User talk:Olgerts V

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Olgerts V!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 04:29, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:

And also:

Regards, kyykaarme (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey

[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 01:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Category:Ruins_of_Сoastal_battery_C 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!


Estopedist1 (talk) 14:27, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Balvu iela - TV tornis (1).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:02, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:KpvShareLogo.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:KpvShareLogo.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 23:27, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Водоразборные колонки

[edit]

Коллега, здравствуйте. Насколько я помню, "standpipes" — это стояки (вертикально проложенные магистральные трубопроводы). Водоразборные колонки закинуты коллегой Екатерина Борисова в категорию "Village pumps" по аналогии с мировыми категориями. Красный wanna talk? 13:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Красный: , добрый день! Хотя более общий перевод "standpipe" — это действительно "стояк", но именно этот же термин используется и для обозначения водоразборных колонок, являющихся частным случаем "стояка" с запорным краном. "Village pump" — это, как несложно понять, насос (помпа). Хотя эти устройства и похожи по форме и назначению, их главное отличие, на мой взгляд, именно в том, является ли данное водоразборное устройство ручным насосом, непосредственно добывающим воду (которые приведены в категориях по другим странам, хотя и не без ошибок), — или же подключено к водопроводу и является лишь краном на стояке. Если Вы согласны с доводом насчёт насоса, давайте сообща перенесём и переименуем российские региональные категории в "Standpipe". — Olgerts V (talk) 14:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Вообще типовая конструкция подобных колонок подразумевает не подключение к водопроводу, а установку электрического погружного насоса в скважине, активируемого нажатием рычага, либо (классическая советская колонка) гидравлического цилиндра, вытесняющего уже накопившуюся в скважине воду порциями по 5-10 литров. По моему мнению, это всё же частный случай деревенской помпы (где-то, кстати, сохраняются и старые версии с большим рычагом). Подключаемых к водопроводу колонок у нас в стране крайне немного, для этого чаще используют краны, т.к. они требуют меньшего усилия для открытия тока воды, имеющиеся же чаще всего остались от скважинных схем. Красный wanna talk? 14:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Красный: Можете ли Вы показать, для примера, несколько изображений из числа российских "Village pump", которые, на Ваш взгляд, действительно являются насосами? Каков, на Ваш взгляд, удельный вес колонок-насосов в категории "Village pumps in Russia", в её нынешнем виде?
Могу с уверенностью сказать, что приведённые колонки в Брянской области, откуда происходим мы с Екатериной Борисовой, подключены к городскому водопроводу и не имеют никакого отношения к сельским ручным насосам или описанной Вами "порционной" схеме. — Olgerts V (talk) 14:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Коллега, Екатерина, к слову, к Брянской области отношения не имеет, проживает в Петербурге и сейчас не участвует в нашей полемике, так как уехала в область по делам, насколько я знаю. По делу, как минимум та колонка, из-за которой я пришёл в статью, имеет конструкцию с погружным электрическим насосом, эта конструкция является превалирующей как минимум, в сельской местности Северо-запада России и, подозреваю, вообще в сельской местности РФ и сопредельных как минимум в силу отсутствия внятной системы центрального водоснабжения. Там, где имеются водонапорные башни, кстати, они питают только системы домашних/садовых водопроводов и функционируют только в тёплое время года (ибо водопроводы проложены по поверхности без какой-либо термоизоляции), в то время как колонки часто действуют круглогодично. Готов предположить, что колонки в Брянске и Севске были переделаны для подключения водопровода (я вижу подваренные трубы, да), но подозреваю, что категория standpipes в данной ситуации должна дублировать, а не заменять village pumps. Вероятно, стоит добавить к насосам defunct, но я не уверен. Красный wanna talk? 14:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Красный: Приношу извинения, если обознался насчёт Екатерины (был знаком с её сверстницей и полной тёзкой, тоже очень творческой личностью). Готов признать также, что Вы лучше меня знаете принцип устройства конкретной колонки в ЛО. И всё же Вы неправы, относя к категории насосов те колонки (по Брянской области в частности, да и по всем прочим городам, скорее всего), которые таковыми не являются. Это однозначно "standpipe" и только. Если Вы считаете, что было бы целесообразно собрать полную коллекцию колонок, централизованных и автономных, по регионам России где-то в едином месте, — на мой взгляд, "standpipe" более подходит для этой цели. В конце концов, основу "village pump" также составляет стояк (standpipe). — С уважением, Olgerts V (talk) 15:44, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • На самом деле мои желания здесь сугубо утилитарны. В мировых категориях творится аналогичная путаница, только категория village pumps куда лучше проработана и содержит гораздо больше элементов. Если с чего-то и начинать перелопачивание этих двух категорий, то с разбора категорий мировых, потому как единообразие дерева категорий — один из столпов, на которых вообще стоит Викисклад, и борюсь я здесь не столько за формулировки, сколько за это самое единообразие. В идеале нам необходимо выработать совершенно новую категорию, объединяющую колонки водопроводные и насосно-скважинные (ну, хотя бы в силу визуального и конструкционного сходства) и толкаться уже от этого. Предлагаю дождаться Екатерину и попробовать выработать какое-то решение. Красный wanna talk? 16:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Коллеги, я крайне плохо разбираюсь в устройстве колонок. Могу лишь сказать, что подавляющее большинство колонок, с которыми мне доводилось иметь дело в сельской местности (не только в Ленобласти, но и в поездках по России), действовали по принципу насосов. То есть жмешь-жмешь ручку, причем неслабо так жмешь и несколько раз - начинает течь вода. Наружные устройства типа водопроводных кранов, из которых вода течет при откручивании вентиля, я видела только на кладбище (на Северном кладбище СПб, если точнее), и их, кстати. никто никогда не называл колонками. Собственно, именно поэтому устройство, которое сфотографировал @Красный: во время нашей совместной поездки по Ленобласти, я без колебаний поместила в категорию village pumps - ну то есть потому что это оно самое и есть, что ж еще. Однако при этом, видимо, стоит создать подкатегорию для устройств, которые функционируют иначе. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 18:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Как много букв! Между тем есть статья по предмету. Pansosh (talk) 18:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

[edit]

العربيَّة  Deutsch  español  English  français  português  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  русский  українська  বাংলা  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(中国大陆)‎  中文(台灣)‎  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/−


Hi Olgerts V, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

-- CptViraj (talk) 13:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Riga Secondary School No40.jpg

[edit]

Hello. This is photo of Riga’s school No23 in the past. If now the number of school is changed it doesn’t mean that I authorized anybody to change the name of my file. Request to change it back to the previous one as stated File:Riga Secondary School No23.jpg . АнИгМа (talk) 09:45, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello. Unless the filename isn't an object of copyright and it does not mean nothing essentially, I have performed you request. But usually filename should describe the image as it is at the moment of taking photo (and it was the School #40), please keep it in mind. You can write me in Russian. Good luck, — Olgerts V (talk) 11:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Trains at..

[edit]

Adding trains at categories is more usefull than adding platform categories. Most pictures are taken for the trains and the station infra is than incidential. Example of a big station with a lot of files and categories: Category:Leipzig Hauptbahnhof. Personaly I find it overcategorised. One should only do it if a category becomes to big.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Перенаправления

[edit]

Приветствую! Прошу при переименовании категорий оставлять перенаправления (Category:Karaeva St., 4 (Eupatoria)Category:Karaeva Street, 4 (Eupatoria)). Заранее благодарю и спасибо Вам за помощь в категоризации фото Евпатории. --Mitte27 (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Streets named after cities of Latvia 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) 08:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Значок "Жигуги" (1)..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!

Омарова 21 (talk) 08:59, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Slēpotāju iela (2).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!

Kurator 23 (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 05:04, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:3 karogi (2).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 16:11, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:ABLV building (1).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 11:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:ABLV building (2).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 11:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:ABLV building (3).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 11:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Rīgas pils laukums no Citadeles puses 1860.jpeg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Rīgas pils laukums no Citadeles puses 1860.jpeg. 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) 13:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 05:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given

[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

A1Cafel (talk) 05:57, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 04:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zasulauka gliemezis.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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mežaparks 1901.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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:47, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Skulptūra Ūdenszirgs (3).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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Skulptūra Ūdenszirgs (2).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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Skulptūra Ūdenszirgs (1).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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zelta kakis.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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edgaram Siliņam.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!

KazyKazyKazakhstan (talk) 00:54, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Viesturdārzs - pīles.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 16:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jaunība (1).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jaunība (2).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Белая Берёзка, Никольский храм.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Белая Берёзка, Никольский храм.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) 16:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the file, it is someone else's file, mistakenly was downloaded believing it was mine. Olgerts V (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Krd 16:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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:


Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

[edit]
2022 Picture of the Year: Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) and Gadwall (Mareca strepera) in Nepal.

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2023 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighteenth 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 (2023) 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 are all 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.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2022 Picture of the Year contest.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

[edit]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) 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.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.


Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Перемещение категорий

[edit]

Коллега, я смотрю, вы категорию Abandoned buildings in Latvia с отдельных снимков Балдонского санатория переместили в саму Category:Baldone sanatorium. Меня тут смущает что: окей, вы не верите, что его когда-нибудь восстановят, но ведь был же этот санаторий некогда и не заброшенным - и вот придёт завтра кто-нибудь из отдыхавших там в былые времена со своими снимками живого и здорового санатория, а попадут они всё равно в категорию для заброшек. Т.е., на мой вкус, заброшенность и т. п. - это свойства того, что изображено на данном снимке, но не здания в целом (и, следовательно, не отведенной ему категории). Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:30, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Коллега, добрый день! По Вашему совету реорганизовал категорию, создав Category:Abandoned buildings in Baldone sanatorium. Я бы тоже очень хотел увидеть снимки "живого" санатория, да и надежда на восстановление не потеряна окончательно... Хотя на примере Юрмалы мы видим, что судьба запустевших санаториев однотипна и печальна. — С уважением, Olgerts V (talk) 05:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]