User talk:44penguins
[[User talk:44penguins/Archive index|]] |
---|
no archives yet (create)
|
user:44penguins/Archive discussions
Please give images good descriptions[edit]
I noticed you've uploaded one or more images and I thought I should turn your attention to a common error.
Please give some thought to writing a good description of uploaded images. This ensures that they can be used. It also helps those that review and improve categories do a better job, which also ensures that images will get used in novel and interesting ways. Thanks, and happy editing! __ ABF __ ϑ 19:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:Fennpfuhlpark_Entfesselt2.jpg[edit]
Die Skulptur stammt von Siegfried Krepp 1989 und befindet sich im öffentlichen Raum ---> Panoramafreiheit. --44penguins (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Welcome[edit]
Unser Ratgeber Erste Schritte und unsere FAQ können Dir nach Deiner Anmeldung hilfreich sein. Sie erklären, wie Du die Benutzeroberfläche anpassen und zum Beispiel auf Deine Muttersprache umstellen kannst. Auch erklären sie, wie Du Dateien hochladen kannst. Daneben erläutern sie unsere grundlegende Lizenzpolitik. Du benötigst keine besonderen technischen Kenntnisse, um hier mitzumachen. Sei mutig hier beizutragen und gehe von den guten Absichten anderer aus. Dies ist ein Wiki - es ist wirklich einfach. Mehr Informationen bekommst Du im Gemeinschaftsportal. Du kannst Fragen im Forum oder im IRC-Chat #wikimedia-commons stellen, den du auch direkt hier öffnen kannst. Du kannst auch einen Administrator auf seiner Diskussionsseite ansprechen. Sofern Du eine spezielle Frage zum Urheberrecht hast, frage auf der Seite Diskussionsseite:Lizenzen. |
| |
(P.S. Möchtest Du diese Nachricht kommentieren?) |
Patstuart (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 11:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Panoramafreiheit, daher behalten.--44penguins (talk) 17:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Wehrmeister?[edit]
Hi, Du hast eine nackte Schöne im Krankenhaus Friedrichshain hochgeladen. Aber der Nackedei von Siegfried Wehrmeister sieht anders aus, und zwar so Grüsse Mutter Erde 09:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hallo Mutter Erde, Du hast recht, ich hab mir zwar gemerkt, dass es eine nackte Frau im Krankenhausgelände sein muss, habe aber keinen Vergleich gemacht. Muss ich also die Beschriftung ändern. Danke und Grüße --44penguins 11:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hast Du nicht noch ein Bild eines echten Wehrmeisters? Sonst wird nämlich die Kat Category:Siegfried Wehrmeister gelöscht, weil da keine Bilder mehr drin sind. Übrigens: Du musst ein bisschen aufpassen. Nur das, was in Deutschland im Freien steht, ist unproblematisch. Kunst von Lebenden (oder genauer: Leuten, die noch keine 70 Jahre tot sind), darf man nicht ohne deren Genehmigung oder ihrer Erben in Innenräumen photographieren. Grüsse Mutter Erde 12:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Leider hab ich z.Z. kein weiteres Werk von Wehrmeister, obwohl ich an einem Artikel über ihn arbeite. Bin auch die nächsten Wochen nicht in Berlin, sonst könnte man seinen Comenius fotografieren, steht auf dem gleichnamigen Platz in Friedrichshain. - Ja danke, die Sache mit den Lizenzen weiß ich, vielleicht denkt man nur nicht immer daran? (Das Werk im Haupthaus des Klinikums ist aber im öffentlichen Raum, also im Eingangsbereich - ich hoffe das geht?) Gruß --44penguins 12:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Naja, ist immer ein bisschen riskant. Du hast es schon längst vergessen, und plötzlich ist so ein Nichtsnutz da und plustert sich auf. Du hatttest ja selbst schon eine Begegnung mit so einem Stinktier. Und wenn es dann auch noch gut vernetzt ist...
- Am besten: Solche Objekte, die man unbedingt zur Illustration braucht, an den Rand des Fotos rücken. Bei 1 MB-Bildern wäre das noch ein praktikabler Kompromiss. Aber das natürlich ohne Gewähr. Grüsse und frohes Schaffen :-) Mutter Erde 15:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Leider hab ich z.Z. kein weiteres Werk von Wehrmeister, obwohl ich an einem Artikel über ihn arbeite. Bin auch die nächsten Wochen nicht in Berlin, sonst könnte man seinen Comenius fotografieren, steht auf dem gleichnamigen Platz in Friedrichshain. - Ja danke, die Sache mit den Lizenzen weiß ich, vielleicht denkt man nur nicht immer daran? (Das Werk im Haupthaus des Klinikums ist aber im öffentlichen Raum, also im Eingangsbereich - ich hoffe das geht?) Gruß --44penguins 12:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Image deletion warning | Zeustempel (Olympia) 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. |
--Tim Landscheidt (talk) 06:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Der abgelichtete Tempel ist mehrere Tausend Jahre alt - da sollte es doch wohl keine Lizenzprobleme geben?? --44penguins (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
{
Image deletion warning | Image:Meisterbrief Fleischer.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. |
--MB-one (talk) 18:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Der abgebildete Meisterbrief befindet sich in meinem Besitz. Er wurde mir von der Tochter des genanten Fleischers zur freien Verwendung überlassen! Also: nicht löschen--44penguins (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Verwaltungsgebäude Josef-Orlopp-Strasse[edit]
Hallo 44P, ich habe mir die Bilder vom Verwaltungsgebäude der KGB in der Josep-Orlapp-Strasse in Berlin angeschaut und möchte wissen wer der Bildhauer um 1913/4 war der die Skulpturen von Hermes , Neptunes u.a. gemacht hast. Gibt es noch eine Möglichkeit das herauszufinden? Schöne Grüsse aus Groningen von--Gerardus (talk) 09:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hallo Gerardus, aus den mir zur Verfügung stehenden Quellen konnte ich das nicht entnehmen. Wenn's gaaanz wichtig ist, müsste ich im Heimatmuseum Lichtenberg mal nachfragen. Einstweilen grüße ich aus Berlin zurück. (PS: Die Straße ist nach dem Kommunisten Josef Orlopp benannt, also mit ph und o, Biografie direkt bei de/wiki.) --44penguins (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 08:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Die abgebildete Zeichnung befindet sich im öffentlichen Raum, hat damit Panoramafreiheit.--44penguins (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
seltsamer Zinnfund[edit]
File:2007-12-Aue Tafel Zinnfund.JPG Am besten mit neuer Beschreibung nochmal hochladen. Gruss 79.194.88.148 18:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC) Ja, muss ich noch einmal hochladen. --44penguins (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Wurde mittlerweile umbenannt. Gruss Mutter Erde 78.55.104.150 09:39, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
File:2007-12-Aue_Holzarbeiten.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. |
ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 10:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
- Das Foto entstand in einem öffentlichen und jederzeit frei erreichbaren Durchgang, es ist panoramafrei, also behalten'. außerdem sind es keine mit namen von Künstlern versehene Werke.--44penguins (talk) 17:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Wie oft kommt das hier eigentlich noch zur Diskussion? --> War schon im Dezmeber 2008 hier (siehe weiter oben)? :-( --44penguins (talk) 08:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Wer bestimmt hier eigentlich, was gelöscht wird? - Ich hatte mehrfach geantwortet, ohne Rückmeldung. Stattdessen ist das Bild nun doch gelöscht worden! Durch solche subjektiven Entscheidungen (ich habe keine Diskussion der Wikigemeinde dazu gelesen) kommt übrigens auch die abwertende Meinung über Wiki zustande! :-( --44penguins (talk) 16:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Don't link redundant categories[edit]
Please don't add redundant categories to images. For example, if your image is in Category:Buildings in Wandlitz, it's a complete liability to add Category:Wandlitz or Category:Buildings. On the other hand, a category that described the purpose of the building can be very useful. See, for example, what I did with your photo at File:Wandlitz histor. Wasserturm005.jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 22:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
File tagging File:Karl_Otto_Portrait.png[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Karl_Otto_Portrait.png. 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:Karl_Otto_Portrait.png]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martin H. (talk) 15:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hallo Martin H., ist inzwischen erledigt, wie zu sehen ist. Sowohl die PERMISSION als auch die Lizenz sind geändert.
Daher Done. Gruß --44penguins (talk) 16:01, 26 May 2010 (UTC)- Die Freigabe des Urhebers bzw. des Inhabers der ausschließlichen Nutzungsrechte bitte noch an OTRS senden, wenn nicht bereits geschehen. --Martin H. (talk) 16:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC) --> Ja doch, ist erledigt!!! --44penguins (talk) 16:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Super, ein OTRS mitarbeiter wird die Freigabe auf dem Bild entsprechend Kennzeichnen. --Martin H. (talk) 16:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Die Freigabe des Urhebers bzw. des Inhabers der ausschließlichen Nutzungsrechte bitte noch an OTRS senden, wenn nicht bereits geschehen. --Martin H. (talk) 16:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC) --> Ja doch, ist erledigt!!! --44penguins (talk) 16:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Nicht Rudolf-Seiffert-, sondern Paul-Junius-Straße[edit]
Hallo, ich habe die Beschriftung bei diesem Bild korrigiert. Du musst dich da geirrt haben. -- lley (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hallo Lley, wir können uns gern mal zu einem Standort-Abgleich treffen. Da zeig ich dir, von wo nach wo das Bild gemacht wurde; es ist aus drei Einzelteilen zusammengesetzt. Habe die Beschriftung nun als Kompromiss gewählt. Gruß --44penguins (talk) 17:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hallo 44penguins, tut mir leid, ich halte deine Beschriftung für falsch. Du hast einen Innenhof der Paul-Junius-Straße fotografiert, auch der Weg im Vordergrund liegt in diesem Innenhof. Die Rudolf-Seiffert-Straße liegt gut 100 m hinter dem Standpunkt, von wo fotografiert worden ist. (Der Standpunkt dürfte ungefähr hier gewesen sein.) Die Häuser die man auf dem Foto sieht, gehören sämtlich zur Paul-Junius-Straße, auch die lange Häuserzeile im linken Bereich (hinter den Häusern fährt die M8 entlang, die Karl-Lade-Straße gibt es dort aber nicht, auch die Häuser gehören nicht dazu).
- Ich war extra vor Ort, bevor ich deine Bildbeschreibung geändert habe ... -- lley (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hallo Lley, ich werde demnächst mir das auch noch mal anschauen, dann müsste der name ggf. geändert werden ...
- So, na, da muss ich ja meinen Fehler nun eingestehen. War heute noch mal vor Ort und gebe dir hiermit vollkommen Recht. So sollte die Fotowerkstatt um eine Änderung des Bildnamens gebeten werden. - Ich hatte aber auch schon Bilder der "richtigen" R.-S.-Str. hochgeladen und habe nun eines davon in den Artikel eingefügt.--44penguins (talk) 16:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
File:Kischi_Karte_der_Insel.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. |
Eusebius (talk) 11:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Hallo 44penguins,
bei einigen deiner uploads (alle, die ich geprüft habe) hast du "Angela M. Arnold" als Autor angegeben. Da eine personale Identität mit dir als Uploader nicht evident ist, must du dich entscheiden, ob du diese Identität, sofern sie denn besteht, öffentlich machen willst, was du nicht tun musst, oder ob du für alle unter "Angela M. Arnold" als Autor hochgeladenen Bilder eine schriftliche Erlaubnis an OTRS einreichen willst (kann alle Bilder zusammenfassen). --Túrelio (talk) 09:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Verstehe ich nicht: Wenn ich unter einem Nickname angemeldet bin und mir damals eine Bestätigungsmail zugesendet wurde - wieso muss ich nun etwas ändern? Unter OTRS soll ja nur dann was eingereicht werden, wenn der Fotograf nicht der Hochlader ist? Kann doch jeder an den einzelnen Fotos sehen? Wie sähe denn eine solche Zusammenfassung aus? --44penguins (talk) 16:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ich weiß zwar nicht was du mit "Bestätigungsmail" meinst, dachte aber mich meinerseits klar ausgedrückt zu haben. Aber vielleicht war ich zu sehr auf Diskretion bedacht. Also nochmal: du nennst dich "44penguins", gibst aber zumindest bei einigen deiner Uploads "Angela M. Arnold" als Autorin an. -> primäre Schlußfolgerung: du lädst hier Fotos von einer anderen Person hoch. Das würde aber deren schriftliche Erlaubnis erfordern (-> OTRS). Zweite Möglichkeit, du bist selbst "Angela M. Arnold". Allerdings erscheint diese Möglichkeit weniger plausibel, weil das eventuelle Pseudonym "44penguins" damit ja bereits gebrochen wäre. Falls letztere Variante zutrifft, brauchst du das hier nicht zu bestätigen, wenn du nicht willst, du wirst dann aber nicht um OTRS herumkommen, weil sonst immer wieder die Nichtübereinstimmung von Uploader und Autor auffallen und zu Nachfragen führen wird. --Túrelio (talk) 18:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Da Spendendosen üblicherweise nicht im Straßenraum dauerhaft angebracht sind, greift die Panoramafreiheit hier nicht. Wann ist der Abgebildete denn gestorben und wer das das ursprüngliche Foto aufgenommen? --Túrelio (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Carl Ulitzka ist 1953 gestorben; wer das ursprüngliche foto aufgenommen hat, steht nicht auf der Büchse. Ich war auch eher ein zufälliger besucher dort - könnte mir aber vorstellen, dass das bild aus einem privaten Album eines Gemeindemitglieds stammt. --87.159.141.16 11:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Danke für die Infos. Also, wenn der Abgebildete 1953 gestorben ist, dürfte das Photo noch geschützt sein, weil es ja erst frei wird, wenn der Photograph >70 Jahre tot ist. Wenn dir an dem Photo viel liegt und die Möglichkeit besteht, wäre es ratsam wenn du z.B. in der Gemeinde (oder im Internet) nachrecherchierst, wer das Photo aufgenommen hat. Dabei könnte helfen, frühere Veröffentlichungen des Photos zu finden, auf denen vielleicht doch der Urheber angegeben ist. Bis dahin muss das Bild hier leider erstmal gelöscht werden. --Túrelio (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nee, ist nicht so wichtig. Im Lemma über den Pfarrer sind ja weitere Fotos. k.w. :( --44penguins (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- @44penguins, denkst du auch noch die Frage 1 Abschnitt höher. --Túrelio (talk) 12:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nee, ist nicht so wichtig. Im Lemma über den Pfarrer sind ja weitere Fotos. k.w. :( --44penguins (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Danke für die Infos. Also, wenn der Abgebildete 1953 gestorben ist, dürfte das Photo noch geschützt sein, weil es ja erst frei wird, wenn der Photograph >70 Jahre tot ist. Wenn dir an dem Photo viel liegt und die Möglichkeit besteht, wäre es ratsam wenn du z.B. in der Gemeinde (oder im Internet) nachrecherchierst, wer das Photo aufgenommen hat. Dabei könnte helfen, frühere Veröffentlichungen des Photos zu finden, auf denen vielleicht doch der Urheber angegeben ist. Bis dahin muss das Bild hier leider erstmal gelöscht werden. --Túrelio (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
File:2010-04-23 MLLK-Kirche - fec - AMA.B - 19.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. |
--—Wuzur 12:30, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
- Der Altarteppich wurde von einer lebenden Künstlerin erstellt. Bitte das Bild noch nicht löschen, ich habe Kontakt mit der Dame aufgenommen und hoffe auf deren Zustimmung zur Veröffentlichung. (T:Ende November 2010) --44penguins (talk) 08:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Bitte nicht überkategorisieren![edit]
Hallo 44penguins, bitte überkategorisiere deine Bilder nicht. So ist beispielsweise in File:2010-09-12 Baudenkmal in Wandlitz, Langer Grund.jpg
- Category:Buildings in Wandlitz i.O.
- Category:Wandlitz nicht i.O., überkategorisiert, da Category:Buildings in Wandlitz ja schon eine Unterkategorie von Category:Wandlitz ist.
Für weitere Info siehe Commons:Categories, insbesondere Over-categorization. -- Ies (talk) 09:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
File:2008-09_Moskau_Friedhof_Maniser.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. |
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
File:2004-4-27_Oderberger_Str_-_AMA_fec.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. |
Reinhardhauke (talk) 13:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- die Löschung wurde laut abgeschlossner Diskussion abgelehnt. --44penguins (talk) 14:03, 11 December 2010 (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.CategorizationBot (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Image:2008-8-11 Friedrichshain Comeniusplatz AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 6 December 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Image:4buchtitel byatt.JPG was uncategorized on 8 February 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Helle Mitte Panorama Hellersdorf 20110712 AMA fec.jpg was uncategorized on 13 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Bismarcksfelder Str Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Straße 19 Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Falkstätter Str Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Druschiner Str Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Damerauer Allee Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Kaulsdorfer Str Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Mühltaler Str Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Deutschhofer Allee Kaulsdorf 2011-04-22 AMA fec.JPG was uncategorized on 8 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Wollankstr Pankow 2011-09-30 AMa fec.JPG was uncategorized on 2 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:37, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Dorfstr Johannische Kirche Kaulsdorf 2001-09-17 AMA fec (10).JPG was uncategorized on 20 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
- Image:AK mit Zeichnung Bernau um 1620 nach Merian, Verlag W. Kerzendörfer Bernau.jpg was uncategorized on 22 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Wie kann eine Karte von 1774 ein eigenes Werk sein? Ich gehe mal davon aus, das die Karte gescannt oder fotographiert wurde. Das Werk aufgrund seines Alters wahrscheinlich allgemeinfrei. Du kann es dann nicht einfach unter eine andere Lizenz stellen. Man möge mich berichtigen, wenn ich falsch liege. --130.75.51.147 16:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Stimmt, wurde bei einer öffentlichen Führung mit Erlaubnis des Kartenbesitzers in einem winzigen Teil abfotografiert (die karte selbst umfasste das gesamte nordöstlich von Berlin liegende Gebiet. Daraus folgt: Lizenz wäre {{PD-old}}, als Autor: der urspr. Herausgeber. Bei den Bildern bin ich nicht so firm, bitte ändere das dann. --44penguins (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Summsteine[edit]
Hallo 44penguins, falls Dir noch mehr Summsteine begegnen, die sind hier gesammelt: Category:Summsteine Da es keinen englischsprachigen Ausdruck für Summsteine zu geben scheint, habe ich eben eine deutschsprachige Kategorie angelegt. Gruß, -- Ies (talk) 07:58, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hallo 44penguins,
das Support-Team hat eine E-Mail (Ticket#: 2011050210014059) zu deinem Bild File:Bockau Gemeindeamt 110429 AMA fec (3).JPG erhalten:
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, ich möchte Sie darauf hinweisen, dass das Bild (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Bockau_Gemeindeamt_11042[..], welches das Gemeindeamt in Bockau darstellen soll, falsch ist. Das angegebene Bild gehört zur Nachbargemeinde Sosa (PLZ 08326). Ich bin mir zu 110% sicher, weil ich in Bockau wohne.
Könntest du dies bitte mit deinen Daten abgleichen? Neu hochladen musst du nicht, ich kann als Admin bei Bedarf das Bild gerne verschieben. Danke. Raymond 08:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hallochen, ja das stimmt. Es ist in Sosa (wir haben da nur kurz Halt gemacht und das Ortsschild wohl übersehen...) Das betrifft dann aber auch die Bilder der Ortspyramide und der Kirche:
File:Bockau Pyramide 110429 AMA fec (100).JPG
Description Bockau | date 2011-04-29 | source own work | Author Angela M. Arnold (44penguins) | Permission | Other_versions ... (2.304×3.072 (3.314.389 Bytes)) - 09:45, 2. Mai 2011 File:Bockau Pyramide 110429 AMA fec (101).JPG Description Bockau | date 2011-04-29 | source own work | Author Angela M. Arnold (44penguins) | Permission | Other_versions ... (3.072×2.304 (3.442.482 Bytes)) - 09:44, 2. Mai 2011 File:Bockau Pyramide 110429 AMA fec (2).JPG Description Bockau | date 2011-04-29 | source own work | Author Angela M. Arnold (44penguins) | Permission | Other_versions ... (2.825×2.245 (1.494.635 Bytes)) - 09:43, 2. Mai 2011 File:Bockau Pyramide 110429 AMA fec (95).JPG Description Bockau, Beispielfiguren in der Ortspyramide | date 2011-04-29 | source own work | Author Angela M. Arnold (44penguins) | ... (3.072×2.304 (3.355.142 Bytes)) - 11:55, 2. Mai 2011 File:Bockau Kirche 110429 AMA fec (1).JPG Description Bockau | date 2011-04-29 | source own work | Author Angela M. Arnold (44penguins) | Permission | Other_versions ... (2.567×2.037 (1.313.993 Bytes)) - 11:54, 2. Mai 2011,
die müssen dann alle auch in SOSA (nicht Bockau) umbenannt werden. ((Schäm :( ))--44penguins (talk) 15:05, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo 44penguins, fast hätte ich das hier vergessen *mitschäm*. Vielen Dank auf für deine Bestätigung. Ich habe nun alle genannten Bilder auf den neuen Namen verschoben, die Weiterleitung aber stehengelassen, damit evtl. vorhandene Links (intern und extern) die Dateien noch finden. Raymond 20:15, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
File:Saporoshje-Springbrunnen_mit_gespaltenem_Atom.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. |
DS (talk) 13:15, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Hallo Angela,
mir ist zufällig gerade bei diesem Bild, mit dem es kein Problem gibt, aufgefallen, dass du im Autor-Feld deinen (vermutlichen) Realnamen offengelegt hast. Das kannst du natürlich tun, wenn du damit kein Problem hast. Allerdings könnte die gewählte Form externe Nachnutzer etwas verwirren, ob sie jetzt den gesamten Ausdruck oder nur 44penguins oder nur deinen Realnamen (sofern er es ist) schreiben sollen. Wenn du eigentlich nur deinen Realnamen im Credit sehen möchtest, sähe ich 2 Möglichkeiten, das besser umzusetzen. 1) den optionalen Parameter |creditline= benutzen und im Author-Feld nur den Usernamen benutzen oder 2) ins Author-Feld deinen Realnamen setzen und dann, zwecks Vermeidung von no-permission-Markierung, für deine eigenen Bilder eine permission an OTRS schicken, wobei hier 1 pauschale Email für all deine eigenen Uploads ausreichen sollte. Nur mal so als Anregung. --Túrelio (talk) 12:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Category:Dorfkirche Berlin-Mahlsdorf[edit]
Hi, sollte das nicht dort rein? Schöne Fotos jedenfalls. Gruß, --Alexrk2 (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- Und warum? Die gibt es doch nur einmal; das andere Mahlsdorf hat ja wohl keine DK. Wenn du meinst, es ändern zu müssen, bitte... Übringes kommt demnächst ein kompletter artikel über die Kirche, ich warte nur noch auf die meinung der kirchengemeinde. --44penguins (talk) 16:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- Ja, andersrum macht wohl mehr Sinn. Der Artikel wird dann ja vrmtl auch einfach "Dorfkirche Mahlsdorf" heißen. War für mich jetzt nur schwer ersichtlich, ob das irgendwie vlt. einen Grund hatte, zwei Kategorien zu haben, oder ob das dasselbe ist, da die neue Kategorie nirgendswo eingeordnet war. Ich werd dann mal so machen und die ursprüngliche Kategorie löschen lassen. --Alexrk2 (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- ok. Und ja, der artikel heißt dann so. --44penguins (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- Ja, andersrum macht wohl mehr Sinn. Der Artikel wird dann ja vrmtl auch einfach "Dorfkirche Mahlsdorf" heißen. War für mich jetzt nur schwer ersichtlich, ob das irgendwie vlt. einen Grund hatte, zwei Kategorien zu haben, oder ob das dasselbe ist, da die neue Kategorie nirgendswo eingeordnet war. Ich werd dann mal so machen und die ursprüngliche Kategorie löschen lassen. --Alexrk2 (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Innenansicht Neues Friedrich-Wilhelmstädtisches Theater 1885 aus Berliner Adressbuch 1885 (online).jpg[edit]
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 13:40, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Schmidt Portrait.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. |
PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:43, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Otto Schmidt.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. |
PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:44, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
File tagging File:Büste Anton Saefkow von Jürgen Pansow (2).JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Büste Anton Saefkow von Jürgen Pansow (2).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:Büste Anton Saefkow von Jürgen Pansow (2).JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
FA2010 (talk) 09:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
File tagging File:Niepel Bilder Katzen (2) 11223 AMA fec.JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Niepel Bilder Katzen (2) 11223 AMA fec.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:Niepel Bilder Katzen (2) 11223 AMA fec.JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
-mattbuck (Talk) 14:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
- Hallo, wenn du mal richtig hinguckst, steht da Panoramafreiheit (nach deutschem Recht gilt das für den öffentlichen Raum) Das kann jeder Besucher der Kita sehen. Wenn dir das nicht reicht, werde ich die Künstlerin noch einaml anmailen...--44penguins (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
File tagging File:Niepel Bilder Katzen (1) 11223 AMA fec.jpg[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Niepel Bilder Katzen (1) 11223 AMA fec.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:Niepel Bilder Katzen (1) 11223 AMA fec.jpg]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
-mattbuck (Talk) 14:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
- Hallo, wenn du mal richtig hinguckst, steht da Panoramafreiheit (nach deutschem Recht gilt das für den öffentlichen Raum) Das kann jeder Besucher der Kita sehen. Wenn dir das nicht reicht, werde ich die Künstlerin noch einaml anmailen...--44penguins (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:GR Ort Delphi gesamt1.jpg[edit]
Jarekt (talk) 12:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Done --44penguins (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:2009-05-16 Aue Panorama von der Friedenskirche.jpg[edit]
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:2009-05-16 Aue Panorama von der Friedenskirche.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. |
–moogsi (blah) 04:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Leonid Kogan.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. |
Clarissy. 21:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Lebedew.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. |
Clarissy. 21:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
File:2010-8-7 Lenindenkmal in Wilkowo - Angela M. Arnold fec.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. |
Cezarika1 (talk) 04:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
- @Cezarika: Das Denkmal steht im öffentlichen Raum und besitzt damit Panoramafreiheit Außerdem ist gar kein Künstler bekannt. Deshalb: nicht löschen. (welche lizenezen werden denn hier nicht eingehalten?? --44penguins (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Wie schon oben (#Copyright status: File:2009-05-16 Aue Panorama von der Friedenskirche.jpg) erbeten und auf deinen Wiederherstellungswunsch geantwortet: Lizenz beim Hochladen nicht angegeben, bitte nachtragen. --Martin H. (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hallo martin, ich hatte das doch beim wiederherstellungwunsch gesagt. Nun ist es zusätzlich auf der gelöschten seite eingetragen. Bitte, nun aber. Und es gilt:
|
The photographical reproduction of this work is covered under the article § 59 of the German copyright law, which states that "It shall be permissible to reproduce, by painting, drawing, photography or cinematography, works which are permanently located on public ways, streets or places and to distribute and publicly communicate such copies. For works of architecture, this provision shall be applicable only to the external appearance."
As with all other “limits of copyright by legally permitted uses”, no changes to the actual work are permitted under § 62 of the German copyright law (UrhG). See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany#Freedom of panorama for more information.
|
.--44penguins (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Chodowickistr=Chodowieckistr[edit]
Dein Bild "Chodowickistraße" muss in Wirklichkeit "Chodowieckistraße" heißen!
File:Aue 2004 Kulturhaus.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. |
Catfisheye (talk) 13:09, 26 April 2014 (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, Gunnex (talk) 00:21, 28 February 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:
And also:
- File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Crew TU 144.JPG
- File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Gromyko.JPG
- File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof K. Oppenheim.JPG
- File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Nikulin.JPG
- File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Polikarpow.JPG
Yours sincerely, Andrey Korzun (talk) 17:48, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
File:Monbijoubruecke von Weidendammer Bruecke - Arno Mohr DDR 1987 M3124.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. |
Correlatio (talk) 21:52, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Gewerkschaftsschule Bernau 2007-08-19 AMA fec 12 Ausschnitt.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. |
Carl Ha (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Nett wäre es gewesen, Du hättest mich einfach erstmal kurz angesprochen. Dann hätte ich die Datei mit einer Anonymisierung auch direkt überladen können (und ohne sie sehr unglücklich zu beschnippeln). Deinen SLA habe ich wieder rauslöschen müssen, bitte informiere Dich hier über die zulässigen SLA-Fälle. --Andre de (talk) 19:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hab Dir auf meiner Diskussionsseite geantwortet. --Andre de (talk) 14:05, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
File:StMarien Khst-57.JPG has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
Martin Sg. (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
File:2008-09 Moskau Friedhof Sobinow.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. |
Dogad75 (talk) 12:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Straßen und Plätze in Berlin (C) AMA 2011.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. |
A.Savin 14:04, 22 October 2018 (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:
And also:
Yours sincerely, Ymblanter (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 48.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:55, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File tagging File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 48.JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 48.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:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 48.JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File tagging File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 64.JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 64.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:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 64.JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:57, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 64.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:57, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File tagging File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 65.JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 65.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:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 65.JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:58, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 65.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:58, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File tagging File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn M29.JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn M29.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:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn M29.JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:01, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn M29.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:01, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File tagging File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 54.JPG[edit]
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 54.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:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 54.JPG]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 54.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:03, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Versöhnungskirche Biesdorf 2011-08 30 AMA fec (33).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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:05, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Versöhnungskirche Biesdorf 2011-08 30 AMA fec (32).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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 63.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Kirche Von der Verklaerung des Herrn 62.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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
File:Marheineke-Halle 2012-03-03 AMA fec (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. |
Martin Sg. (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2020 (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:
And also:
Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2022 (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:
And also:
- File:Jungfernbruecke-DDR 1985 M2973.jpg
- File:Marx-Engels-Bruecke-DDR 1985 M2975.jpg
- File:Weidendammer Bruecke-DDR 1985 M2974.jpg
Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 07:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
File:BuddyBär im Hauptbahnhof.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. |
Lukas Beck (talk) 14:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
File:FRÖSI-Getränkedeckel AMA fec.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. |
Gnom (talk) 13:02, 27 December 2023 (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:
And also:
Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 19:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)