User talk:Nillerdk

English: Welcome to the Commons, Nillerdk!

First steps tutorial 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. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Filnik 15:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gækkebrev 2.JPG

---

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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 15:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gækkebrev 1.JPG

---

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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 15:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Jakuszyce-Harrachov.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Jakuszyce-Harrachov.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by User:Sz-iwbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Sz-iwbot 15:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Czerniawa Zdrój - Nové Mesto p. Smrkem.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Czerniawa Zdrój - Nové Mesto p. Smrkem.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by User:Sz-iwbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Sz-iwbot 15:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Karolines Køkken 1-8.jpg

Forsiderne på kogebøgerne betragtes som værker, der så kræver tilladelse fra Arla til at anvende. På dette fotografi vises en forside på en sådan måde, at der er tale om en fotografisk gengivelse af værket. Med andre ord, skal vi have Arlas tilladelse til at vise det, da forsiden tilsigtet er i fokus. Alternativet er at skabe et billede, hvor forsiden tilfældigvis bliver en del af fotografiet, men hvor hovedmotivet er noget helt andet.

Se også Commons:Derivative works og Commons:Freedom of panorama. --|EPO| ^da: 16:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token c7722c88821f93cf35b4247148790b8f

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Category:Christoph Münch Creative Commons photos

Hi Nillerdk, who is Christoph Münch and why does he need his own category? Justiced noticed this strange category which really stands out at Category:Dresden. Regards, --X-Weinzar (talk) 02:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello X-Weinzar! Thank you for your comment. He has donated 100 Dresden-related photos (the 99 others will be uploaded when the licence is cleared) and they deserve to be grouped together. I have now made the category hidden however, so it does not confuse anyone. Nillerdk (talk) 16:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay thank you, that's at least better than before. Still, I'm asking myself why they should be grouped together in a category? Could I just start my own category, too? ;-) I don't really have a problem with that, I'm just curious. Regards, --X-Weinzar (talk) 00:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Errrm, I'd say this pic doesn't fulfill the Freedom of Panorama requirement. --X-Weinzar (talk) 13:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for noting - while I generally am aware of Panoramafreiheit (Freedom of Panorama), this one slipped my attention. I've tagged the particular for speedy deletion. Thanks again for keeping an eye on my doings (-; Some 40 more photos from the same source will be uploaded soon.Nillerdk (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Category:Cycling infrastructure in Germany

Category discussion notification

Category:Cycling infrastructure in Germany 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!

--ŠJů (talk) 12:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Category:Cycling infrastructure in Germany

Have a look at the above proposal to abolish this category - very short-sighted thinking. I have, I think, covered it by sorting enough pictures to remove their argument, but a bit more work (and of course, an  Oppose on the discussion) would be good. Ingolfson (talk) 09:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Bicycle road signs

Category discussion notification

Category:Bicycle road signs 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!

--ŠJů (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Help

Hey. I'm new to Wikipedia Commons and I was wondering if you would help me out here and show me the way around. The instructions they give you I cannot understand and I noticed that you had uploaded a bunch of files. If you can help me out I would really appreciate it. --WhiteHandofSaruman (talk) 13:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to Commons and thanks for contacting me. How can I help you? Do you want to upload something? Nillerdk (talk) 13:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Gloedelampe.jpg

Hej Nillerdk! Du har noteret, at File:Gloedelampe.jpg ikke bliver PD før i 2014. Hvor har du 2014 fra? Men godt set det med skabelonen kun passer til fotografier. Som du nok har gættet, så bad jeg bare botten flytte alle billederne i kategorien. Jeg tjekkede kun at der var "source" men glemte så at kigge på om det rent faktisk var et foto. --MGA73 (talk) 08:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

70 år efter Helge Holsts død, først da er vi vel sikre på PD? Har spurgt Nico om han ved noget mere om tegningen. Jeg har også overvejet, om tegningen overhovedet opnår værkshøjde, men det må vi heller antage. Nillerdk (talk) 05:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Ja, nu hvor jeg har kigget på den, så kan jeg godt se det :-) Jeg er enig i, at der næppe er værkshøjde. Det er vel reelt også den eneste mulighed vi har hvis vi ikke skal finde rettighedshavernes arvinger og bede om tilladelse. Det er jo et skøn hvornår der ikke er værkshøjde, men jf. Category:PD ineligible så er det vist ikke helt skævt at antage at glødelampen er uden værkshøjde. Jeg foreslår derfor, at vi prøver at sætte en Template:PD-ineligible på og ser om der er nogen, der mener andet. --MGA73 (talk) 08:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Nu har jeg sat skabelonen på + tilføjet Category:PD files for review og så må vi se, hvad der sker. --MGA73 (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Kategorisering af "Category:Files moved from da.wikipedia to Commons requiring review"

Hej Nillerdk! Jeg har nu fundet ud af at få min bot til at tjekke filerne i kategorien og gætte på hvilke kategorier, der måtte være relevante. Det ser ud til at virke rimeligt. Der kommer enkelt "fjollede" indimellem men de er jo lette at slette. Det burde gerne gøre arbejdet lettere. --MGA73 (talk) 21:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, det lyder godt. Jeg vil forsøge at vende tilbage til den gode rytme med et par filer om dagen (-; Nillerdk (talk) 21:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Så er kategorien snart tømt

... men vi kan jo altid fylde lidt flere i den :-) Til orientering kan jeg oplyse, at Sten har kategoriseret sine billeder i Category:Images by User:Sten from da.wikipedia, så den skal ikke slettes fra hans billeder. Kategorien er skjult, så den ikke kommer frem på billederne. Prøv at kigge forbi - han har været aktiv :-) --MGA73 (talk) 17:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Av ja, Sten er meget flittig. Det var en fejl at fjerne kategorien, den gør jo ingen skade.

Kan du ikke lige søge på Givskud Zoo i OTRS, for disse to billeder er desværre muligvis copyvios:

• http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fil:Brutalis-afrika.jpg
• File:Samnon_(gorilla).jpg (hvorfor blev filnavnet samNon ?)

Men slet dem ikke, vi kan jo lige spørge høfligt først. Nillerdk (talk) 19:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Givskud giver ingen hist i OTRS. Jeg kan heller ikke finde nogle billeder på nettet, der ligner Samson (i en opløsning, der er svarende til "vores" eller større). Så hvis ikke du kan finde et "bevis" så synes jeg vi skal antage good faith (der er i øvrigt mange gode billeder på flickr). N'et er en øv-fejl da jeg tilføjede "(gorilla)" i navnet. Jeg har nu uploaded med rigtigt navn og kopieret din tekst over.

Mht. Brutalis så er det netop grunden til, at jeg ikke flyttede den med. Jeg flytter dem der er ok først og så kan man lettere overskue resten. Jeg markerede dog en 28 med tvivlsom licens forleden (billeder af statuer mv.).

Jeg har flyttet et par "usikre" PD-filer og har bedt om PD-review, for der er tydeligvis nogle på Commons der er ret gode til det. Jeg overvejer om der er andre, der også med fordel kan flyttes til review her, men vi skal selvfølgelig ikke flytte dem, vi godt ved ikke er ok. --MGA73 (talk) 21:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Det er en god fremgangsmåde og det er smart, at din bot kan flytte billederne! Mht. Samson (og Brutalis - situationen er den samme) er jeg stadig i (kraftigt) i tvivl eftersom uploaderen på da:Brugerdiskussion:Tinesc skriver at parken ejer rettighederne til billederne, men hun skriver sig selv som forfatter (hvilket jo kan passe, men jeg tvivler med den formulering). Jeg skriver lige til Givskud Zoo og beder om en tilladelse og samtidig om vi må få flere billeder. Nillerdk (talk) 05:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Du ser da også bare alt... Nå men hvis hun har taget billederne med sit eget kamera, så mener jeg, at hun ejer rettighederne. Det er jo ikke Givskud, der har lavet et "kunstværk". Men fint at du skriver og hvis vi er heldige får vi en "bred" tilladelse så vi kan få flere billeder. Der ligger som nævnt mange på flickr - måske har Givskud et galleri der vi kan bruge.

Forresten. Jeg plejer kun at flytte en lille smule ad gangen, så det ikke virker for uoverskueligt. --MGA73 (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hvis hun har fotograferet i arbejdstiden har Givskud Zoo muligvis rettighederne (også selvom ingen udtrykkelig aftale foreligger), men dette er ikke klart reguleret i lovgivningen (se ophavsret i ansættelsesforhold på [1] - der står også meget andet godt om den danske ophavsretslovgivning). Lad os bare holde os til Givskud Zoos mening om sagen (håber de svarer ...) Nillerdk (talk) 07:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Noget nyt? Kom til at tænke på det da du lavede denne tilsyneladende fine rettelse [2]. Men prøv at se kategorien Odder hvad den indeholder og linker til :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Genial kategori (-: (-: (-: Ja, jeg har netop fået positivt svar fra Givskud. Jeg får dem lige til at sende bekræftelse til info-da@...! Odderggade ryger i Odder Kommune, da man jo ikke uden videre kan slette billeder af helt håbløs kvalitet. Det får Commons altså brug for en dag - der er godt nok meget skidt imellem. Måske opfinder man en "stem 1-5 på dette billede" og så kan man vælge at slå alle billeder fra, der i gennemsnit er blevet bedømt under 3. Nillerdk (talk) 21:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hvor herligt :-D Så kan vi også flytte Brutalis. Det er nok også snart på tide med en gennemgang af resterne på dawiki. Der er vistnok tre kategorier tilbage mere end 100 billeder i hver. I resten af kategorierne har jeg flyttet dem, der kunne flyttes uden større problemer. --MGA73 (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hvad for en slags gennemgang? Er der problemer i at flytte flere filer? Jeg kan sikkert godt hjælpe, hvis du pejler mig ind.Nillerdk (talk) 20:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

En gennemgang for at se om billederne er ok. Fx var jeg jo kommet til at flytte et billede af en statue selvom jeg havde markeret det med tvivlsom licens. Godt du så det. Det er jo intet problem at flytte alle billederne, men vi bør ikke flytte billeder uden kilde eller copyvio osv. Fx er jeg ikke sikker på at alle billeder markeret med PD-old virkelig ER pd-old. --MGA73 (talk) 20:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Laver du da manuelt lister over flyttekandidater? Jeg kan vist ikke på praktisk måde hjælpe til med dette, så er det ikke nemmere at flytte blindt og lade det komme an på det efterfølgende review? Det var da ikke så slemt med den georgiske statue, den lå da højst 24 timer på Commons (efter hvor lang tid mon på dawiki?) Nillerdk (talk) 20:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg sætter bare botten til at flytte fra en ende af en kategori ad gangen. Den spørger så for hvert enkelt billede, om jeg vil springe det over, acceptere det nuværende navn eller vælge et nyt. Så sidder jeg og følger med og springer de vanskelige over.

Der er i forvejen mange, der er sure på commons-kanibalerne, så for ikke at skabe mere uro på dawiki og for ikke at skabe et dårligt ry af dawiki på commons, så synes jeg at det er bedst (og lettest) at vi sletter vores eget skidt på dawiki i stedet for at flytte det til commons.

Oprydningsopgaven består "bare" i at kigge på billederne et for et og sætte "tvivlsom licens" på de dårlige eller rette fra fx "PD-old" til "PD-Denmark50" eller fra "GFDL" til "GFDL-self". Så det er såmend ikke så svært. Nogle gange skal man også lede efter den oprindelige kilde (hvis der står "billedet er fra den engelske wiki" men der ikke er angivet et link).

Prøv fx at klikke på da:Fil:Alf_Ross.gif synes du at licensen er ok? --MGA73 (talk) 20:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

PD review

PLease ask Tommy the three questions asked on my talk page by Jappalang. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Grocery stores categories

Thank you for creating the "Grocery stores by country" category. Useful! However I don't understand why you removed Category:Shops in the United States at Category:Grocery stores in the United States. "Category:Grocery stores in the United States" needs to be in some United States category, and that seems the most relevent to me; I added it back. If there is some reason it is not appropriate here or some other category would be better, let me know, thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for watching out! I agree with your changes and can't say anymore what I was thinking back then ... Nillerdk (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

File:5 -krone fra Danmark.jpg

Hej Nillerdk!

Jeg har forsøgt at få en debat igang på dawiki uden større held da:Wikipedia:Landsbybrønden#Forespørgsel_til_Danmarks_Nationalbank. Så derfor kan vi passende tage debatten på commons. Jeg har derfor rettet til en almindelig deletion request.

Som du kan se er min pointe at DN skriver at vi godt må hvis... og hvis det var deres mening at det skal være helt forbudt, så kunne de jo bare skrive det. Du må meget gerne tjekke min oversættelse og rette hvis der er ord der er oversat forkert. Har brugt google + gennemlæsning og rettelser ud fra hvad der lyder bedst. --MGA73 (talk) 10:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg er helt tilfreds med din aenring til normal deletion request. Jeg beklager meget, at jeg ikke fandt den engelske udgave af nationalbankens side foer nu, for saa havde du sparet oversaettelsesarbejdet... sorry. Jeg mener nu stadig ikke, at vi kan have moenter, da designet (som er i fokus) er beskyttet og vi ikke har tilladelse. Nillerdk (talk) 11:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Det er jeg da ked af. Havde ellers håbet vil kunne blive enige om at det var ok, så jeg kunne udgive mine egne penge og bruge undskyldningen "Jamen Commons....". (Håber folk forstår sarkasme - hehe). Om ikke andet så får vi en afgørelse vi kan bruge på dawiki også. --MGA73 (talk) 13:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, ja det ville vaere ganske rart at maatte trykke penge selv, men skulle vi saa ikke starte med noget stoerre end en femkrone? (-; Nillerdk (talk) 13:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

PD-old kategorien på dawiki

Hej Nillerdk!

Denne gang har jeg flyttet en masse fra da:Kategori:Billeder der er offentlig ejendom da ophavsretten er udløbet. Der er måske enkelte "skrammelbilleder" med, men det må vi så tage derfra. Enkelte af dem, der er tilbage i den danske kategori skal tjekkes først, men hovedparten skal bare lige have et link til billedet fra Det Kongelige Bibliotek.

Muligvis er ikke alle billederne fra Det Kongelige Bibliotek pd-old, men så må de være PD-Denmark50. I alt fald må vi da formode, at de har styr på ophavsretten :-) Jeg har i øvrigt lavet en "hurtig" oprydning efter overførslen for at undgå alle skabelonerne med manglende kilde osv. --MGA73 (talk) 20:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Hej igen! Kan se, at du allerede har fundet lidt "skrammel". Vi kan enten tage diskussionen på commons eller slette billederne og tage diskussionen på dawiki. Hvis vi gør det første, så bør den oprindelige uploader på dawiki have en besked og der bør laves en slettemarkering på billedet med henvisning til diskussionen på commons. Ellers risikerer vi jo at billedet bliver slettet uden uploaderen opdager det. Hvis vi gør det andet, så skal billederne bare slettes hurtigst muligt (fx med teksten "Transfered by mistake - nominated for deletion on dawiki") og så skal de bare nomineres til sletning som alle andre filer. Hvad synes du vi skal gøre? Principielle debatter synes jeg fint vi kan tage på commons (fx mønten), men hvis der er "trivielle" sletteforslag så er det lettest at gøre på dawiki. --MGA73 (talk) 11:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Det er bedre at diskutere trivialiteterne paa dawiki. Skal jeg fremover bare saette en Speedy paa her med henvisning til ("Transfered by mistake - nominated for deletion on dawiki"), at vi vil diskutere paa dawiki? Dette kan vi kun goere med filer, der kun har vaeret her kort tid. Ellers risikerer vi jo at de er i brug og saa er Speedy ikke tilladelig. En anden mulighed er at jeg underretter dig paa din diskussionsside i de enkelte tilfaelde. PS: I dette tilfaelde har jeg faktisk underrettet uploaderen, men procedure er besvaerlig. Nillerdk (talk) 12:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Det lyder som en god idé med en speedy. Jeg tjekker brugen inden jeg sletter. Hvis nogen har nået at tage billedet i brug må vi jo løse det på anden måde. Nu hvor du har lavet et sletteforslag her, så synes jeg bare vi skal lade det være. --MGA73 (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, det goer jeg saa for fremtiden. Mht. det foto, jeg allerede har indstillet: Maaske bliver vi noedt til at indstille det paa dawiki ogsaa? Nillerdk (talk) 14:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Det virkede da fint at indstille til speedy. Så kan vi slette på dawiki i fred og ro. Vil du forresten kigge på da:Fil:Hans Christiansen Hus.jpg og da:Fil:Kirke-rendsborg.jpg ved lejlighed? Billederne er som flere af brugerens billeder hentet fra dewiki. --MGA73 (talk) 20:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Postkort mv.

Hej! Hjalp det lidt på arbejdet at jeg satte min bot til at rette lidt i teksten på postkortene? :-) I mellemtiden har jeg fået udryddet skakbrikkerne på dawiki, og der er en del pd-old og GFDL-self klar til overførsel. --MGA73 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Jep, det er helt klart en hjælp! Nillerdk (talk) 21:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Ja og jeg er også begyndt at sætte Category:History of Lolland and Falster på dem jeg tjekker. Og nu til noget helt andet: Skal der ikke en PD-old eller noget på File:Jessen-dörns-in-klockries.jpg og hvad blev der af din oil on canvas du satte på før jeg flyttede billedet? :-) --MGA73 (talk) 07:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Stavefejl i syntaxen rettet. Takker! Jeg er blevet opmærksom på noget interessant vedr. PD-art, der jo skal bruges på Commons når der er tale om udløbne kunstværker, der er blevet digitaliseret fornylig. Digitaliseringen er efter dansk ophavsret beskyttet som "fotografiske billeder" (altså ligesom PD-DENMARK50) og det skal vi rette os efter på dawiki. På Commons gælder der dog en sjælden undtagelse: Wikimedia ignorerer at nyligt affotograferede gamle kunstværker i nogle lande (herunder de nordiske) er ophavsretsligt beskyttet (rettigheden ligger hos ham/hende, der digitaliserede!). Det er en undtagelse, da det normalt er et krav, at billedfiler skal være PD i USA og i oprindelseslandet. Se selv historikken til PD-kunst ([3]) og When to use PD-art ([4]). Nillerdk (talk) 07:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Nåe det havde jeg så ikke set. Normalt plejer jeg bare at rette disse "typo'er". Ja det er et interessant spørgsmål. Egentlig kan man jo så søge på nettet og "låne" alle billeder af kunstneres værker (hvis de er død for mere end 70 år siden). --MGA73 (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Rigtigt, men disse billeder fra nettet er kun tilladt paa Commons og ikke paa dawiki, saa lad os faa dem flyttet foer nogen opdager noget (-: Nillerdk (talk) 08:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Som fx da:Fil:Frederikke Løvenskiold.png der ligger her File:Frederikke Løvenskiold.png? Jeg har i øvrigt flyttet alle PD-old'er medmindre de så lidt uldne ud. --MGA73 (talk) 14:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, saadan et billede er netop ikke PD i Danmark, hvis vi forudsaetter at digitaliseringen er sket indenfor de sidste 50 aar (i dette tilfaelde har operatoeren af skanneren/kameraet ophavsretten til digitaliseringen). I USA opnaar ham/hende der laver en kopi af et udloebet kunstvaerk derimod ingen rettigheder. Da Commons i dette saertilfaelde tillader at ignorere dansk lovgivning, maa billedet ligge paa Commons, men skal maerkes med PD-art. Nillerdk (talk) 14:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

He he he, vi er nogle slemme nogen på Commons ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ferie

Ja jeg er på ferie så jeg laver ikke så meget. Internetforbindelsen er i øvrigt langsom så jeg prøver at holde mig fra de "tunge" opgaver. Kunne jeg lokke tid til at kigge her ved lejlighed? File:Ludvig Levin Jacobson.jpg. Har i øvrigt slettet lidt fra kategorien med tvivlsom licens men det kræver lidt "trafik" at finde erstatningsbilleder så ... --MGA73 (talk) 19:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hvis du har ferie, hvad laver du så overhovedet her (-; Eller regner det? Nillerdk (talk) 21:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Kan ikke leve uden... Se hvad jeg fandt File:Lathraea squamaria2.jpg - flot beskrivelse ik'? --MGA73 (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Se hvad jeg fandt

Hej Niller! Se hvad jeg fandt: Category:Media needing category review in use at da.wikipedia. Når alle billeder er overført og tjekket, så har vi lidt mere at kigge på... :-) --MGA73 (talk) 07:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Nåe, du er ikke meget for at tjekke kort og prinser? :-D Er du klar til 500 PD-self-filer eller noget i den stil? Det er den sidste større kategori, der mangler. Derudover er der "kun" de småting, der kommer drypvist efterhånden som billederne i "Kategori:Billeder der skal tjekkes" bliver tjekket, eller hvis der kommer nye filer. --MGA73 (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg har ingen anelse om vores ven Vilhelm men har jo spurgt Hans om hjælp. Mht. kortene har skrevet til Svend-Erik for at få en ordentlig tilladelse, men har intet hørt. Det ville være fint at blive færdig med de sidste 500-1000 filer ... Nillerdk (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg eksperimenterer lidt inden jeg flytter dem alle. Det ville være rart, hvis skabelonen ikke bliver til volapyk når den bliver overført til Commons (altså den med beskrivelse, kilde, dato...). Når du foreslår artiklen slettet, hvad så med File:7a-monogram.jpg i øvrigt? --MGA73 (talk) 20:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

7a er da meget pæn og kan måske bruges i andre sammenhænge... Der er jo ingen krav om notabilitet på Commons, kun noget ret vagt med "educational purpose". Nillerdk (talk) 20:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg har nu slettet fredsbevægelsen selvom jeg tror, at Malene har haft rimeligt godt styr på tilladelserne. Mht. File:Ifakara.mainroad.JPG så er "vores" større end deres, så det er næppe en kopi derfra. --MGA73 (talk) 07:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg har spurgt Kristen om licensen for Tanzaniabilledet er angivet korrekt. Jeg spørger også om vi må få flere fotos. Nillerdk (talk) 07:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Vedr. de:Wikipedia:Administratoren/Anfragen#NoCommons så har du fået svar. Du kan jo altid snyde og sætte fx en PD-self på og så rette tilbage når overførslen er sket :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Så er det snart slut

Hej Niller!

Jeg har lige overført billederne fra den sidste kategori. Herefter er der kun de billeder tilbage, der skal tjekkes inden overførsel og så nogle få, spredte billeder, der ligger og gemmer sig mellem de andre billeder. Når billederne på commons er tjekket og slettet fra dawiki og billederne i kategorien med tvivlsom licens er slettet, så er det også noget lettere at finde de billeder, der mangler at blive flyttet.

Dertil kan selvfølgelig komme nogle nye billeder :-)

I anledning af pinsen kommer jeg jo nok til at holde lidt fri. Men næste step er at få gennemgået de sidste billeder og få sat "tvivlsom licens" på eller hva' der nu bør ske med dem. --MGA73 (talk) 21:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hejsa! Lad os nu ikke skyde bjørnen før vi har spist den eller hvad det nu hedder (-: Men enden kan da ses og det er glædeligt. Jeg er lidt udmattet men holder nu 3 dages pause i Wrocław. Du må også have en god ferie! PS: Jeg har desværre ikke fået nogen tilbagemelding fra Svend-Erik, hvilket kan ende med at få ærgerlige konsekvenser for hans kort )-: Jeg forsøger at igen når jeg er tilbage. Nillerdk (talk) 22:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Nej der er lidt arbejde tilbage. Men alene det at 99,5 % af billederne nu er flyttet betyder da, at det er meget begrænset, hvad der kommer til af nye filer. Mht. kortene så ser jeg ikke det store problem i, at vi ikke har en perfekt tilladelse. Der er givet tilladelse til at bruge billederne og med bemærkningen om at der er spurgt med en standard-forespørgsel, så bør vilkårene være accepteret. Du må have en rigtig god ferie! Det er i alt fald velfortjent med en pause :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:15, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hov forresten. Du kan jo se eksemplet her: Template:Military Insignia. Eksemplet viser, at hvis man skifter "krav", så har det ikke tilbagevirkende kraft. Jeg ved ikke om man havde OTRS dengang han gav tilladelsen og om man stillede de samme formkrav til den. Men jeg synes i alt fald, at det er synd at slette kortene når vi nu har en tilladelse, og de godt ved at vi bruger dem (de henviser jo til Wikipedia). --MGA73 (talk) 20:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Så er der lige flyttet ca. 10 mere. Til gengæld har jeg også tjekket nogle, så nu er der "kun" 199 :-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

(reset) Du har ret mht. kortene, men vi bør nu alligevel gøre en indsats for at få en ordentlig tilladelse, selvom vi har en "nogenlunde" allerede.

Jeg har samlet alle "Druen"'s diagrammer i Category:Economic charts in Danish by da:User:Druen. De er alle meget dårligt beskrevne og dårligt individuelt kategoriserede (hvilket skyldes min ringe viden på området). Kender du nogen eksperter på området?

En anden forespørgsel: Gider du gendanne File:Ifakara.mainroad.JPG og klistre en OTRS-Pending på (Kristen sender snart en formel tilladelse). Nillerdk (talk) 10:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Jeg krydser også fingre for at vi får en bedre tilladelse vedr. kortene. Mht. Druen synes jeg, at et opslag på brønden er fint. Jeg har gendannet filen og sat en skabelon på. --MGA73 (talk) 14:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Lidt underholdning

Commons_talk:PD_files#Category_/_template_for_verification :-) Anledningen var da:Fil:Hitler med Ante Pavelic og Hermann Goering i Tyskland 16 06 1941.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 15:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Nu hvor disse billeder bliver samlet på Commons, så kunne vi også overveje at samle emballage (Daim, Sunmaid, ???) på commons, så det er samlet?

Jeg har i øvrigt fundet lidt mere underholdning: Category:Media needing categories. --MGA73 (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Ja, flyt bare Sunmaid og Daim. Jeg er dog ret sikker på, at de skal slettes. Alt andet ville være inkonsekvent... Nillerdk (talk) 05:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, så flytter jeg. Diskussionen vedr. mælkekartonen er i øvrigt gået død. Problemet er nok, at det 1) virker underligt for mange, at en bil må fotograferes mens en mælkekarton ikke må og 2) at det kan være svært at afgøre hvor meget der skal til før en konkret emballage har værkshøjde. --MGA73 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Så ikke alligevel. EPO slettede dem :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

En mere

• File:TIF Skjold 2008.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 17:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Tilladelsen dækker også File:ForsideTIFBog.jpg eller har du betænkeligheder ? Nillerdk (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Sorry. Havde ikke set at den dækkede to billeder :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Et tip

Hej Niller! Denne kunne måske interessere dig (også den lige over) Commons_talk:PD_files#File:Flyvev.C3.A5bnet-OF4.gif. --MGA73 (talk) 20:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Sikke noget rod

Hej Niller! Det tog lidt tid før jeg fandt ud af, hvad der var sket her [5]. Konklusionen må være, at du har rettet et par gange siden jeg startede min redigering og indtil jeg gemte. I alt fald var meningen bare at fjerne overskriften "Licens" oppe i beskrivelse og flytte "ukendt" ned under author. Men det ser fint ud nu og det er jo det vigtigste. --MGA73 (talk) 22:06, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

OK (-; Nillerdk (talk) 22:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Snegoble

Hej Niller!

Hvad siger du til, at vi flytter da:Fil:Tivoli jul 2006.jpg til Commons og tager en samlet diskussion af den og File:Tivoli by night.jpg? --MGA73 (talk) 17:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, når nu der er en lignende. Men jeg mener selv, at de begge skal ud. En samlet diskussion er dog mere praktisk. Nillerdk (talk) 17:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Ja. Diskussionen med det præhistoriske maleri var også lidt rodet... Nu er goblen flyttet sammen med et par andre billeder. --MGA73 (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Billeder du skal tjekke

Kom lige til at tænke på, at i stedet for at sætte en kategori på billederne, så kunne du jo også sætte dem i et galleri på din egen side eller en underside. På den måde optræder det ikke på billederne.

Fandt forresten et gammelt billede i går (?) da:Fil:Peder oxe.jpg. Prøver at finde noget på nettet - de må jo være PD-art hvis den er fra 15xx (da:Peder Oxe til Nielstrup). --MGA73 (talk) 19:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Fik flyttet lige lovlig mange filer

Hej Nils!

Så har jeg lige flyttet en stak filer. Jeg ved ikke helt, hvad der skete, men der blev vist flyttet lige lovlig mange. Jeg venter lige med at slette til du har kigget om vi kan antage at tilladelsen er ok (annoncerne "for" kvindehandel). --MGA73 (talk) 16:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Lige en tilføjelse. Hvad med at samle wikipedia-logoerne også? Vi har File:Da100k.png men de andre gamle har vi vist ikke (se filhistorikken her da:Fil:Wiki.png). --MGA73 (talk) 16:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Logoeerne er nu alle i Category:Danish Wikipedia logo variants. Det officielle logo vil nok altid være en dublet. Det skal åbenbart have det samme navn på alle wiki'er og ligge lokalt. Derudover er der en kopi på commons. Den version kan man jo bruge hvis man selv vil bestemme om logoet skal skrifte hvis dawiki's logo ændres. --MGA73 (talk) 12:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Billeder på nl-wiki

Hej Nils! Her er en kategori med en masse PD-art kandidater: nl:Categorie:Wikipedia:Afbeeldingen_met_licentie_PD-kunst - hvis du en dag får tid og lyst er der måske noget, der kan flyttes til Commons. Det er selvfølgelig særligt interessant for os, hvis vi har relevante artikler på dawiki vi kan bruge dem. --MGA73 (talk) 19:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Hej! Tak for forslaget - flere er velkomne. Jeg vil dog forsøge at holde mig til de danske filer. Der må være nogen, der kan forstå hollandsk bedre end mig (-; Jeg vil også forsøge at skrue ned for det halvautomatiske arbejde på Commons og igen kaste mig over madkulturen på dawiki. Måske også fotografere lidt igen... Det har været interessant, men jeg vil også bidrage på andre måder. Nillerdk (talk) 19:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

File:HP Hansen 12 Æltning i sælde.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Media needing category review in use at da.wikipedia

Hello, Nillerdk. You have new messages at Multichill's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hvad mon der står i din standardtilladelse?

Står der 2.5 i din standardtilladelse? Hvis ja synes jeg du skal rette til 3.0. --MGA73 (talk) 17:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Det ville jeg meget gerne. Men licensteksten findes ikke på dansk... Det betyder ikke ikke så meget for 2.5 tillader brug af en senere udgave af licensen. Synes du alligevel jeg skal ændre, selvom det ville være mindre "kundevenligt"? Jeg bruger altid [6] som udgangspunkt. Jeg bruger min egen, da den "officielt anbefalede" er skrevet kompliceret og har nogle uheldige fortolkninger af licensen. Kommentarer er meget velkomne. Nillerdk (talk) 19:36, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hvorfor er det mindre kundevenligt at rette 2.5 til 3.0? Nå men pyt nu med det. Mig bekendt er det ikke forbudt at rette fejl og mangler i standardskabelonerne. Tværtimod. :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeg retter ikke 2.5->3.0 fordi licensteksten ikke findes på dansk og det kan vi ikke byde vores bidragsydere. Jeg vil gerne rette i standardskabelonerne, men jeg har ikke haft lyst til at tage diskussionen op endnu. Hov, nu har jeg alligevel rettet en vigtig fejl (se ændringen [7] og forklaringen [8]). Nillerdk (talk) 07:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Hm. Har vi ikke en 3.0 på dansk? Synes jeg ellers at vi havde. Nå men det må jeg lige lede efter en dag. --MGA73 (talk) 19:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Kender du denne maler?

Dette billede er blevet flyttet til commons (File:PTP Strandgade - Asiatisk Kompagnis Bygning.jpg) men trænger til en oprydning. Kender du maleren så der kan komme en rigtig maleri-skabelon på med teknik og maler osv.? --MGA73 (talk) 18:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeg har lavet en Creator med informationer fra Den Store Danske, det er da en start. Gider du kaste et blik på [9] (jeg troede "vi" var enige om at bevidst lyssætning på fotografier var nok til at gøre dem til værker). Nillerdk (talk) 21:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeg kigger lige. Jeg har i øvrigt givet Christian et par tips om hvad man bør være obs på når man flytter til Commons. Han vil også gerne have denne over da:Fil:Region_hovedstaden_logo.png og jeg er enig i, at logoet er ret simpelt. --MGA73 (talk) 21:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Måske har vi været lidt for hårde. Kunne da være rart hvis der er nogle eksempler andre steder fra, som vi kan bruge. OL-billedet er ikke det bedste bevis desværre. --MGA73 (talk) 21:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Willie debuxo.JPG

Hi, Nillerdk. Well, the info I can provide is that the picture is taken in the interior of a bar in NY. It is a painting in a wall. That's all I can say. I hope it will be enough to keep the image, otherwise I guess there is no other solution than erasing it. --Atobar (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Billeder på en mur

Hej Nils!

Du har nogle vægmalerier på din obsliste bl.a. med begrundelsen "Freedom of panorama would only cover if the painting is permanently located, which is not the case.". Afhænger det ikke af hvad man forstår ved permanent? Billedet kan jo ikke fjernes uden at gå i stykker men det holder selvfølgelig ikke 100 mio. år. Men hvad gør det?

Har du nogle gode links til tidligere "afgørelser" på det område? Ellers kunne vi måske sætte dem på som almindeligt sletteforslag. --MGA73 (talk) 07:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Uh, jeg tror min begrundelse var lidt tynd for malerierne ser da ud til at være permanente eller halv-permanente. Nu har jeg tilføjet en ny begrundelse, der burde være klar. Nillerdk (talk) 07:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Det ser fint ud nu. Kan se at der er kommenteret på et af billederne, så hvis vi nu venter et par dage med at slette, så har folk en chance for at ændre til DR eller kommentere hvis de har noget nyt at tilføje. --MGA73 (talk) 10:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Så er de slettet (sammen med lidt andre). Hvis du får lyst må du da gerne rydde op på listen - evt. sætte dem, der kan slettes neders. Du har fx et logo uden nogen skabelon på og du har flere hvor der tales om OTRS. --MGA73 (talk) 09:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Fint! Jeg har ryddet lidt op nu og tilfoejet de fleste filer fra Cat:Files needing another check by Nillerdk. Spoergsmaal: Har du modtaget nogen tilladelse fra Stine Honoré, Danfoss Universe (maaske den 30.6 eller senere)? Jeg har vaeret i kontakt med hende og hun var parat til at tillade en stoerre samling fotografier, maaske ogsaa File:Mads_Clausen_kontor.jpg. Nillerdk (talk) 11:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Kan ikke lige huske navnet, men du kan se he da:Diskussion:Danfoss Universe. Hvis der er en passende side eller kategori her på commons, så bør tilladelsen også nævnes her. --MGA73 (talk) 11:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

PD-art

Lidt i forlængelse af en tidligere snak om PD-art, så tror jeg denne kan interessere dig hvis du ikke allerede har set den: Commons:Village_pump#Legal_threat_from_National_Portrait_Gallery --MGA73 (talk) 21:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

He he

Tjek lige denne... [10] :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Was denn (-; Mener du kategorien "Borre"? Den har jeg rettet nu. Jeg er heller ikke sikker paa, at det er PD i USA (vi ved ikke hvem, der har taget fotoet og jeg formoder, at fotoet ikke er blevet offentliggjort udenfor USA), men jeg gider ikke indstille den til sletning. mvh Nillerdk (talk) 08:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Nemlig - stødte på kategorien fordi vi har en kategori med samme navn på dawiki. :-) --MGA73 (talk) 09:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Se evt: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gammeldansk.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 14:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

ImageAnnotator and Opera 9.64

Indeed, I just found an error in a support library. That error was a simple typo introduced a while back, so it's nothing mission critical. Just hyper-annoying that I forgot to re-test it on all browsers after that change, which I had made for MediaWiki:Gadget-ChooseResolution.js. Anyway, if you reload your browser's cache, it should work (again!) now on Opera. Lupo 15:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Ved mårup kirke.jpg may be deleted

Ved mårup kirke.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("Ved mårup kirke.jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

HersfoldOTRSBot^{(talk/opt out)} 23:38, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

The photo is from the same source as around 20 others whith OTRS-permission. This one was intented to be covered in the same way as the others. As I don't have OTRS access, I can't verify if it was forgotten in the permission text by the copyright holder OR if it was forgotten by MGA73 as he processed the permission. I have inserted the link to the relevant permission now. Nillerdk (talk) 07:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hej Niller! Jeg var jo nød til at tjekke. Filen er ikke nævnt på listen. --MGA73 (talk) 13:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

{{Autotranslate}} BotMultichillT 21:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Domus vista 3.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Licensing tutorial da.svg was uncategorized on 7 November 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done Nillerdk (talk) 05:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:Christoph Münch Creative Commons photos

The link http://www.dresden.de/dmg/de/pressedienst/fotografien/freie_fotos.php is broken. Best, --ThT (talk) 00:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Danke für deinen Hinweis! Ich werde sofort die Vorlage ändern. Die neue Adresse ist http://www.dresden.de/de/02/070/dmg/pressedienst/fotografien/freie_fotos.php. Grüße Nillerdk (talk) 06:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hurra!

Tillykke :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Taak. Indtil videre er det "kun" på tysk (og af en eller anden grund også en række sprog, som jeg ikke behersker - slovakisk, italiensk ... - hvorfor har jeg dog fået adgang til de køer?). Nillerdk (talk) 09:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Hæhæ. Jeg synes du skal takke for adgangen og sige at du ikke taler slovakisk osv. men dansk og engelsk og ?. Så tror jeg du får adgang til minimum engelsk (Commons). Jeg er ikke sikker på, at du ikke får adgang til info-da uden at søge specifikt om det, for den er jo ikke beregnet til tilladelser, og de vil måske gerne sikre sig, at du og de andre der har adgang kan sammen. Er det en "stor konto" så betyder det derimod ikke så meget. --MGA73 (talk) 10:29, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Joachim_Gauck_IGFM_01.jpg

I've restored the file and added the appropriate license. Remember to change OTRS received to PermissionOTRS when you close it off (I'd have done so myself, but it is your ticket).--Nilfanion (talk) 10:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC) And done for File:Ivo Lollobrigida sw.jpg too.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hvordan går det?

Hej Nillerdk! Jeg har haft travlt med 14 mio. ting så har ikke fået fulgt med her. Hvordan står det til? Dejligt vi fik ryddet op på dawiki. Så mangler vi bare alle de andre wikier og Commons :-D --MGA73 (talk) 18:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Commons som flersproget projekt

Kære Erik! Commons er et flersproget projekt, hvor intet sprog bør have en mere eller mindre fremtrædende position end andre. Af tekniske årsager er det desværre ikke muligt at skabe et internationalt sammenhængende kategorisystem, hvor flere end ét sprog anvendes til selve kategorinavnene. Af praktiske årsager skal alle kategorier derfor have engelske navne. Der er nogle undtagelser. Egennavne skal ikke oversættes med mindre der er en bredt kendt eller officiel oversættelse. På kategoribeskrivelsessiden skal der derimod være så mange oversættelser som muligt......

Et svar

Jeg har naturligvis også bidt mærke i udsagnet om Commons, som et flersproget projekt. Påstanden om at kategorinavne skal være på engelsk, har jeg imidlertid ikke mødt før.

Jeg har flere gange oplevet at andre personer har slettet mine fremlagte filer, men den påstand, at de ledsagende oplysninger om proveniens var mangelfulde. Det var ikke sandt, idet alle de nødvendige kendsgerninger var vedføjet – på dansk.

Jeg mener at fremlæggelsen af mediefiler på Commons, i forvejen er en besværlig affære, så alle lettelser vil være velsete, mens flere hindringer vil afholde mange brugere fra at bidrage til samlingen. Den sproglige barriere skal ikke hæves, men sænkes. Du foreslår at megalitgrave vil være en bedre betegnelse for det, som jeg kalder oldtidsgrave. Megalit er græsk, og betyder stor sten, hvilket du vel ved. Ca. halvdelen af de grave, jeg er i færd med at beskrive, indeholder ikke så meget som én sten. Der er tale om mange typer fra bondestenalderens kolossale langdysser, over runddysser og jættestuer til mere beskedne jordhøje fra bronzealderen.

Kategorisystemet er en glimrende hierakisk struktur, men man kan indimellem miste overblikket. Det lader sig jo reparere. Jeg har selv flere gange ændret kategorier for mange billeder fra en overordnet til en mere speciel kategori. ”Nystedegnens oldtidsgrave” burde selvfølgelig stå i ”Guldborgsund Kommune”, ”Lolland”, ”History of Lolland and Falster” og måske andre kategorier. Der eksisterede i forvejen en kategori, som hedder ”Dolmens in Denmark”, som jeg har brugt. Den finder man via ”Denmark” og ”History of Denmark”. Det burde vel være godt nok for folk, der ikke læser dansk. Selv den er dog utilstrækkelig, fordi dolmen betyder ”dysse”, og altså i virkeligheden kun burde rumme egentlige lang- og runddysser. ”Tombs from the stone- and bronzeages in the former Nysted Municipality”, er måske den rette kategori.

En ting er at gebærde sig på overfladen af et fremmed sprog, læse det og fatte meningen. En anden ting er at beskrive specielle fænomener, uden at forfalde til misforståelser og mangelfulde sætninger.

En lille anekdote: I dagens udgave af avisen ”Politiken” findes en annonce for en filmpremiere. Næsten hele teksten er på engelsk, men filmens titel er på spansk: ”Sin nombre”, og hvorfor ikke. Spansk er jo et sprog på fremmarch i USA, så i fremtiden skal kategorier i Commons vel være på spansk?

--Erik Damskier (talk) 11:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Hvis dine filer bliver slettet eller markeret med "et eller andet mangler" så giv mig et tip, så ser jeg på det. Mht. kategorier, så kan vi ikke have alle navnene på en gang. Der er det vigtigste, at der er en passende beskrivelse i indledningen, så man kan søge på fx København, Copenhage eller Købinihavnisilimut eller hvad navnet nu er på det pågældende sprog. --MGA73 (talk) 13:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Kære Erik! Vi bliver desværre nødt til at leve med engelske kategorinavne (læs mere om navngivning her: [11]). Når det er sagt, så er anvendelse af danske kategorinavne langt bedre end ingen kategorier.

Dit store og seriøse arbejde med beskrivelse og dokumentering af Nystedegnen er prisværdigt. Dit publikum er dog næppe hovedsageligt folk fra Nystedegnen endsige dansktalende. F.eks. vil oldtidsgravene have interesse af alle i hele verden, der studerer den nordiske oldtid. Det kan være tyskere (som i mindre grad end danskere behersker engelsk) eller amerikanere eller andre nationaliteter. Langt de færreste vil forstå dansk og vi kan ikke forvente, at de lærer det.

Jeg har ikke forstand på oldtidsgrave. Hvad med Category:Tumuli in the former Nysted Kommune til gravhøje (ental: tumulus) uden stendysse og Category:Megalith graves in the former Nysted Kommune hvor der er store sten? Bemærk at vi skriver Nysted Kommune fordi det drejer sig om et egennavn og fordi Nysted Municipality vist nok (?) ikke eksisterede som officiel betegnelse.

Husk at du stadig har mulighed for at uploade på den danske Wikipedia. Nogle af os vil så overføre filerne, men da vi ikke er fageksperter kan det førre til dårligt resultat. Fortsæt derfor endelig på Commons; spørg mig eller Bruger:MGA73 hvis du kommer i tvivl om noget. Nillerdk (talk) 15:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Some of categories "by alphabet"

Category discussion notification

Some of categories "by alphabet" 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!

--ŠJů (talk) 08:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Files you uploaded may be deleted

The files listed below, which you uploaded, have been tagged {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the OTRS team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the OTRS team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to "permissions-commonswikimedia.org" now. Please quote the file name in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. Please note that this message is being left by an automated bot, whose operator is not an OTRS volunteer. Thanks for your time! Please help translate this message! HersfoldOTRSBot^{(talk/opt out)} 09:25, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

• File:Fish and chips2 Johannes Jansson.jpg

Files still awaiting OTRS confirmation

Hello, Nillerdk. The file(s) listed below have been marked with {{OTRS received}}, but there has been no complete confirmation of its permission status in the last 30 days. From what I'm able to tell, you were the person who added this template. Would you mind taking a look at this again? If confirmation cannot be found, this file should probably be marked for deletion. This should be the only notification you will receive regarding this image, so long as the comment I added to the image description page is not altered. Thanks! HersfoldOTRSBot^{(talk/opt out)} 09:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

If you are not an OTRS volunteer or did not add the "received" template to this file, it's possible I made a mistake identifying the correct user. I look for the most recent diff where the template was added, so if you reverted an edit where this template was removed, I can't tell the difference. If this is the case, please let my operator know at w:en:User talk:Hersfold. Sorry for the inconvenience!

The file(s) in question are:

• File:Heft 5 neu 01.jpg
• File:Monika Eigensperger.jpg
• File:Albatrellus Cristatus by Ditte Bandini.jpg
• File:Best daytime PV Dubai image.png
• File:Palazzo Versace Dubai - Indicative Interior.png
• File:Palazzo Versace Dubai - Indicative Interior2.png
• File:Aquabike.jpg

Thank you for the notice. I have contacted all the copyright owners once again. If they don't answer soon, the photos should be deleted. Nillerdk (talk) 09:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Food!

See Category:Images of food by Cyclonebill to check :-) Multichill (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Files moved from da.wikipedia to Commons requiring review

Så virker min bot igen og jeg har flyttet og tjekket en masse. Der er et par enkelte filer tilbage, som bør tjekkes en ekstra gang. Får du tid og lyst er du velkommen til at kigge på dem. Og ellers kan de bare vente til jeg kommer forbi igen :-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Aquabike.jpg

This file is tagged as OTRS received for now four months. There is, since 13 December, no activity on the OTRS-ticket. Can you please either follow up with the ticket or, if you do not expect, that permission will be received, request it for deletion using {{speedy|No permission received}}. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 10:54, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, I've taken care of it. I hardly think we'll receive anything. Nillerdk (talk) 11:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Nillerdk. You have new messages at Sevela.p's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Sevela.p 16:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote on my RfCU

I would like to thank you for taking the time to review my request for checkuser rights. I hope one more CU will make a difference, at least for the other CUs' workload! Regards, --Eusebius (talk) 16:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Pred/Bright_Eyes_permission

Hi,

I just read your addition to this permission and wondered if you have sent that mail to the OTRS-team too? -- Cecil (talk) 20:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Terve Cecil! Ich glaube nicht, dass OTRS die Mail hat, aber ich kann sie jetzt weiterleiten. Wohin am besten? permissions-commons? Nillerdk (talk) 07:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Ja, wäre dort am besten aufgehoben. Weißt du zufällig, ob es zu den momentan noch vorhandenen Bildern, die diese Erlaubnis einbinden, andere Tickets gibt, weil die Lizenz wurde ja durch die Antwort auf deine Anfrage eigentlich für nichtig erklärt. -- Cecil (talk) 07:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Ich habe die Mail weitergeleitet, siehe [12]. Zu meinem besten Wissen sind nur die Fotos von Matthias 'mattness' Bauer in Ordnung (es gibt ein Ticket von ihm mit gültiger Freigabe). So war auch die Konklusion auf der Löschdiskussion auf dawiki [13]. Die restlichen Fotos (siehe z.B. [14]) müssen eigentlich gelöscht werden. Grüße Nillerdk (talk) 08:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Ja, das war die Löschdiskussion, die mich etwas irritiert hat. Sie ist alt und scheint bereits archiviert zu sein. Aber ich werd da dann einfach mal. Auch wärs wohl besser, bei den mattness-Bildern den Link auf preds permission durch den OTRS-Baustein zu ersetzen. Weißt du zufällig die Nummer? -- Cecil (talk) 09:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, hab die Nummer beim Gossow-Foto gerade gesehen. Werd ich dann mal in den anderen auch einbauen. Danke. -- Cecil (talk) 09:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Working Man's Barnstar

I award you the Working Man's Barnstar for your non-stop work to cleanup and organize images on Commons. Tak for hjælpen! --MGA73 (talk) 15:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Tak og selv tak! Nillerdk (talk) 14:22, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Public domain cartoons

Thanks for the advice, you are right, I should be more explicit. --Coentor (talk) 16:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:Bicycle road signs, Category:End of bikeway signs

Category discussion notification

Category:Bicycle road signs, Category:End of bikeway signs have been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which they 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!

--ŠJů (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Adminship

Thanks for voting--DieBuche (talk) 16:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hej! Du er nu godkendt som reviewer per Commons_talk:Flickr_images/reviewers/archive_8#User:Nillerdk. Det har taget lidt lang tid - nok fordi du ikke spurgte på Flick-siden. Tror ikke så mange kigger på Picasa-siden. Du kan reviewe Flickr, Picasa, Panoramio og hvis du finder noget andet, det er muligt at reviewe, så går det nok også an :-) --MGA73 (talk) 08:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Tak fordi du fulgte op. Jeg kan godt nok ikke huske, at jeg har ansøgt til Flickr-reviewer, men ja kunne måske få brug for det. Nillerdk (talk) 10:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Der er nu oprettet en brugergruppe til Image-reviewers så nu er du med på den gruppe - du fik lige File-mover også se selv. --MGA73 (talk) 17:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for correcting the archive link. It might have taken months for me to notice my error. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Canned beverages

Category discussion notification

Category:Canned beverages 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!

--Themightyquill (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

File:DresdenPopulationHistory.svg

File:DresdenPopulationHistory.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Demmo (talk) 18:57, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Watermarks

I see that you have uploaded a lot of pictures to Wikimedia Commons. But I see that most of them have a time-stamp on them or your name. The usage of watermarks is strongly discouraged on Commons as other ways exist to keep track of credits. Please remove the watermarks on your pictures and refrain from uploading any pictures with annotations on it on Wikimedia Commons. A watermark template will be added under the pictures concerned.Citypeek (talk) 09:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I found your message on User:Nillerdk/gallery for some reason. To answer your comment: 1) I'm not sure what photos with watermarks you are talking about? Could you please give an example? 2) Is it your personal recommendation to refrain from uploading pictures with any annotations or is it based on consensus? 3) I've never added a watermark to own work. Nillerdk (talk) 19:37, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

In your gallery page. I take a few:

[15]

[16]

[17]

So, everything written on the pic: date, name, place, description of what the picture is about etc. should not be in the pictures (and also the information automatically added by your camera should not be there). It will get the watermark template. Read about it on this page: [18]

" English: These images contain digital watermarks or credits in the image itself. The images in this category should be adapted by removing the watermark. The usage of watermarks is strongly discouraged on Commons as other ways exist to keep track of credits. If a non-watermarked version of the image is available, please upload it under the same file name, and then remove the warning template.

If the removal of the watermark has consequences for image quality (for example, a large portion of the image has had to be cropped away to get rid of the mark or it is part of a historical document), then some projects may wish to continue using the old, watermarked version. In the event of the old version being useful, please upload the new version under a slightly different title so that both can be used. After uploading the non-watermarked version, replace the warning template with, replacing the name in italics with the file name in question. Images can be added to this category by placing the watermark template on the image description page." Citypeek (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

These are not my photos. The author is Keld Gydum and he initially made the photos for personal use without wiki-use in mind. I just uploaded them, because I found several of them useful (despite of watermarks). In your quote there is nothing about refraining from uploading useful pictures with watermarks. Thank you for removing watermarks. You may want to start checking the files in use for watermarks, for example with this link [19]. The other watermarks can be removed when needed. Nillerdk (talk) 09:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, it becomes more clear to me. And if you have any spare time on your hands, why don't you give it a try yourself? There are more or less 10.000 pictures on wikimedia commons that need that kind of removal of watermarks;). Regards, Citypeek (talk) 13:39, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Friedrich_Wilhelm,_Duke_of_Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg

Friedrich Wilhelm, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg 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!

Schwäbin (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:UK National Cycle Network National Route 5

Category:UK National Cycle Network National Route 5 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!

--Schnee (talk) 11:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Porten ved Nilfisk 1961.jpg

Hej Nillerdk, Ved du om File:Porten ved Nilfisk 1961.jpg evt. har været udgivet før 1. marts 1989. danskebilleder.dk har ikke meget information om det, ud over at det har billednummer 1983/704 (hvorfor det jo sandsynligvis er indgået i deres samling på dette tidspunkt). Hvis det kommer fra en privat billedsamling og det ikke har været udgivet før 1. marts 1989 skal det desværre slettes :( (se Commons:Hirtle chart og Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hammel Sygehus 1960.jpg). --heb [T C E] 12:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Desværre ved jeg ikke mere. Nillerdk (talk) 08:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Porten ved Nilfisk 1961.jpg

File:Porten ved Nilfisk 1961.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!

heb [T C E] 07:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

== file:Evanthore Vestergaard F.jpg Hello Nillerdk, I did delete the image as requested.

Best regards --Neozoon (talk) 21:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

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

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

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) 19:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

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

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Nillerdk,

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:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. 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) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Syrnede mælkeprodukter skrå synsvinkel.jpg

File:Syrnede mælkeprodukter skrå synsvinkel.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!

🎂CAKE🎂 09:39, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Ymer 1000ml.jpg

File:Ymer 1000ml.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!

🎂CAKE🎂 09:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen

Category:Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen 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. 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!

Dodi 8238 (talk) 11:05, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Hallo::::::::

In Ihrem Foto sind Bohnen auf Sauer, aber im Fototitel schreiben Sie eine Linse. File:Čočka na kyselo uzené maso, okurka.jpg. Bitte korrigieren Sie den Namen. Vielen Dank,pohled 111. Pohled 111, talk ? ::::::::::::::::::--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:05, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

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!

Affected:

• File:Matador spillebræt paa dansk.jpg

Yours sincerely,   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 03:55, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Category:Folk_dance_by_country

Folk dance by country 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!

E4024 (talk) 23:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Serving_food

Serving food 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!

SpiderMum (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)