} is not for speedy deletion, please see COM:DP. When you want to delete a page by manually using the {{Delete}} template (rather than using the automatic Nominate for deletion tool in the Tools menu on the sidebar per COM:DR#Starting requests), please remember to follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion (or Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually), otherwise you will create a lot of work for other people. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:58, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is my bad english.... German would be better. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 14:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- Außerdem habe ich festgestellt, dass Sie eine fehlerhafte Löschanfrage gestellt haben. Hier ist {{Delete}} nicht zum schnellen Löschen gedacht, siehe COM:DP/de. Wenn Sie eine Seite manuell löschen möchten, indem Sie die Vorlage {{Delete}} verwenden (anstatt das automatische Tool „Zum Löschen vorschlagen“ im Menü „Tools“ in der Seitenleiste gemäß COM:DR/de#Löschantrag stellen), denken Sie bitte daran, die Anweisungen in der Vorlage zu befolgen, einschließlich des Abschnitts „Klicken Sie hier, um weitere Anweisungen anzuzeigen“ (oder Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually), andernfalls erstellen Sie eine viel Arbeit für andere. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Edit Summary
[edit]When editing a page on Commons there is a small field labeled "Edit Summary" or "Summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.
Filling in the Edit Summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the Edit Summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's name in the Edit Summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
OK, bevor ich einen Löschantrag stelle, frage ich mal noch einmal nach. Beate Sievers ist die Urheberin schreibst du. Möglich, auch wenn sie dann erst 14 gewesen wäre. Aber kann ja vorkommen. Nur - wie kommst du darauf, dass das Bild gemeinfrei wäre, weil 70 Jahre post mortem? Sievers (und das dürfte diese Beate Sievers sein) ist erst letzten Monat gestorben. Also: wie kommt dieses Bild in die Gemeinfreiheit? Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Gegenfrage: Der Name steht so auf der Ausstellungstafel. Ist vermutlich die Frau oder Mutter oder Schwester von Heinz-Georg Sievers. Sind Bilder von Bildern - das ist eine Ausstellungstafel im Museum - als zweidimensionales Werk nicht frei? Wenn meine Annahme falsch ist, bitte mache den LA, bevor ich irgendwo diskutiere. Grüße. Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Und noch eine Frage: auf einer anderen Tafel ist der genannte Heinz-Georg Sievers abgebildet - dort steht als Quelle "Archiv THW Kiel" - wie verhält sich es dann? Danke. Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo, leider sind Bilder, nur weil sie in Museen gezeigt werden nicht einfach frei, das wäre schön und würde unsere Arbeit sehr erleichtern. Ich fände es auch besser, wenn wir Bilder einfacher verwenden dürften. Leider bedeutet 70 Jahre post mortem aber auch genau das. Es ist ein sinnloses Recht, dass nur wenigen besonders bekannten Künstlern zugute kommt, wir aber leider alle mit leben müssen. Auch Bilder aus Vereinsarchiven fallen darunter, es sei denn, solche Institutionen können nachweisen, dass die Bilder in ihrem Auftrag gemacht wurden und vertraglich auch die Rechte alles mit diesen zu tun damit verbunden ist. Solche Verträge hat aber 1950 wahrscheinlich gar Niemand geschlossen. Ich vermute mal, dass das Bild aus dem Tagebuch von Sievers stammt, aber gar nicht von ihr selbst gemacht wurde. Wenn wir wüssten, wer der echte Fotograf ist, könnten wir vielleicht heraus bekommen, ob das Bild schon frei ist. Allerdings ist die Chance gering, weil dafür der Fotograf spätestens 1952 (70 Jahre, es zählt immer der 1. Januar des Jahres nach dem Tod) verstorben sein müsste. Wie man hier sieht gehen leider auch Museen noch oft nicht sauber mit so etwas um. Leider der Stand des Rechts, das hier weit an einer Sinnhaftigkeit vorbei geht. Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:31, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Mehr steht leider nicht auf der Tafel. Es wäre wohl besser, wenn da nichts stehen würde. Dann wäre es denkbar, dass der Fotograf zwei Jahre später schon verstorben wäre, man könnte zumindest nicht dagegen argumentieren. Machst du dann bitte den LA, damit ich es nicht selbst machen muss (peinlich). Danke. Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:36, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Muß dir nicht peinlich sein, es ist ja wirklich alles nicht einfach, um nicht zu sagen, es ist kompliziert. Andererseits muss halt für das Bild nachgewiesen werden, dass es frei ist, nicht dass es unfrei ist. Also auch wenn da nichts stünde, bliebe das Problem. Man kann - grob gesagt - 100 Jahre nehmen. Also Bilder von 1920 von denen man die Fotografen nicht weiß, kann man unter Umständen nutzen. Ich empfehle dir mal darauf zu achten, wann WMDE mal wieder einen Bildrechte-Kurs anbietet. Das ist wirklich hilfreich. Denn man hat ja immer wieder damit zu tun. Und das ist eine der wirklich sinnvollen Sachen, die sie bieten. Ansonsten - ich kümmere mich. Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:58, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Besten Dank. Mef.ellingen (talk) 22:09, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Muß dir nicht peinlich sein, es ist ja wirklich alles nicht einfach, um nicht zu sagen, es ist kompliziert. Andererseits muss halt für das Bild nachgewiesen werden, dass es frei ist, nicht dass es unfrei ist. Also auch wenn da nichts stünde, bliebe das Problem. Man kann - grob gesagt - 100 Jahre nehmen. Also Bilder von 1920 von denen man die Fotografen nicht weiß, kann man unter Umständen nutzen. Ich empfehle dir mal darauf zu achten, wann WMDE mal wieder einen Bildrechte-Kurs anbietet. Das ist wirklich hilfreich. Denn man hat ja immer wieder damit zu tun. Und das ist eine der wirklich sinnvollen Sachen, die sie bieten. Ansonsten - ich kümmere mich. Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:58, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Mehr steht leider nicht auf der Tafel. Es wäre wohl besser, wenn da nichts stehen würde. Dann wäre es denkbar, dass der Fotograf zwei Jahre später schon verstorben wäre, man könnte zumindest nicht dagegen argumentieren. Machst du dann bitte den LA, damit ich es nicht selbst machen muss (peinlich). Danke. Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:36, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo, leider sind Bilder, nur weil sie in Museen gezeigt werden nicht einfach frei, das wäre schön und würde unsere Arbeit sehr erleichtern. Ich fände es auch besser, wenn wir Bilder einfacher verwenden dürften. Leider bedeutet 70 Jahre post mortem aber auch genau das. Es ist ein sinnloses Recht, dass nur wenigen besonders bekannten Künstlern zugute kommt, wir aber leider alle mit leben müssen. Auch Bilder aus Vereinsarchiven fallen darunter, es sei denn, solche Institutionen können nachweisen, dass die Bilder in ihrem Auftrag gemacht wurden und vertraglich auch die Rechte alles mit diesen zu tun damit verbunden ist. Solche Verträge hat aber 1950 wahrscheinlich gar Niemand geschlossen. Ich vermute mal, dass das Bild aus dem Tagebuch von Sievers stammt, aber gar nicht von ihr selbst gemacht wurde. Wenn wir wüssten, wer der echte Fotograf ist, könnten wir vielleicht heraus bekommen, ob das Bild schon frei ist. Allerdings ist die Chance gering, weil dafür der Fotograf spätestens 1952 (70 Jahre, es zählt immer der 1. Januar des Jahres nach dem Tod) verstorben sein müsste. Wie man hier sieht gehen leider auch Museen noch oft nicht sauber mit so etwas um. Leider der Stand des Rechts, das hier weit an einer Sinnhaftigkeit vorbei geht. Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:31, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Und noch eine Frage: auf einer anderen Tafel ist der genannte Heinz-Georg Sievers abgebildet - dort steht als Quelle "Archiv THW Kiel" - wie verhält sich es dann? Danke. Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
File:19991121 KOE - Vera Macht 1.tif 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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 09:57, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Category deletion
[edit]When you want to delete a category misspelling. {{Bad name}} should be used since it's a speedy deletion. No discussion is needed. Jonteemil (talk) 23:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Sydfyenske DS
[edit]Exactly where did you find File:Sydfyenske DS - 2.jpg? Hjart (talk) 09:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- This building is in Svendborg, at the crossroad between Havnepladsen and Frederiksgade, opposite the entrance to Frederiksø. You can see it at Google in a round picture. Or at openstreet: there is "Nordic marine consolt" at the buliding. At the left side there is a bar "drunken sailor". Mef.ellingen (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
So ist es wohl, du bist ein:
[edit]Posseltmann | |
Vielen dank, dass du dich um das Foto vom unser'm Bernd gekümmert hast. RegierungDavidlands1852 (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
Schleifähren
[edit]Moin Mef.ellingen, bei deinen Änderungen und Verschiebungen zu den Schleifähren Missunde II und Missunde III wäre eine vorherige Recherche über bereits bestehende Kategorien durchaus sinnvoll gewesen. Gruß von der Küste Ein Dahmer (talk) 18:59, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Im Nachhinein muss ich dir Recht geben, sorry. Allerdings war die Missunde III nicht so einfach zu finden. Aber man muss natürlich auch die Tatsachen betrachten: die III ist nicht in Betrieb und die II ist nicht außer Betrieb. Da ist noch nichts ersetzt und das wird in diesem Jahr wohl auch noch nicht passieren. Das mag alles vielleicht noch kommen, aber aktuell leben wir im "Jetzt und heute". Und die III ersetzt nicht die III... Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)