User talk:Hedwig Klawuttke

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Hedwig Klawuttke!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文(台灣)‎ | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−


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

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans  Bahasa Indonesia  bosanski  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  eesti  English  español  Esperanto  français  galego  hrvatski  íslenska  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  occitan  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  shqip  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  հայերեն  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  조선말  한국어  日本語  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  עברית  العربية  پښتو  فارسی  ދިވެހިބަސް  +/−

Sterkebaktalk 17:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image deletion warning Image:U-47_2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans  Bahasa Indonesia  bosanski  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  eesti  English  español  Esperanto  français  galego  hrvatski  íslenska  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  occitan  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  shqip  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  հայերեն  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  조선말  한국어  日本語  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  עברית  العربية  پښتو  فارسی  ދިވެހިބަސް  +/−

Denniss (talk) 19:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Reichsautobahn_1936-1939.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 14:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hedwig, I put the template back on the description page. Even though you already named the source, there is no proof that this is in the Public Domain. Where does it say that the creator was working for the government? Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. First:My English is not the Best. As far as i know, this Image is Public Domain. Go to the Rights and Restrictions of the Library of congres and you will see under Point 1.a the Point "No known restrictions on publication". A few lines under it, there stay: The image is public Domain. This is sufficient for me and i think, i dont need anyone Template. I stored as much information as possible in the description site of the Image. --Hedwig Klawuttke (talk) 11:32, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Hedwig, die Seite sagt No known restrictions on publication, was im Endeffekt nichts weiter heißt als Wir haben keine Ahnung wer der Urheber ist, daher gehen wir mal davon aus, dass das Bild nicht geschützt ist.. Das reicht leider für die Commons nicht aus. Bilder können hier nur behalten werden, wenn wir Beweise dafür haben, dass das Bild PD ist. Das LoC verlangt wohl Beweise dafür, dass das Bild geschützt ist. Daher können wir uns nicht blind darauf verlassen. Grüße, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo; aber wir haben auch keinen Beweis, daß dieses Bild nicht PD ist. Gut, jetzt wirst du sagen, daß ist für Commons nicht so gedacht. Aber man sollte hier nicht gleich den Reichsbedenkenträger spielen. Ich mache mir hier die Mühe, passable Bilder zu finden und wenn dann in der LoC bei den Terms of LoC unter dem Punkt 1.a steht, daß dieses Bild PD ist, dann müssen wir auch davon ausgehen. Außerdem scheint ja der Urheber bekannt zu sein. Also ich sehe hier keine Gründe für eine Nichtbenutzung, aber das kann natürlich auch nur eine Meinung sein. So ähnliche Probleme habe ich auch bei den Bildern Image:Scharnhorst firing Glorious.jpg und Image:U-47 2.jpg. Da steht auf der Source-Seite explizit, daß diese Bilder PD sind. Was brauchen wir denn noch alles ?! Das sind dann diese Momente, wo mir echt die Lust auf Weiterarbeit vergeht. Ich dachte, wir ziehen alle an einem Stang und wollen Wikipedia verbessern. Nimm das bitte nicht persönlich; aber manchmal weiß ich nicht, was ich noch machen soll. --Hedwig Klawuttke (talk) 10:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Hedwig, nachdem wir hier aber Bilder für Weiternutzer bereit halten, brauchen wir einen Beweis dafür, dass es PD ist. Wir können nicht einfach vermuten, das widerspricht den Richtlinien von Commons. Diese sind nicht von mir ausgearbeitet, wenn sie dir nicht gefallen, musst du das auf den entsprechenden Projektseiten diskutieren. Das LOC sagt übrigens hier recht genau, was No known restrictions on publication und unten drunter steht extra dabei: These facts do not mean the image is in the public domain, but do indicate that no evidence has been found to show that restrictions apply., was im Endeffekt nichts anderes heißt als Diese Bild ist nicht unbedingt PD, aber es wurde kein Beweis für das Gegenteil gefunden.. Und genau das ist unser Problem. Es steht ja sogar das Geburtsdatum des Photographen dran: 1910. Bei der Erstellung des Fotos ist er also um die 30 Jahre alt gewesen, nehmen wir mal an, dass er 80 Jahre alt wurde. Dann ist er 1990 gestorben, wodurch seine Bilder am 1.1.2061 gemeinfrei werden. Vorher nicht. Das richtet sich nicht gegen deine Person, so ist leider die Rechtslage. Wenn das LOC etwas mehr Informationen bereit stellen würde, wieso es davon ausgeht, dass das Bild PD ist, könnten wir das eventuell behalten. Mit der aktuellen Quellenlage sehe ich allerdings schwarz. Selbiges gilt auch für die anderen von dir genannten Bilder, siehe auch den entsprechenden Deletion Request. Grüße, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Du hast ja Recht. Das mit diesen Bildrechten ist aber auch eine vermaledeite Sache. Da hätte man für Wikipedia ruhig ne andere Lösung finden können. Aber das ist eine andere Sache und gehört nicht hierher. Na bis denne --Hedwig Klawuttke (talk) 11:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image deletion warning Image:Reichstagsbrand.gif has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans  Bahasa Indonesia  bosanski  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  eesti  English  español  Esperanto  français  galego  hrvatski  íslenska  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  occitan  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  shqip  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  հայերեն  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  조선말  한국어  日本語  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  עברית  العربية  پښتو  فارسی  ދިވެހިބަސް  +/−

h-stt !? 21:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hallo Hedwig,
auch wenn du es sicher harmlos/nett gemeint hast, ist ein Bezug auf persönliche Wikistress-Angaben aus einem anderen Projekt in einer rfd-Diskussion wirklich unpassend. Auf :de oder :en hätte das als ad hominem-Argument oder unter Bezug auf de:WP:KPA sogar einen Rüffel zur Folge haben können. Was den angesprochenen Zusammenhang angeht, hätte ein Blick in die History meiner :de-Userseite gezeigt, dass diese seit 31. Juli 2008 nicht mehr bearbeitet wurde, womit sich jede Verbindung mit einer am 20. August 2008 eröffneten rfd erübrigt. De facto hatte das überhaupt nichts mit der Wikiwelt zu tun. Ich hätte es längst runterschalten können, bin aber nicht mehr so häufig auf :de.
Und dass Unsinnsargumenten wie copyright may have been regarded as war booty widersprochen (bzw. die Quelle dafür eingefordert) werden muss, liegt daran, dass sonst in der nächsten rfd argumentiert wird, das hätte man in der früheren Diskussion auch so gesehen.
Ansonsten kann ich alles, was du geschrieben, natürlich völlig nachvollziehen - zumal ich kein Jurist bin. Schwierigkeiten sehe ich dennoch 1) darin, dass es für Commons sehr problematisch ist, wenn in solchen Fragen mal so und mal so entschieden wird, d.h. mal nach dem Buchstaben des Gesetzes und mal nach Bauchgefühl (was auch bei jedem etwas anders liegen kann), und 2) für Re-User dieses Fotos, insbesondere in Deutschland, weil die Löschdiskussion auch von findigen und geldgierigen Abmahnanwälten mitgelesen werden kann. Sobald dann jemand das Bild auf seine Website oder in ein Buch setzt, kommt der Brief vom Anwalt, was für den Ruf von Commons auch nicht gerade förderlich wäre. Aber zu deiner "Beruhigung", da ich die rfd eröffnet habe, wird sie auf jeden Fall von einem anderen Admin entschieden bzw. geschlossen werden, und darauf werde ich keinen Einfluss nehmen. Gruß --Túrelio (talk) 14:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upps - sorry, war wirklich deeskalierend / freundlich gemeint. Wie gesagt, ich bin ja davon ausgegangen, daß der Wikistatus eben nichts mit unserer Disc zu tun hatte. Na jedenfalls nichts für ungut - --Hedwig Klawuttke (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ich habe Lupo, der sich mit Copyright-Fragen besonders gut auskennt, mal um eine Drittmeinung gebeten. Vielleicht kennt er ja einen Ausweg jenseits der 70pma-Regel. --Túrelio (talk) 07:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lupos statement war klarer als erwartet, leider; obwohl ich auf anderes gehofft hatte[1]. Nach der zu erwartenden Löschung würde ich Hochladen auf :en unter Fair-use empfehlen; das sollte gehen und so bliebe das Foto wenigstens auf :en verfügbar. --Túrelio (talk) 08:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Danke für deine Bemühungen, sehr nett. Das mit der Kooperation zwischen dem Bundesarchiv und Wikimedia habe ich auch gerade zufällig gelesen. Na wenn da nichts geht...--Hedwig Klawuttke (talk) 20:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


File:Schlachtschiff_Scharnhorst.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!

Kam Solusar (talk) 04:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File:StarTrek_Communicator-TNG.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!

Powers (talk) 19:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:X-Wing.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

--Jappalang (talk) 09:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Communicator_VOY.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!

Powers (talk) 02:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:X-Wing_Model.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!

VernoWhitney (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arbeitslosigkeit im Reich.svg 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!

Zulu55 (talk) 09:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bismarck and Prinz Eugen.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!

Parsecboy (talk) 19:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bismarck and Prinz Eugen.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!

(talk) 04:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hitler Visit.gif 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!

Christoph Braun (talk) 21:39, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tiger Längsschnitt.svg 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!

Kursant504 (talk) 04:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

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

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Rosenzweig τ 20:51, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]