User talk:Esquilo/Archive 1

Archive 1

SUL

Hi Kemikungen. Have you ever considered to merge your accounts? --Leyo 09:33, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

What are the benefits? /Kemikungen (talk) 09:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Do you already know meta:Help:Unified login/sv? --Leyo 09:59, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

No, but I only have two accounts: Användare:Kemikungen on Swedish Wikipedia and User:Kemikungen on Wikimedia Commons. /Kemikungen (talk) 10:03, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Currently, there is no “hard” prove that both accounts belong to the same user. Merging accounts would change this for example. --Leyo 10:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

The factual accuracy of the chemical structure File:Cinnamyl-alcohol-3D-balls.png is disputed

Dispute notification

The chemical structure File:Cinnamyl-alcohol-3D-balls.png you uploaded has been tagged as disputed and is now listed in Category:Disputed chemical diagrams. Files in this category are deleted after one month if there is no upload of a corrected version and if there is no objection from the uploader or other users. Please discuss on the file talk page if you feel that the dispute is inappropriate. If you agree with the dispute, you can either upload a corrected version or simply allow the file to be deleted. In all cases, please do not take the dispute personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! --Ephemeronium (talk) 12:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

A new image with the missing hydrogen atom uploaded. Thanks for the notice. /Kemikungen (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

for cleaning up File:SMS Konig.jpg. Just thought I'd let you know I appreciate your efforts. Keep up the good work! Parsecboy (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Parsecboy! /Kemikungen (talk) 21:16, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

File:AD-6 Skyraider.jpg

Hi, you upleaded the nice Skyraider photo from English Wikipedia. However, it would be better, if you give your files a different name than on en:wiki, because otherwise the local wikipedia will still use the file uploaded there and not the one from Commons. Also, since we have now 54 photos of AD-6 aircraft, a name like "AD-6s of VA-42 in 1955" or so would be helpful to differ between the photos. Thank you and Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 16:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Since bots are uploading files from enwp with the same name, I decided to stick to that scheme. /Kemikungen (talk) 05:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Gulnade svartvita bilder

Hej, Ser att du fixat till en del gamla svartvita bilder på ett bra sätt. Kanske har du även möjlighet att se över våra bilder av Yngve Larsson? Flera av dem lider av liknande problem. Allt gott! /Urbourbo (talk) 13:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Det är väl bara File:Klass 5c.jpg, File:Stettin yl 1.jpg och File:Stettin yl 2.jpg som lider av gulsot? Det borde gå lätt att ordna. /Kemikungen (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Trevligt! Ja, och kanske File:Skogskyrkogarden 1940.jpg och File:Mullberget biblioteket crop.jpg? Lite osäker. Såg dessutom en bild som väl verkar ha perspektivproblem: File:Sibyllegatan 16-6.jpg? Hade varit idealt med någon form av åtgärdsmallar & dito -kategorier för dessa typ av problem... Allt gott! /Urbourbo (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Skogskyrkogarden 1940 är nog för liten och för dålig kvalitet för att det ska löna sig att göra något åt den, men de andra kan jag kika på. /Kemikungen (talk) 14:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Roligt, stort tack! :) /Urbourbo (talk) 14:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Här ett till tips på en bild som väl behöver något gjort med perspektivet? Jämför hur det väl borde se ut här. Allt gott! /Urbourbo (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Vi kan väl prova med den där? Fast jag tycker nog att bilden från 2007 är bättre. Perspektivet blir mer naturligt när bilden är tagen på längre håll. T.ex. så ser man ju taket. /Kemikungen (talk) 20:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

OK poäng. Dock borde vi i så fall kanske beskära den. Allt gott, /Urbourbo (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 5ce712522cf37d6720e9dfd37a5d2109

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Sepiabilder

Hej Kemikungen! Har noterat att Du har gjort om ett antal bilder jag nyligen laddat upp från originalens klassiska "Vecko-journals-sepiaton" till vanlig (och i mitt tycke tråkig) gråskala. Nu vet jag att man ju lika litet "äger" de bilder man laddat upp här på Commons som de texter man skriver på vanliga wp, men jag skulle ändå vilja vädja till Dig att - om Du absolut vill ha gråskalevarianter - hellre ladda upp dessa som kompletterande parallella varianter än att helt ersätta de varmt och vackert sepiatonade originalversionerna. /FredrikT (talk) 17:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Originalen är inte sepiafärgade, utan sepiatonen är en artefakt som beror på ålder. Gulnade fotografier brukar jag regelmässigt konvertera till gråskala, vilket, som du kan se av kommentarerna ovan, brukar vara uppskattat. Jag är tveksam till att sepiafärgen tillför något till bilderna. Den minskar bara bildernas kontrastomfång. Att ladda upp dem under nytt namn innebär en massa merarbete eftersom jag då även blir tvungen att gå in i alla artiklar som använder bilderna och ändra länken. Men om du tycker att de bilder som du har bidragit med borde fortsätta att vara sepiafärgade så ska jag försöka låta bli dem i fortsättningen. /Kemikungen (talk) 18:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Jag tackar för det sista beskedet. Vad gäller själva sakfrågan är det faktiskt också så, åtminstone vad gäller bilderna ur Vecko-Journalen, att det definitivt inte handlar om någon åldringsprocess: VJ trycktes under många decennier i just sepia, vilket var ett av tidningens mest klassiska kännemärken (om Du har hört Tage Danielssons monolog "Den gamla Vecko-Journalen" ur Under Dubbelgöken så vet Du att han skämtar nostalgiskt om detta fenomen på åtskilliga ställen där). När det gäller äldre originalfotografier kan det säkert finnas vissa färgförändringar som är åldersrelaterade, men också här är mitt intryck att fotoateljéerna ofta "tintade" fotografierna just för att ge dem envarmare färgton. Denna teori stärks också av att själva den omgivande kartongpaspartoun på dessa bilder ofta är i en matchande färgton. /FredrikT (talk) 18:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Att partoun har liknande färgton tycker jag snarare pekar på att de har åldrats och gulnat tillsammans. Hade det varit frågan om avsiktlig sepiatoning med svavel så skulle partoun ha varit märkbart ljusare för att framhäva fotografiets gulbruna ton. /Kemikungen (talk) 18:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Som arkivarie som sysslat mycket med gamla fotografier genom åren tillåter jag mig att fortfarande hysa en avvikande mening. Som belysande exempel kan Du ta de ungefärligen jämngamla File:Gustaf Ljunggren.jpg respektive File:Agrell, Sigurd - porträtt - foto Rahmn Lund - AF .jpg. I båda fallen är själva fotografiet sepiatonat, men paspartouterna är helt olika: på den första bilden där bakgrunden är ljus har ateljén valt en ljust gulaktig paspartout medan den senare, genomgående mörkare bilden har fått en i brunt. Vore det verkligen troligt att båda en gång varit "ofärgade" och råkat åldras på perfekt matchande sätt som själva fotopositivet? Slutligen vill jag också anföra File:Bergendal, David - porträtt - AF - litet.jpg som ett exempel på ett jämngammalt fotografi som dock inte alls är sepiatonat utan i helt "svartvit" gråskala - det finns m a o ingen kemiskt "nödvändig" bruntoning av gamla fotografier med åren. (Allt detta är originalfotografier jag själv varit med att skanna och ladda upp) /FredrikT (talk) 18:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Gustaf Ljunggren tror jag har varit ofärgat. Det ser ut som att paspartoun har gulnat mer än bilden även om den säkert var gräddvit från början. Agrell däremot är uppenbart färgad med avsikt från början. Hur mycket ett gammalt fotografi gulnar med åren beror på många olika faktorer; Kvaliteten på fotopappret, om det varit utsatt för ljus (inramat) eller legat mörkt (fotoalbum). Även en sådan sak som tobaksrök har missfärgat månget gammalt fotografi. /Kemikungen (talk) 19:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Esquilo!

Tip: Add categories to your files

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) 10:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Image:Ireneusz Iredynski2.jpg was uncategorized on 19 May 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey! I didn't upload that. User:Kiribati2008 did. I just converted it to greyscale. /Esquilo (talk) 10:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Well you did upload a new version, so it is not unreasonable to assume you know what it is of, and therefore might be able to categorize it. If you do, please add a category or two :-) (NB I have nothing to do with running the bot). --Tony Wills (talk) 02:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea who Ireneusz Iredynski is. I just found the image on Special:NewFiles and noticed it needed some cleanup. /Esquilo (talk) 07:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, I think the bot tags recently uploaded files and also recently edited files (on the asumption that if there is activity there is a good chance someone might be there to fix the problem). I suppose in this sort of case you could probably just move the template to the uploaders page, anyway I added a category to the image (he's a Polish writer) :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 21:00, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

HMS Snapphanen

Hej. Såg att du nyligen ändrat blasoneringen (och bilden) för HMS Snapphanen. Undrar om du har en källa för den nya blasoneringen? Min enda källa (Braunstein, Christian (2006). Heraldiska vapen inom det svenska försvaret = Heraldry of the Armed forces of Sweden Stockholm: Statens Försvarshistoriska Museer. ISBN 91-971584-9-6, s.66) anger nämligen inte att grepen är störtad (men visar däremot en störtad tjuga). Så en bättre källa är alltid välkommen. /Lokal_Profil 18:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Ingen särskilt bra källa tyvärr. Jag råkade notera att orienteringen på tjugan/grepen/gaffeln skiljde sig från den som jag har på en minnestavla här hemma. Därför googlade jag lite och hittade påståenden som bekräftade att den skulle vara störtad på några heraldikforum. På min tavla liknar den en tjuga, men jag har också hittat uppgifter om att det ska vara en muskötgaffel (som används som stöd vid skjutning). Vilken sorts gaffel det ska vara och hur många tänder den ska ha lägger jag mig inte i, men jag är rätt övertygad om att den ska vara störtad. /Esquilo (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Da har du nog hittat mitt gamla inlagg dar jag funderade pa om det kanske var en muskotgaffel =). Inga problem, hoppades bara att det fanns en battre kalla nan stans =) /Lokal_Profil 15:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hundskärsknuv.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, but resoulition at lower limit. --Ikar.us 23:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Marhällan.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 High quality. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ängsholmen vid Sollenkroka.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, although maybe a panorama would be better in this case.. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Artbestämning

Hej Esquilo, vet du vilken art denna blomma kan tänkas tillhöra: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hYQk6Zk0gZs/TljSP7PqXVI/AAAAAAAAAJE/ez8lMl_-qJk/s1600/Blomma1.jpg Jag misstänker att det är någon form av syska men kan inte hitta något liknande på commons. mvh --Vogler (talk) 19:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Britneybirthday.jpg

I got my nomination slightly wrong, sorry. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Harald Vogel

Hi, Esquilo, thanx for reworking this picture: file:Harald Vogel.jpg. Very good idea and perfect result! Best wishes, --Wikiwal (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Reply to your question

That category is to help people be able to find photos that were taken by those cameras. I also believe it helps aids search engines in finding images take by that camera as to sort them out. I am not exactly sure though. An administrator might know why those categories exist. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 22:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Esox lucius ZOO 1.jpg

Hi, Esquilo. I noted that you used the image on the sv:Gädda. I nominated the image as QI. Would you mind to support the nomination ? Sincerely. --Jik jik (talk) 11:28, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Uh, ok. How do I do that? /Esquilo (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

The procedure is described in Commons:Quality_images_candidates#How_to_review. The picture itself is to find in Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list in the section dated December 18, 2011. Thanks. --Jik jik (talk) 17:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

It's a good picture, but the resolution is a bit to low to qualify as a QI. See Commons:Image guidelines. /Esquilo (talk) 09:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I uploaded the original resolution of the picture. --Jik jik (talk) 10:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Anastasios Soulis and Rebecca Scheja.jpg

Hej, med tanke på att tjejen tittar in i kameran antar jag att bilden är tagen i samband med filmningen, men med tanke på bildbeskrivningen kanske det borde förtydligas, så att den inte raderas för att vara ett screenshot ur en film. /grillo (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Det stämmer. Det står också ett förtydligande under licensmallen. Samma sak med File:Johannes Brost.jpg, File:Kjell Bergqvist.jpg och File:Tuva Novotny.jpg.

Finns det någon bättre mall än {{Info}} som man bör använda för sådana förtydliganden? /Esquilo (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Jag är förstås blind och såg inte den noteringen... Tack för förtydligandet. /grillo (talk) 18:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GeschützDora2.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 QI for me. --Kadellar 16:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kvarnen på Waldemarsudde.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 QI for me. --JLPC 20:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stridsbåt 90 Polis.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. --JDP90 14:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Riksdalerskäret.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. --Óðinn 17:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stora sjötullen 2011.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 although it could be sharper. --Poco a poco 14:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lindalen nedre.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 QI to me. --Florstein 16:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Björkboda herrgård.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  Comment Nice, but it needs perspective distortion correction. --Iifar 18:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)   Perspective adjusted. --Esquilo 09:48, 16 August 2012 (UTC) Good quality. --Óðinn 07:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Djursholms vattentorn.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 Clouds are blown out. --King of Hearts 03:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC) New version any better? --Esquilo 12:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC)Maybe a bit tilted (not sure), but good enough for QI, IMO.--Jebulon 15:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Riksdagsmän

Du har kanske redan tänkt på det, men om du ska fotografera riksdagsmännen kan du låna utrustning från Wikimedia Sveriges teknikpool. Det är bara att skriva upp dig och hämta den utrustning du behöver på kontoret.--ArildV (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Jag hade tänkt använda min egen Nikon D5100 med ett Nikkor AF-S DX 18-105 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR-objektiv (Puh, vad Nikon har krångliga beteckningar på sina gluggar!). Det är inga större skillnader mellan D5100 och D7000, men gluggen verkar vara bättre (f/2.8 släpper in mer ljus). /ℇsquilo 08:17, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Jag tror det är värt att använda föreningens objektiv, förutom ljusstyrkan så är skärpan fantastisk (innan jag använde det trodde jag inte det skulle vara så stor skillnad). Inget objektiv jag har fått så skarpa bilder med. Lycka till med fotograferingen hursomhelst!--ArildV (talk) 08:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hm, jag kan inte redigera http://se.wikimedia.org/wiki/Teknikpool/Lånelista och jag kan inte logga in med mitt vanliga användarnamn/lösenord. /ℇsquilo 19:54, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Du ska kunna det logga in med ett vanligt Wikipediakonto och redigera sidan eftersom den ligger i projektnamnrymden som alla kan redigera. Om du vill kan jag skriva in dig, men det ska fungera för dig att redigera.--ArildV (talk) 20:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stenopus Hispidus.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 {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Japansk röding.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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clownfisk.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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

File:Adéle Weman (Ebba Masalin, 1932).jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Adéle Weman (Ebba Masalin, 1932).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. --Poco a poco 04:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dalarö Skans4.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 Very good. - A.Savin 22:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ian Wachtmeister.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. --Ralf Roletschek 15:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hovjägarbostället.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 QI for me. --JLPC 19:03, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

COM:QIC#November_14,_2012

For File:Spb 06-2012 Inside the Passage.jpg, a rework is available, please consider to check it out. Thanks - A.Savin 10:19, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trinks-Triplex.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 QI and maybe Valued image --The Photographer 18:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Euston station MMB 30 390026 43062 390010 221116.jpg

Hi. You opposed this image at QI discuss on grounds of CA. I have corrected this, and was wondering if you'd take another look. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I can't see any difference at all. /ℇsquilo 15:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 09:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Militära skyddsområden med avbildningsförbud

Hej,

Har du koll var man kan hitta en lista över militära skyddsområden i Skärgården där man inte får fotografera? På väg från Årsta till Utö sist blev jag osäker på om det var tillåtet att fotografera framförallt Äggskären, men också Vitsgarn och Alvsta långholmar (såg ut som det satt skyltar på den senare):--ArildV (talk) 09:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Skyddsområden finns inte längre (avskaffades 2010). Skyddsobjekt finns fortfarande och är utmärkta med sådana här skyltar. Vitsgarn och Alvsta långholmar borde inte vara skyddsobjekt. Det är bara området från Näsudden till Årsta Havsbad som är utmärkt som skyddsobjekt på sjökortet. Avmagnetiseringsanläggningen på Äggskären däremot är ett skyddsobjekt. /ℇsquilo 09:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Sedan kan du ju göra som jag gjorde med den här bilden; Vänta tio år med att ladda upp den. Då är brottet preskriberat. ;-) /ℇsquilo 09:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Jag vill verka bekräfta eller dementera att det finns några bilder att spara i 10 år. Tack för svaret!--ArildV (talk) 09:49, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Photos of Cheb relief intarsia

Hi, I'm writing about very unique technique called Cheb relief intarsia. I'm also collecting photos and informations about all items with it. This technique was very popular in Sweden, and I found some item near to Stockholm. But I'm from Czech republic and this is too far for me. Could you please take a photos of them?

Items are at Hallwylska museet, Skoklosters slott and Ulriksdals castle. In Ulriksdals are many items (kabinets, desks, trik-trak games, etc), but I don't know accession numbers. Could you be so kind and ask somebody from there? If you agree, I will tell you how to photo them. Thank you. Dominikmatus (talk) 14:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello Dominikmatus!

I have no idea what 'Cheb relief intarsia' is, but if there is such items att the Hallwyl Palace, maybe you can find them in the category Hallwylska museet. There are lots of items from there photographed during the 2012 photo hunt. /ℇsquilo 14:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what it is. I already searched in this category and it's not there. I don't know grants of WM Norway, but you propably could use it. If you can't do that, I will ask someone else. It's not problem :). Dominikmatus (talk) 15:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Maeuseturm Bingen Rhein.jpg

Hi, thanks for your QI review. You found "Sharpening poorly done. Lots of artefacts." Where are these artefacts, could you please mark one or two of them? Thanks in advance -- Arcalino (talk) 11:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Finanzbehörde (Hamburg-Neustadt).Fassadendetails.1.ajb.jpg

Hi Esquilo! Thanks for QI review. You're right, the transformation is corrected now. Rgds --Ajepbah (talk) 11:24, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Adéle Weman (Ebba Masalin, 1932).jpg

File:Adéle Weman (Ebba Masalin, 1932).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!

–⁠moogsi (blah) 19:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

date of photographs

Hello. You're deleting information that I added of when the picture was taken.

I delete the categorization for two resaons.

1. The categorization is superflourus. Date information exists in both the EXIF-block and in the Information-template.
2. It is inapropriate usage of the categories. Date categories are for images that are depicting events at a specific date. There is no point in adding photos of buildings etc in such categories. /ℇsquilo 19:21, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Prostitute in Naples, Italy (1920).jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Prostitute in Naples, Italy (1920).jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Prostitute in Naples, Italy (1920).jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

FunkMonk (talk) 05:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Sigma lenses category sorting

Hello, how do you plan sorting categories in the Sigma lenses category? Maksim Sidorov 10:46, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The same way as "Taken with Sigma" category; By focal length and aperture. /ℇsquilo 10:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I think, it’ll be better, however grouping all the categories under S letter looks strange for me. Please keep in mind lenses generations, for example, there are 5 generations of the 70-200mm F2.8 lens. Maksim Sidorov 10:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Are they supposed to be sorted by age or by the letter-soup? /ℇsquilo 10:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I sorted they by age. The 17-70mm lens has three generations: F2.8-4.5 DC Macro (2006), F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM‎ (2009) and F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C‎ (2012), and despite the first one has another aperture, there are strictly three generations, one succeeds another. I think, corresponding categories should be listed in the order shown above. Maksim Sidorov 11:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:José G. Álvarez 1.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:José G. Álvarez 1.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 19:09, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sagalund - Fähuset.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. --Ralf Roletschek 14:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sagalund - Bastu.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. --Smial 10:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC) Very great picture--الجوكر 11:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)‚

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sagalund - Brinkkulla stugan.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. --Ralf Roletschek 14:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Buildings in Kimito island, sauna.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Nice picture but only one category is needed in the scope, i.e. "Buildings in Kimito island -sauna" is enough here, I think. --JLPC (talk) 18:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

•  Support I presumed Esquilo is on holidays (or not at home) and I took the liberty of changing the scope, as some good friends sometimes did for me... --JLPC (talk) 08:34, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

  Actually I don't really grasp the concept of "scope" within Valued Image criterias, but thank you for correcting it for me. --ℇsquilo 08:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dalsbruk - Kolugnarna.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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ängsö brygga.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. --JLPC 17:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skrapan.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 Quality image for me. --Frank Schulenburg 05:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lilla Höggarnsbank.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. --Vassil 02:37, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Understen lighthouse, SW view..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Good picture, BIS. I've corrected your scope : it must be linked to a category(click on "edit" and look at the line "scope"). I think you just have to complete it by adding "SW (or NE...) view", now. --JLPC (talk) 17:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the correction. The view is from NE. How do I add that? --ℇsquilo 09:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is advisable. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I've added it to the description and addad heading:SW to the {{Object location}}. --ℇsquilo 15:33, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

This is great. But that suggests, rightly, JLPC: this is to put it in the scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:56, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

•  Support Good with new scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:41, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Båtsportkort.jpg

File:Båtsportkort.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!

Stefan4 (talk) 21:45, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Märketskallen old.jpg

File:Märketskallen old.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!

Stefan4 (talk) 17:06, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Category:Årstafältet.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good and didactic --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:47, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Halavar (talk) 22:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Gulo gulo gulo (Wolverine).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment We must add a geocoding. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:20, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

  Coordinates added. /ℇsquilo 07:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

•  Comment Perfect for coordinates. So it's a Zoo. It should be noted in the caption. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

  Added to the caption. /ℇsquilo 11:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:33, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Category:Sturebadet, interior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Oppose Sorry, awful composition may be fixed.--Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk) 15:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Fixed how? This is the only composition I could get with both the pool and the decorated wall. --ℇsquilo 15:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Part of the wall is cropped, horizon line is still wrong. --Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk) 15:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Photographic quality is subjective here. But there are problems sharper. missing geocoding, and caption in English. The scope must be reduced to "interior". --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

This is a Valued image candidate, not a Quality image candidate. It does not have to have technically high quality, but it have to be valuable in an illustrative sense. The horizon line is, as far as I can see, straight. It should be since the camera was resting on a flat and level surface. PS: I've added coordinates. /ℇsquilo 07:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

It is true that we do not consider that the intrinsic value of the image, not the photographic quality. But it is necessary to VI, caring for captions. We need a caption in English. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

English caption added. /ℇsquilo 11:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope--J. Lunau (talk) 13:03, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lerviksudde.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  Support QI --Rjcastillo 13:11, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Örö.jpg

File:Örö.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!

Motopark (talk) 14:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Botveskär2.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  Support ok --Cccefalon 15:28, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Västra Kvarnholmen.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. --Cccefalon 07:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Örngrund.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 {{{3}}}

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Karin Söder.jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 16:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Camp Heumensoord.jpg

Hello Esquilo,

I removed the category "Nijmegen" because it is allready in a subcategory (on the Four Days Marches). Nijmegen is a big city and putting every image made in Nijmegen in the main category doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Because the image is not one of the most descriptive of Nijmegen I removed it from the category "Nijmegen". I would like to ask you if you would be willing to remove the category "Nijmegen" again.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 23:01, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Heumensoord is a place in Nijmegen and is so regardless of whether there is a Four Days March going on or not. /ℇsquilo 08:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

So it can be in a subcategory, like almost every other image. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

File:AndersWesterlund.jpg

File:AndersWesterlund.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!

91.64.223.139 09:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Hushållsost.jpg

File:Hushållsost.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!

Hangsna (talk) 17:56, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Creator:Carl Eldh

Why are you adding the second Wikidata parameter? One is enough. --Jarekt (talk) 18:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ålkistan canal in Stockholm, Sweden..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Geocoding is needed on the file page and the scope isn't precise enough : maybe the word "canal" would help, as well as the location ("near Stockholm" for instance). --JLPC (talk) 10:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

{{Object location}} added and scope clearified. /ℇsquilo 12:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

 Support : Ok now : useful. --JLPC (talk) 13:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 09:19, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Stränggjutning.jpg

You avoided my modification

but...

Do you really know what is continuous casting??? Borvan53 (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure. This is a typical case of continuous concrete casting using a sliding mold. The photo was taken to illustrate the swedish article Stränggjutning, but Holger.Ellgaard took a better photo then the same mold was still a few hundred meters further south. /ℇsquilo 07:50, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Grenze Priwall 1959.jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 14:36, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Färgfabriken.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. --Cccefalon 16:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skinnarviksberget.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. --Laitche 13:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Liljeholmshamnen.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. --Hubertl 12:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monteliusvägen 2015.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 *  Support ok now for me --Hubertl 05:56, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gunnarstenarna.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 {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Vidorijska dzamija, Bos Novi.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Vidorijska dzamija, Bos Novi.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Smooth_O (talk) 12:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Template:FoP-Sweden

Template:FoP-Sweden 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 template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Stefan2 (talk) 10:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

File:KavallerieDivision.jpg

File:KavallerieDivision.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!

Jcb (talk) 16:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Your picture of Kungshatt actually depicts Estbröte

Esquilo, your nice picture of Kungshatt seen from SW, turns out to depict Estbröte. I refer to this file.

--Per Appelgren (talk) 09:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:INS Vikrant (R11) launches an Alize aircraft during Indo-Pakistani War of 1971.jpg

Yours sincerely, MCMLXXXIX 18:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Lenin-Trotsky 1920-05-20 Sverdlov Square (censored).jpg

And also:

• File:Lenin-Trotsky 1920-05-20 Sverdlov Square (original).jpg

Yours sincerely, Sealle (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Coronets

These two coronets were each created for a specified prince and princess of Sweden. Why did you remove their categories? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:55, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

If created for two royalties, then why three categories? No, Category:Coronets of Swedish princes and princesses will suffice. If necessary created subcategories for regalies for corresponding royal person. /ℇsquilo 08:00, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Congo Crisis photos by IMS Vintage

You have uploaded a number of photos to the commons of the Congo Crisis from the IMS Vintage Photos Swedish press archive. You have uploaded them with the {{PD-Democratic Republic of the Congo}} copyright tag, which states that for a photo to be in the public domain it must be 25 years since its publication within the country. There is no proof that these press photos were at any point published in the Congo, and chances are they weren't; the Congo Crisis was an international media hotspot and the foreign press there was mostly serving outside customers. So the use of this tag is simply inaccurate. I was suggesting that you use the {{PD-Sweden-photo}} tag because, in the event the photos were Swedish, it would suit them. This is not out of the question; the Swedish press was certainly present in the Congo, because of the heavy Swedish peacekeeper presence maintained by the UN. Obviously this wouldn't count for certain photos that were purchased from other non-Swedish press agencies (like French and/or Belgian ones). Looking at the collection on IMS' websites, some of the photos have the marking of non-Swedish agencies, while others have only the IMS copyright. In the case of the latter bunch, the {{PD-Sweden-photo}} tag is suitable. The rest may very well not be in the public domain and should be left of of the commons. -Indy beetle (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Is this a question you want me to answer or is it something else you want from me?

The only information IMS provides is when the photo was taken plus a brief and often barely readable description of the subject. Sometimes there is a copyright-stamp from the agency that sold the photo to IMS, but there is no information whatsoever about where the photo was first published. So, I have to go with the info I have; location where the photo was taken. /ℇsquilo 17:12, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

But for a photo to be in the public domain as per {{PD-Democratic Republic of the Congo}} it had to have been published in the Congo at an appropriate time, not taken/created there. Without proof of such, the use of the tag is simply just wrong and the photos should be deleted. -Indy beetle (talk) 17:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

File:A-soldier-standing-beside-a-crashed-airplane-in-Congo-391757384429.jpg

File:A-soldier-standing-beside-a-crashed-airplane-in-Congo-391757384429.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

File:A-soldier-riding-a-bicycle-in-Katanga-1961-352033976731.jpg

File:A-soldier-riding-a-bicycle-in-Katanga-1961-352033976731.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 19:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

File:A-Congo-soldier-with-a-bird-on-his-shoulder-1960-352042007458.jpg

File:A-Congo-soldier-with-a-bird-on-his-shoulder-1960-352042007458.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 19:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

File:A-man-being-treated-for-his-wounds-during-the-Lynching-in-Leopoldville-391773076042.jpg

File:A-man-being-treated-for-his-wounds-during-the-Lynching-in-Leopoldville-391773076042.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 19:45, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

File:A-man-is-putting-a-cream-on-his-face-while-looking-at-his-reflection-142342139128.jpg

File:A-man-is-putting-a-cream-on-his-face-while-looking-at-his-reflection-142342139128.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 19:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Photos to be deleted without reason

Hello

They are trying to delete this photo https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.jpg added sources--Tahurus (talk) 08:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.jpg

File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 17:56, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Contradictory descriptions

The file A-group-of-Finnish-Army-persons-are-showing-their-respect-352029226188.jpg has a description telling the groups is Swedish athletes. Is the file name or the description correct? --LPfi (talk) 08:47, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

My answer is on the file talk page. /ℇsquilo 10:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Zastava-model-1300-on-display-in-a-car-dealership-391765946774.jpg

moved to File talk:Zastava-model-1300-on-display-in-a-car-dealership-391765946774.jpg

File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.jpg

File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Civilians-watching-a-parked-military-jeep-and-tank-with-soldiers-352039984203.jpg

File:Civilians-watching-a-parked-military-jeep-and-tank-with-soldiers-352039984203.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 20:50, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Cambodian-refugees-in-Thailand-falling-in-line-391759062869.jpg

File:Cambodian-refugees-in-Thailand-falling-in-line-391759062869.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!

Pitpisit (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Please remain calm and collegial

---

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks!

Sealle (talk) 06:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

My point exactly! /ℇsquilo 07:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Allan-Edwall-352043385244.jpg

Hej! Ser att Edwall-bilden råkar vara feldaterad. Åtminstone årtalet. Bilden finns publicerad i SvD 1964-12-04. --N0WIS (talk) 17:14, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Det fanns tre olika datumstämplar på baksidan av fotot. I vanliga fall brukar jag välja den äldsta, men jag måste ha missat det i det här fallet. Rätt datum ska vara 12/11 1963. /ℇsquilo 06:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Natrix natrix(grass snake ) eating.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Swedish-artist-Carl-Kylberg-in-front-of-his-easel-in-his-studio-at-Strandvägen-142458415533.jpg

File:Swedish-artist-Carl-Kylberg-in-front-of-his-easel-in-his-studio-at-Strandvägen-142458415533.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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Artist-Carl-Kylberg-standing-with-one-of-his-works-of-art-352126502823.jpg

File:Artist-Carl-Kylberg-standing-with-one-of-his-works-of-art-352126502823.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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Bibi-Andersson-in-the-movie-Wedding-Day-142441977177.jpg

File:Bibi-Andersson-in-the-movie-Wedding-Day-142441977177.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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Zarah-Leander-and-Willy-Birgel-performing-in-the-Theater-352129653212.jpg

File:Zarah-Leander-and-Willy-Birgel-performing-in-the-Theater-352129653212.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!

Rosenzweig τ 14:44, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ivar Los park01.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 Nomination View over Riddarfjärden and Riddarholmen from Ivar Lo's park in Stockholm. /Esquilo 16:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC) Promotion Good quality but is it downsized? --Trougnouf 18:36, 20 January 2019 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Stepro 21:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2018 is open!

Dear Esquilo,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in R1 of the 2018 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2018) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked.

In the final (and current) round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2018.

Round 2 will end 17 March 2019, 23:59:59.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 18:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Haparanda or Torneå

The original description of the File:Swedish-military-trucks-in-the-street-in-Tornio-Finland-1944-391852503039.jpg is incorrect, the picture is taken on the Haparanda torget in front of the stadshotell. If you care to compare this picture to the others of Haparanda stadshotell and torget, you can see that I am right. There are no such buildings, and never have been, in Torneå. The error is understandable since the towns are are practically twin town, besides Haparanda being in Sweden and Torneå in Finland. --Estormiz (talk) 05:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

The source says the photo is taken in Tornio, Finland. I have uploaded the backside of the press archive original here. /ℇsquilo 06:06, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

The source is incorrect, which is not uncommon with old photographs. Definitely the lorries are ready to evacute people of Finland from Tornio, but the evacution starts from the torget near the stadshotell of Haparanda. --Estormiz (talk) 06:23, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

It would be good to have someone from Tornio or Haparanda to take a stand on this matter. --Estormiz (talk) 06:33, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

File:A-convoy-of-combat-vehicle-in-Iraq-July-20-1961-391768248197.jpg

File:A-convoy-of-combat-vehicle-in-Iraq-July-20-1961-391768248197.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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:05, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:HMS Stockholm vapen bra.svg

Copyright status: File:HMS Stockholm vapen bra.svg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:HMS Stockholm vapen bra.svg. 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.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:11, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Woman-parachutist-and-pilot-from-Kirghiz-Republic-142353388755.jpg

File:Woman-parachutist-and-pilot-from-Kirghiz-Republic-142353388755.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!

PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.jpg

File:Abyssinian-soldiers-1936-142348340618.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!

Indy beetle (talk) 22:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:PlanNine 10.jpg

And also:

• File:Tor Johnson.jpg

Yours sincerely, --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:40, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Abyssinian-warriors-new-weapon-machine-guns-391757409991.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Abyssinian-warriors-new-weapon-machine-guns-391757409991.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Abyssinian-warriors-new-weapon-machine-guns-391757409991.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

JuTa 08:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Stig Forsberg.jpg

---

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

• Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
• State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
• If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
• Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
• Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

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.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, 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. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Gholam-Hossein Haghani.JPG

File:Gholam-Hossein Haghani.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!

E4024 (talk) 04:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Greta-Garbo-and-Jaro-Furth-in-the-film-Joyless-Street-1925-142462321702.jpg

File:Greta-Garbo-and-Jaro-Furth-in-the-film-Joyless-Street-1925-142462321702.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!

Rosenzweig τ 12:48, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Redirect

Personligt ville jeg meget foretrække ikke at have Category:Ven. Jeg flyttede kategorien for at undgå fremover at skulle åbne den for at sikre mig at det nu også var den kategori jeg ville flytte filer til. Med din genoprettelse kan jeg desværre komme til det alligevel. --Hjart (talk) 08:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:Ven is a redirect. It is customary to leave a redirect when moving a category that have existed for a long time, because of incomming links. If you use hotcat to add categories it will follow the redirect. If you add categories manually you will have to look up the correct name anyway. /ℇsquilo 09:37, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I know it's a redirect and I'm a longtime user of hotcat too. When I type "Ven" I'm shown a number of different categories starting with those letters and "Ven (Oresund)" is just a lot less ambiguous than "Ven". Also "Ven" has a number of different meanings in various languages, which is why it's rather unfortunate to name a commons category like that. As an example of why it's unfortunate, I'm regularly watching the ukranian town Category:Skole because danish and norwegian newbies tend to categorize their pictures of schools into it. --Hjart (talk) 09:59, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, if the disambiguity really is a problem it should be a disambiguation category (like Category:Bay), but then there will be no redirect for hotcat to follow. /ℇsquilo 12:39, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

In my experience newbies rarely checks out whether a page is a disambiguation page, so changing it to one would cause just as much trouble and with hotcat the redirect is not needed. --Hjart (talk) 13:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

BTW. Today I removed File:Løgumkloster Kirkemusikkskole.jpg from the Ukrainian Skole category as well as from the english, russian and ukranian wikipedia pages on Skole. It depicts 3 buildings in a small town near me in south Jutland. Apparently someone thought it was a nice picture and didn't care to check whether it really belonged in that category. --Hjart (talk) 13:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Hannah Bergstedt.jpg

File:Hannah Bergstedt.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!

62.20.228.92 19:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Former-gauleiter-in-Austria-and-chairman-of-the-nationalistic-Bruderschaft-391766138239.jpg

File:Former-gauleiter-in-Austria-and-chairman-of-the-nationalistic-Bruderschaft-391766138239.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!

Túrelio (talk) 13:39, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:FIN-10m-1980-rev.jpg

And also:

• File:FIN-1m-1963-anv.jpg
• File:FIN-1m-1963-rev.jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 02:52, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Badstränder Sandham etc...

Tack för feedback på Sandhamns bilden jag försöker få ordning på Sveriges badplatser se github.com/salgo60/Svenskabadplatser alla synpunkter mottages. Försöker desperat leta bilder på badplatser därav denna fel koppling.... - Salgo60 (talk) 16:38, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Om du ger dig till tåls några månader så kan jag nog fixa bilder på Stora Trouvillestranden. Tills vidare kanske den här bilden kan duga. /ℇsquilo 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

File:A-Polish-woman-weeps-as-she-tells-her-story-to-US-troops-142365089506.jpg

File:A-Polish-woman-weeps-as-she-tells-her-story-to-US-troops-142365089506.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!

2A01:4C8:1060:CFA0:E041:6B0D:4A3D:DE7B 12:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Hannah Bergstedt.jpg

File:Hannah Bergstedt.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!

62.20.228.92 16:59, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Template:Supersedes/se

Template:Supersedes/se is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD G2 (unused and implausible, or broken redirect) If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Jonteemil (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Your image of Sixten Ehrling

Hi! Thanks for uploading this image. Would you mind doing me the favor of cropping it such that, when placed as an upright thumb on a Wikipedia article, Ehrling's face is a bit larger? It strikes me that we could manage nicely with less of the black space above his head. Thanks! 2604:2D80:5902:C00:25C0:555:3672:7597 05:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you mean File:Sixten-Ehrling-taken-in-connection-with-an-orchestra-rehearsal-at-the-Royal-Opera-142462176210.jpg or File:Sixten_Ehrling.jpg. Only the first one is uploaded by me. It is uncropped original and I think it would be a shame to crop out the conductor pin. /ℇsquilo 15:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. I'd like to retain the conductor's baton but trim the excess top and bottom areas... trying to fit this image into a small space with a number of others. You really appreciate the help! (Please see: User:Silence of Järvenpää/sandbox over at Wikipedia.) Would you have any interest in helping me find images of Anthony Collins (c. 1950s), Akeo Watanabe (c. 1960s), Lorin Maazel (c. 1960s), and/or Paavo Berglund (c. 1970s) that would survive FLC review? It'd be a tremendous help to me and a service to the project! 2604:2D80:5902:C00:D83F:D32F:AC34:9686 16:56, 5 June 2021 (UTC) 2604:2D80:5902:C00:D83F:D32F:AC34:9686 16:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Something like this? /ℇsquilo 06:15, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Kontakt?

Hej Johan,

Jag är grafisk formgivare och är intresserad av att använda en av dina bilder som en detalj på ett bokomslag, finns det något sätt att kontakta dig utanför wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Windleton (talk • contribs) 10:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Hanö old lighthouse.jpg

Copyright status: File:Hanö old lighthouse.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Hanö old lighthouse.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 12:05, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Revert

Hello Esquilo, noticing your comment on this revert, my reply is why not? The more people looking to the files and the articles, the more work can be done . Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

1. I see no reason to link to enwp for a description of a Swedish newspaper. If it should be linked it should be done via the wikidata-object so the reader get the link to the article in his/hers language.
2. If it should be done it should be done to all photos in Category:Photos from IMS Vintage Photos obtained from SvD.

/ℇsquilo 14:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Don't agree with you. Lotje (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

File:German-troops-captured-in-blazing-Aachen-in-Germany-1944-391749586962.jpg

Hi Esquilo, is there no online-source for this image? Where did you obtain it? --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

From IMS Vintage Photos. The hardcopy was for sale on eBay in 2017 and this photo is copied from the auction. The number at the end of the filename is the eBay auction number. /ℇsquilo 20:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. However, if the image-file was taken from Ebay, what role has imsvintagephotos here, as you sort of credit it to them? In addition, if this photo is also available on IMS, please provide link to it to the source-entry. --Túrelio (talk) 10:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

IMS Vintage Photos is the source I have used to obtain the file (actually it was eBay, but I think it is better to credit the seller). Sometimes, but not always, there is also the the original publisher's stamp on the reverse side. This photo had no such stamp.
And by the way I think it is great that you audit my uploads, credits and copyright tags. Determining the copyright status of an old photo is difficult and sometimes I make mistakes. It is good to have an extra pair of eyes on it. /ℇsquilo 10:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)