User talk:Boberger/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 12:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed.Boberger (talk) 14:19, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 12:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Boberger (talk) 14:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


File:Arle_Elllika_070128.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!

LX (talk, contribs) 14:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, this is not a clearcut issue. Ellika is a sculpture owned by the Regional Government of the county of Stockholm and is located in the subway station "Mariatorget" in Stockholm. While subway stations above ground possibly with no doubt are public spaces covered by right by Swedish laws on immaterial rights to take photos where the copyright belongs to the photographer (only), underground stations could be arguable in this respect. They are not clearly bindoors (which must be interpreted to be inside a building, not tens om meters below ground in solid rock) but are not clearly outdoor either (if by outdoor is meant in fresh air). You might put a large sum on that this issue has never been dealt with in a Swedis h court, neither tas the drafters of the bill never documented anything that might easily interpret the law in this respect. This is obviously a case never thought of at the time of drafting of the bill, or reviewing it.

In a case of doubt, I cannot see any reason not for Wikimedia Commons to interpret the rights issue in a way that is in favour of the public interest side of the argument and not of the "private" side. Boberger (talk) 13:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 10:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

License added.

Boberger (talk) 07:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Grate_antiken.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!

/grillo (talk) 14:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 20:20, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I´ve asked for assistance on Filniks Discussion page. Boberger (talk) 21:01, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 11:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Boberger (talk) 11:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 08:00, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Boberger (talk) 08:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
File:Asmundur Sveinson Sonartorrek.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!

--Fingalo (talk) 21:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with this picture, which is uploaded by other User.Boberger (talk) 08:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Rottneros Asmundur Sveinsson Moder jord.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!

Fingalo (talk) 11:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Se Discussion page för picture file, where I have explained appropriate Swedish copyright law, which permits publication of this picture.Boberger (talk) 08:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 11:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. License has now been added.Boberger (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 23:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Fixed.Boberger (talk) 23:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Kopano Matlwa

Hej, du tycks ha blandat ihop två författare på bokmässan. Category:Kopano Matlwa visar en karl, men Matlwa är kvinna! Jag har försökt luska ut vem du kan ha fångat, men är dålig på ansikten. Du kanske minns sammanhanget och kan ta reda på vem det var? /Jssfrk (talk) 12:27, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Tack för din anmärkning. Visst blev det fel. Jag har så länge ändrat uppgifter på filbeskrivningssidorna och kategorisidan och ska försöka reda ut vem det är som jag fotograferat.Boberger (talk) 17:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Rätt person är den nigerianske författare Helon Habila, Category:Helon Habila!
Boberger (talk) 18:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 18:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

FIxed. Boberger (talk) 18:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 18:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

FIxed Boberger (talk) 18:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Mall för projektet

Hej! Vi kan använda Template:Cloudberry på de filer som vi laddar upp. Jag ska snygga till lite på mallen senare, men det är ju bra om vi kan få in den på bilderna på en gång. --Ainali (talk) 07:40, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bergshamra Moratugan Anders Ersgården 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Tomer T 12:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Tullgarns slott boat house.jpg

Hej Boberger

Du ändrade i info-texten till rubr bild File:Tullgarns slott boat house.jpg. Tidigare stod "... Sweden. Boat-house." och nu står det "... SwedeN. One of originally tho bath huta."

Jag hade för mig att det står båthus på informationsskylten, men du vill ha det till badhytt, eller något liknande? Är lite osäker på tolkningen av din text. --Xauxa (talk) 10:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hej Xauxa!
Ursäkta skrivslarvet. Jag har nu ändrat till "one of two ... bathing huts" Bathing hut är det ord som mitt lexikon har för badhytt, även om jag tror att det främst beskriver den typ av små fristående badhytter som var vanliga ute på badstränderna under 1900-talets första hälftn (och ibland var mobila med hjul under).
Jo, din bild på bryggan föreställer en omklädningshytt på bryggan. Infoskylten visar också en bild från omkring 1930 med Gustav V på väg ut på bryggan, där det då fanns två likadana badhytter symmetriskt arrangerade. Det finns också ett båthus, ungefär där bilden är tagen, och infoskylten står också placerad där (en gemensam infotavla över både brygga/badhus och båthus). Jag vet detta, därför att jag var i Tullgarn på utflykt i går. och tog också en bild av brygga/båthus, innan jag visste att Du tagit en nästan likadan. Däremot tog jag ingen bild av båthuset.
Hälsningar Boberger (talk) 12:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Bra, då känner jag mig lugn. Jag kom ihåg skylten med kungen, men det var ett tag sedan. Förresten, apropå skrivfel, så kan man nu även få filnamnen rättade, det gick ju inte tidigare. Skönt när små förtretligheter kan rättas till. --Xauxa (talk) 21:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hur rättar man filnamn? Jag har massor med gånger skrivit dem felaktigt? Boberger (talk) 22:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Jag tänkte väl det att du bör ha mött samma problem som jag, för mig var det här också en ny funktion. Tidigare fick man begära delete och sedan ladda upp igen med korrekt filnamn, vilket känns övermaga när det kanske gäller ett enstaka felslag i ett filnamn. Nu kan man använda Template:Rename, lägga in och följa mallen {{rename|new name.jpg|reason for new name}} på bildens textsida så får man det fixat snabbt av någon. Kul att jag kunde förmedla detta! Jag tänkte det här får jag föra vidare :) --Xauxa (talk) 07:09, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Drottningholm & kategorier

Hej! Trevligt med alla nya bilder från Drottningholm. Det vore dock bra om du tog en titt på de befintliga kategorierna, då bla många byggnader har egna kategorier, och de flesta kategorier är namngivna på engelska. Strukturen lämnar alltjämt en hel del i övrigt att önska, men det motiverar förstås inte att lägga bilder om samma ämne i olika kategorier. Allt gott, /Urbourbo (talk) 13:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Jag upptäckte litet sent in i processen att huvudkategorien heter Royal Domain of Drottningholm och inte Drottningholms slott, i och för sig ett inte helt lyckat namn, Drottningholm Castle hade varit bättre. Jag får ta och gå igenom bilderna senare för att omkategorisera och då se till att de kommer in i lämpliga understrukturer. Hälsningar Boberger (talk) 14:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
OK gott. Ja, detta med "royal domain" låter ju lite krystat, även om det kanske är det vedertagna engelska namnet? Hursomhelst finns en poäng i att ha en huvudkategori för hela området, och en annan kategori för huvudbyggnaden. Den senare skapade jag (tills vidare) som "Drottningholm Palace (main building)". Allt gott, /Urbourbo (talk) 14:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Ja, det är bra att du lagt upp huvudbyggnaden som en egen underkategori- Samma behövs åtminstone för parken, skulpturerna, Kina slott och kanske också¨teatern. Hälsn Boberger (talk) 14:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
De andra du nämner är redan fixade sedan tidigare! ;) Allt gott, /Urbourbo (talk) 14:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)