User talk:Werckmeister
Hi! welcome to the Wikimedia Commons!
Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikimedia. Here are some links that you might find useful:
- Try the First steps Tutorial.
- To sign your posts talk pages, pages etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
- For commonly asked questions, take a look here.
- You can get help at the Help Desk
- Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikimedia: Licensing of images and copyright tags, Categories, Deletion guidelines, software, etc.
- Please do not forget to always state the source of the images that you will be uploading.
I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikimedia. If you have any further questions, feel free to drop a note on my talk page or any other administrator.
Enjoy!
Gryffindor 01:10, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
your message
[edit]hello Werckmeister, you're welcome. I keep busy trying to sort out the pictures of Vienna into the different categories, so far what I have seen you are doing good work. I normally go by the format "X, Vienna". In case of a building having the same name but being in Vienna, I go by the place or square where they are. For example "Palmenhaus (Schönbrunn)" and "Palmenhaus (Burggarten)", however it's "Burggarten, Vienna", because I think there is another one in Innsbruck or Prague? Not too sure... About the changing of categories, I wish I knew if there is a quicker way to change them, not too sure though, I would have to ask around. The reason why I used "Regierungsgebäude, Vienna" is because apparently the building is most commonly known as that? And I think there are multiple ministries inside it, isn't it? Gryffindor 22:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- I am not too thrilled with the name "Regierungsgebäude" myself, considering isn't every governmental building a Regierungsgebäude? However AFAIK only this specific building, the former k.u.k. Kriegsministerium is always called that. I am open for suggestions of course. With the naming scheme of categories, with government buildings it is indeed difficult. I looked up Category:Government of the United States and Category:Buildings in Washington, D.C. to help us orientate, since those two categories are the only ones I could find that have substantial listings, the German ones couldn't help me really. Take a look at those two categories and let me know what you think. Our added problem is that we are using both German and English at the same time, whereas the American government building simply use only English obviously. So for "Bundesministerium für Justiz" we could say "Austrian Ministry of Justice", what do you think? Or should we try to keep the German names? So maybe use "Bundesministerium für Justiz (Austria)" instead of a comma, just like Parliament (Austria)? Maybe that would be a bit more elegant looking. You raised a good point though, again I am open for suggestions. With the double articles, simply merge the articles or create a redirect, you don't need a sysop for that. My job is more to delete images, fight vandals, block users, etc. but simple tasks any user can do that. Gryffindor 10:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- There is no official language and no official policy unlike the Wikipedias IMO. At the moment I work with English, not because I dislike German, but because most users will probably understand that. There are many who visit Vienna and Austria and want to contribute their images, putting everything into German might unnecessarily overcomplicate things. Plus, if you are familiar with English, you probably know what "Wiener" means, so it's kinda embarassing , that's also why I prefer using "Vienna" instead. To me the most important thing is that users can navigate through everything as easily as possible. The Warszawa article indeed is impressive, however as opposed to many German users on the Commons, I don't work with articles, I only use categories. If someone wants to put things into an article later, that's fine with me, however the base should be categories first, because things can always change and articles could also be deleted easily by vandals for example, so it's always best to have a back-up. Let's do this: for buildings, streets, etc. in Vienna (and other Austrian cities), we use a comma. So it's "x, Vienna" or "X, Salzburg". If there are multiple buildings with the same name in the same place, we use "X ([Name of Bezirk or area])", such as we have been doing with the Vienna Palais so far. If something is in the country, such as a government building, let's have it "X (Austria)". The government buildings are in German. If something is completely unique only to Austria, such as Category:Schloss Schönbrunn, obviously no comma with Vienna needs to be used, there is no chance of a mistaken identity. Let's see how the thing goes, and if something comes up again, we can always change it later, but to me this sounds like the most sensible solution at the moment, what do you think? Gryffindor 18:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- The usage of the comma is based on how the English Wikipedia does it. I know that the German Wikipedia uses brackets, I just think that a mixed use could maybe reflect the differences better, meaning commas for cities, but brackets for areas for example. I think maybe we should try to propose a policy in one of the talk forums to get some feedback, this could help shed some light. Proposals can be made by anyone. Gryffindor 22:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well I wouldn't say it goes totally against the naming convention, see for exampe Category:Vienna Jugendstil. A category called "Stadtpark statues, Vienna" would sound a bit odd I think... how else is your work going? Gryffindor 12:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Cheer for creating the category Category:Stadtpark statues. However since there are multiple Stadtparks all over, maybe it would be better to be more specific in order to avoid future confusion and name the cat. "Vienna Stadtpark statues" for example? Gryffindor 16:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Hallo Werckmeister,
die Gründe, weshalb ich das geändert hatte, waren vor allem zweierlei:
1. fand ich die vielen Flaggen Deutschlands ausgerechnet bei Wien eher deplatziert. Ich weiß schon, dass sie hier für die Sprache standen, nicht für das Land. Trotzdem ist Deutsch aber nicht nur als Sprache Deutschlands definiert.
2. In den Bildunterschriften fand ich die vielen kleinen Flaggen störend. Es war sehr bunt ("Klickibunti", wie man so sagt), aber kein Informationsgewinn. Das Augenmerk sollte dort mMn eher auf den Bildern und Fotos liegen, nicht auf Icons.
Ich hoffe meine Beweggründe sind halbwegs nachvollziehbar. lg, Tsui 18:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Austrian flag for Austrian-related images
[edit]Hello Werckmeister, could you do me a favour? For example for the description page you use the German flag to give explanations in the German language. Could you please change them to the Austrian one instead? I have already done so in the image Image:Kursalon Stadtpark Wien4.jpg but I notice that you have done so in many, therefore i wanted to ask you first. In Austria normally the Austrian flag is used to show the language, the British flag for English, etc. etc. Gryffindor 18:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- sorry, I was watching the news about the elections... yes of course, sounds good. I really wanted to get more images of the Palais in the 3rd, 4th and 9th districts, there are many apparently, but I never find much time. And I always wait for good weather, which is difficult obviously. If you look at my images, you will see that I try to always have them with a lot of sun, I try to aim for the highest quality of light possible, no easy feat. Do you have any time to check those Palais out? That would just be awesome. I found this really amazing webpage, you probably know it http://www.burgen-austria.com/Adressverzeichnis.asp?sort=adresse, I mean this guy just has it all, absolutely amazing. My aim is to have images of all the Palais basically, which will take time, again I always wait for the sun which means time is pressing since fall is coming. I normally try to have a shot of the full building at various angles, and then some details of the facade such as the main gate, balconies, windows, etc. About the Austrian flag, yes please because we are using "Austrian" images and let's try to be sensitive about national sentiments. Any other pictures.... I think we are missing some more images of the Ringstraße, such as Börse (none as far as I know), more of Roßauer Kaserne, Staatsoper, also Arsenal, Spittelberg (with the sun), the ugly train stations Südbahnhof, FJB, Westbahnhof, etc. and I am trying to find more of historic images of those train stations, at the moment they have an exhibition in the Wien Museum on the Bahnhöfe. There is just too much, but probably the Palais is a good start, we are also missing interior images of those places, so far only the Palais Kinsky I got in. But again, I think we should have images with as much sun as possible, no point really in having images with the sky grey, or too dark or so, there is no rush. Thanks again for your help and cooperation, I really appreciate it. Gryffindor 20:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Vienna train stations
[edit]yes they really are unbelievably hideous, going through the exhibition in the Wien Museum I was getting in a really foul mood when I saw pictures of how they used to look like, they were like palaces, with huge Freitreppen, each one even had a kaiserliches Salon and Wartesaal which looked amazing, I just don't understand how anyone could destroy something so impressive, very sad. Thanks for your efforts, oh and yes I forgot we are missing images of more Jugendstil buildings, not just the famous ones, but just normal buildings, also pieces of art such as vases, glas, Wiener Werkstätte items, etc. but again this is a long-term project, could take years. Gryffindor 09:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Cheers for the cleanup. That is really weird, how did that public domain tag get in there? I used to do PD images, but now I use the GFDL and CC tag instead... AH ok I see now what happened. Yes, I am not sure which tag to use in this case because it is a picture of a picture, do you follow me? I took a picture myself, so it's GFDL and CC. But I took a picture of a picture that is in the public domain because of its age. Ok, so which tag do I use in that case, I don't even know it myself.... any ideas? Gryffindor 15:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, so I cut through the Gordian knot, I'll just leave the PD tag on and remove my own, hopefully that should solve it. Gryffindor 15:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent.... I think we'll take them all!-) Gryffindor 17:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- please say thank you from my part to Otto, that's really nice of him. Gryffindor 17:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, what a list. I was able to do just a little bit over the weekend since the weather was just amazing, but I had to take care of a friend who was visiting, so not many pictures there. I heard the weather should be fine the coming days... happy shooting :-) Gryffindor 17:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- The weather is just gorgeous at the moment, what an amazing fall. Unfortunately I work all day, so by the time I get out basically the sun is gone, which is particularly annoying obviously since I can only take pictures on the weekend. I took some of the Palais Lobkowitz (with lots of sun), which I hope to upload soon. How is it going on your end? Gryffindor 07:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, what a list. I was able to do just a little bit over the weekend since the weather was just amazing, but I had to take care of a friend who was visiting, so not many pictures there. I heard the weather should be fine the coming days... happy shooting :-) Gryffindor 17:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- please say thank you from my part to Otto, that's really nice of him. Gryffindor 17:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent.... I think we'll take them all!-) Gryffindor 17:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Please see some comments there about your suggestion. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 02:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
| Pay attention to copyright | Image:Picasso Nude Woman, Eremitage.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.
|
Lupo 07:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
renaming category
[edit]hello Werckmeister, how is it going? The weather is so nice right now, it's just amazing. Hope you get to take some good pictures? I have a side question, I was wondering now why is Vienna under the category "Vienna, Austria"? I mean Paris is not listed as "Paris, France", or "London, UK" or "Berlin, Germany"? Shouldn't we rename that category simply into "Vienna"? Gryffindor 09:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Gryffindor, I have a few days off from work and I'm not in Vienna, so no taking pictures atm ;)
- hmm, I don't think I'm the right person to talk to about naming categories, because I'm still getting confused myself why things are named the way they are ;) The problem with Commons is, that there aren't any guidelines about naming categories/pictures. So everyone is doing what he thinks is right, or he thinks looks better ;)
- What is kinda strange is, that I know that the germans renamed all there cities to match the 'XX, Germany' Syntax (look at Category:München, Category:Köln), Berlin seems to be the only exception here, maybe because it's the capital?
- In the case of Vienna, it looks like there was already a category Category:Vienna, which at some point got merged with 'Category:Vienna, Austria' (see the history), my guess is that 'Vienna, Austria' only made it over 'Vienna' because of some users preference to the first..
- I will make a post on the forum about naming categories if I find some time. Personally I think 'Category:Vienna' looks better than 'Category:Vienna, Austria', but I'm not sure if apart from that it really makes that much of a difference. I mean if you search for Vienna the right category still should turn up.. --Werckmeister 16:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- hmm, look at Category talk:Vienna, Austria and Commons:Village_pump_archive-17#Article_or_category.3F, there was (some) talk about this subject.
- It also looks like that 'Luxembourg, Luxembourg', 'Tbilisi, Georgia', 'La Paz, Bolivia' and 'Vienna, Austria' are the only capitals with country extension (see Category:Capitals). --Werckmeister 16:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- Enjoy your stay wherever you are. Yes, I know about the Germany system (can't really agree with it either), but in any case the capital city Berlin does not have a , Germany behind it. Neither does the capital city London, Paris, etc. so I don't quite follow why Vienna should either. Can we both at least agree that a simple "Vienna" is fine since we are directly involved, and I'll talk to the user who merged it back then? Gryffindor 18:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- A simple 'Vienna'-Category without the extension is fine with me. btw, User:Orgullobot seems to be the bot for renaming categories. though it doesn't seem to be run that often, because my Stadtpark statues still haven't been renamed --Werckmeister 19:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Hallo Werkmeister, bitte sortiere die Bilder direkt in Unterkategorien ein, anstatt sie direkt in die Landeskat zu werfen. Danke im Voraus, --Flominator 14:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Flominator, Ich tue mir bei der Einordnung bei Deutschland ein bisschen schwer, vor allem mit den ganzen Landkreisen, etc. Mir geht's in erster Linie darum, dass die Orphans überhaupt in einer Kategorie aufscheinen, normalerweise findet sich dann auch schnell jemand, der sich besser auskennt und die Bilder dann (schneller) in eine spezifischere Kategorie einordnen kann. Wenn ich bei jedem Pic schauen müsste wo es genau hingehört würde die Orphan-Aufarbeitung wesentlich langsamer verlaufen..
- Ich werd mich aber bemühen die Bilder so spezifisch wie möglich einzuordnen.. lg --Werckmeister 14:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Versuch einfach "Ort, Germany" und wenn das nicht klappt, pack es ins Bundesland! --Flominator 14:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- naja, Bundesland ist aber auch nur halbherzig ;) Aber ich werd mich bemühen ;) lg --Werckmeister 14:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Versuch einfach "Ort, Germany" und wenn das nicht klappt, pack es ins Bundesland! --Flominator 14:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
hmm, btw, die beiden Kategorie Category:Nature of Germany und Category:Nature in Germany sollte jemand zusammenführen. Glaub nicht das es da zwei geben muss.. lg --Werckmeister 15:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Das hast du gut erkannt ;) --Flominator 21:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Und welche der beiden Kategorien ist zu bevorzugen? Gibt's da irgendwelche Richtlinien? lg --Werckmeister 21:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Kein Plan. Hab da nen Link auf [[User:Flominator|meiner Seite], wo vielleicht was stehen könnte. Sonst weiss vielleicht auch User:Skinmate Bescheid. Muss pennen, n8, --Flominator 21:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- lt. Link von deiner Seite wird 'of' empfohlen, was ich jetzt mal genommen hab. In der Kategorie Category:Nature by country kommt das auch öfter vor als das 'in'.. lg --Werckmeister 10:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Kein Plan. Hab da nen Link auf [[User:Flominator|meiner Seite], wo vielleicht was stehen könnte. Sonst weiss vielleicht auch User:Skinmate Bescheid. Muss pennen, n8, --Flominator 21:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Und welche der beiden Kategorien ist zu bevorzugen? Gibt's da irgendwelche Richtlinien? lg --Werckmeister 21:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
categories
[edit]hello Werckmeister, how are you? Yes, I know it sounds strange and this is the only exception, but as far as I know, Tirol in English is known (but not always) as "the Tyrol" [1]. I know it's weird, but oh well... About the use of languages, I am not sure what to use, is it all in English or the local versions? I have tried to start a discussion on this point on the Commons, since User:Juiced lemon pointed out to me on Commons:Language_policy#Language_for_categories that English has to be used. The discussion page can be found here Commons:Language for categories. sincerely Gryffindor 13:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes I am aware of the exception (hence my previous hint that it is not always used like that). It does not matter really to me, I just wanted it to be as correct as possible and therefore took the English Wikipedia as help. About the language issue, I sense that some German-speaking users might have a problem with using English, I know this topic has come up on various occassions. I just think that no one should feel left out by feeling "forced" to use English, although I personally would still prefer to use "Vienna" instead of "Wien". ps: yes, no pictures from my side at the moment as well, the weather is too grey and cold for that :-( Gryffindor 21:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Moguer
[edit]Moguer is not in the province of Granada, but in the province of Huelva. --Pedro González 18:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Bitte keine Bilder in top-Category:Germany ablegen
[edit]Hallo Werckmeister,
ich habe gerade gesehen, dass du einer Reihe von bislang kategorielosen Gebäude-Fotos die Category:Germany verpasst hast. Das ist einerseits sehr gut, andererseits solltest du aber doch den ausdrücklichen Hinweis auf der Seite der Category:Germany beachten, dass dort keine Einzelbilder abgelegt werden sollen. Da ich selbst oft genug die dort von anderen abgelegten Bilder "weg-kategorisiert" habe, weiß ich, dass das natürlich mit einigem Aufwand verbunden ist; es wäre dennoch schön, wenn du dir diese Mühe machen könntest. Danke und Gruß -- Túrelio 09:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, agree as well for p.e. cities and states, p.e. that one (1. Oktober 2014, 08:10 Uhr). Kindly regards, Roland zh (talk) 17:30, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:Gloggnitz_1896.jpg
[edit]
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Gloggnitz_1896.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|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 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. Siebrand 15:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:Logo4c.jpg
[edit]
|
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo4c.jpg. This image 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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org).
Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. Lokal_Profil 23:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
| Image deletion warning | Image:Burg_Greifenstein4.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. |
Superbass 15:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
(ein Österreicher hat sich bei info-de@wikimedia.org gemeldet. Die beiden Bilder zeigten eine andere Burg, da Greifenstein keinen Rundturm habe und auch die Umgebung nicht stimme. Gruß --Superbass 15:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC))
- Nachtrag: Hat sich erledigt - gemeint war eine Burg Greifenstein in Hessen. Die Löschung ist überflüssig. --Superbass 21:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
| Image deletion warning | Image:Burg_Greifenstein3.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. |
Superbass 15:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Tip: Categorizing images
[edit]
Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.
Here's how:
1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:
2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.
[[Category:Category name]]
For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:
[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]][[Category:Comets]]
This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".
When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").
Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.BotMultichillT 06:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- Image:Hundertwasserhaus Interior, Vienna.jpg is uncategorized since 20 July 2009.
- Image:BlickVonDerRuineUeberHohenberg.JPG was uncategorized on 4 October 2009.
|
File:Moscow_Metro.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. |
Fernrohr (talk) 23:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
File tagging File:Bitte berühren!.jpg
[edit]
|
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Bitte berühren!.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:Bitte berühren!.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request. |
— Cheers, JackLee –talk– 06:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Augustinerkirche 1.jpg
[edit]
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Augustinerkirche 1.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 18:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Augustinerkirche 2.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Augustinerkirche 2.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
JuTa 14:51, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Augustinerkirche 3.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Augustinerkirche 3.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
JuTa 14:53, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Palais Coburg Rückseite.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Palais Coburg Rückseite.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Palais Coburg.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Palais Coburg.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 17:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Palais Coburg2.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Palais Coburg2.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Palais Coburg3.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Palais Coburg3.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 03:23, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Hallo Werckmeister,
hab grad dein Bild vom Wasserturm Favoriten gesehen undwollte dich fragen, ob du da noch das Original hast - die Korrektur passt leider überhaupt nicht, denn der Wasserturm verjüngt sich ziemlich stark nach oben (weshalb meine Bilder teilweise schief gewordern sind... ;-> hier wäre mein gerade gedrehtes zum Vergleich - aus einiger Entfernung photographiert). Vielleicht lässt sich das noch verbessern? Sonst würde ich dazu tendieren, dein Bild im Artikel mit einem anderen zu ersetzen, dass die Proportionen des Turms besser wiedergibt...
Ganz liebe Grüße, Anna reg (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
File source is not properly indicated: File:Schloß Hof001.jpg
[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Schloß Hof001.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
Leyo 17:55, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Global account
[edit]Hi Werckmeister! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:30, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
[edit]|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Andrey Korzun (talk) 22:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Curiosity
[edit]Hello. I am curious to know if you, as the uploader, do know why File:Schloss hof meierhof.jpg, has two authors, Deneb and Peter Knorr. Thanks. Carlotm (talk) 21:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
File tagging File:Reinhold Hayward synergie 3.jpg
[edit]
|
|
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Reinhold Hayward synergie 3.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:Reinhold Hayward synergie 3.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Jcb (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Stiftskirche Admont.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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Kunsthistorisches 11.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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Stiftkeller.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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Museales Rahmenprogramm 8.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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Bibliothek.Admont gesamt.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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Josef Stammel.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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:Stift Admont 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. |
Basvb (talk) 11:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
|
|
File:St-blasien-1906.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. |
Jcb (talk) 21:53, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
|
|
File:Stadtplan, Gmünd, Niederösterreich.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. |
Jcb (talk) 22:06, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
|
|
File:Tischofer Höhle Lokalisation.png 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. |
Jcb (talk) 17:14, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Tmw 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. |
